Brand Diversity and Brand Similarity Impacts on Brand Evaluations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33423/jmdc.v18i2.7011Keywords:
marketing, development, brand diversity, brand evaluation, brand similarity, broad brand, narrow brandAbstract
This research examined the joint impact of brand diversity and brand similarity upon brand evaluations. The results revealed that low-diversity brands are favored over high-diversity brands, whereas high-similarity brands are favored over low-similarity brands. High-diversity narrow brands are favored over high-diversity broad brands, whereas low-diversity narrow and broad brands are favored identically. Additionally, low-diversity narrow brands are favored over high-diversity narrow brands, whereas low-diversity broad brands are favored over high-diversity broad brands. The findings of extant research that narrow brands are preferred over broad brands are true only when the quality diversities of both brands are high.
References
Chang, J.W. (2020). The asymmetric patterns of adverse extension effects on narrow and broad brands: Perspectives on brand structure and extension typicality. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 29(7), 985–997.
Crawford, M.T., Sherman, S.J., & Hamilton, D.L. (2002). Perceived entitativity, stereotype formation, and the interchangeability of group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1076–1094.
Danbold, F., & Unzueta, M.M. (2020). Drawing the diversity line: Numerical thresholds of diversity vary by group status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(2), 283–306.
Goethals, G.R., Allison, S.J., & Frost, M. (1979). Perceptions of the magnitude and diversity of social support. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15(6), 570–581.
Hamilton, D.L., & Sherman, S.J. (1996). Perceiving persons and groups. Psychological Review, 103(2), 336–355.
Hayward, A. (2023, November 1). Every Apple iPhone ranked in order of greatness. Stuff. Retrieved from https://www.stuff.tv/features/ranked-every-iphone-in-order-greatness
Horwitz, S.K., & Horwitz, I.B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6), 987–1015.
Hulsheger, U.R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J.F. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1128–1145.
Johnston, C.D., & Madson, G.J. (2022). Negativity bias, personality and political ideology. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(5), 666–676.
Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599–627.
Keller, K.L., & Aaker, D.A. (1992). The effects of sequential introduction of extensions. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 35–50.
Kempf, D.S., & Smith, R.E. (1998). Consumer processing of product trial and the influence of prior advertising: A structural modeling approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(3), 325–338.
Kende, A., & McGarty, C. (2019). A model for predicting prejudice and stigma expression by understanding target perceptions: The effects of visibility, politicization, responsibility, and entitativity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(5), 839–856.
Kim, Y., & Wingate, N. (2017). Narrow, powerful, and public: The influence of brand breadth in the luxury market. Journal of Brand Management, 24(5), 453–466.
Lickel, B., Hamilton, D.L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A.C., Sherman, S.J., & Uhles, A.N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 223–246.
Linville, P.W., Fischer, G.W., & Salovey, P. (1989). Perceived distributions of the characteristics of in-group and out-group members: Empirical evidence and a computer simulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(2), 165–188.
Loken, B., & John, D.R. (1993). Diluting brand beliefs: When do extensions have a negative impact? Journal of Marketing, 57(3), 71–84.
Love, L.R. (2018). Group cohesion: The effect of diversity. Global Journal of Management and Marketing, 2(1), 77–86.
McGarty, C. (2004). Forming stereotypes of entitative groups. In V. Yzerbyt, C.M. Judd, & O. Corneille (Eds.), The Psychology of Group Perception: Perceived Variability, Entitativity, and Essentialism (pp. 161–178). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
McGarty, C., Haslam, S.A., Hutchinson, K.J., & Grace, D.M. (1995). Determinants of perceived consistency: The relationship between group entitativity and the meaningfulness of categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34(3), 237–256.
Parker, J.R., Lehmann, D.R., Keller, K.L., & Schleicher, M.G. (2018). Building a multi-category brand: When should distant brand extensions be introduced? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(2), 300–316.
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C.W. (1967). Attitudes as the individual’s own categories: The social judgment approach to attitude change. In C.W. Sherif, & M. Sherif (Eds.), Attitude, Ego Involvement, and Change (pp. 105–139). New York, NY: Wiley.
Sherman, S.J., Hamilton, D.L., & Lewis, A.C. (1999). Perceived entitativity and the social identity value of group membership. In D. Abrams, & M. Hogg (Eds.), Social Identity and Social Cognition (pp.80–110). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Skowronski, J.J., & Carlston, D.E. (1987). Social judgment and social memory: The role of cue diagnosticity in negativity, positivity, and extremity biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 689–699.
Spencer-Rodgers, J., Hamilton, D.L., & Sherman, S.J. (2007). The central role of entitativity in stereotypes of social categories and task groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 369–388.
Susskind, J., Maurer, K., Thakkar, V., Hamilton, D.L., & Sherman, J.W. (1999). Perceiving individuals and groups: Expectancies, dispositional inferences, and causal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(2), 181–191.
Yzerbyt, Y., & Schadron, G. (1994). Stereotypes and social judgment. In R. Bourhis, & J.P. Leyens (Eds.), Stereotypes, Discrimination, and Intergroup Relations (pp. 127–160). Brussels, Belgium: Mardaga.
