Radu Dimitriu

Bypassing the Attitude-Behavior Gap: Using Social Identity and Norm Effects to Engender Sustainable Consumer Behaviors (An Abstract)

Most attempts to engender sustainable consumer behaviors rely on altruism appeals that are predicated on preexisting pro-social attitudes. This paper explores alternative means by which consumers can be encouraged to engage in socially and environmentally positive behavior. It is proposed that firms can use social influence effects among consumer groups assembled by the firm in the digital environment. Three controlled field experiments show that group influences among a temporary online consumer group can lead to collaborative behaviors, both between the consumer and the brand and between the consumer and other beneficiaries of the behavior. The paper finds support for the existence of two distinct group-level effects: a social identity effect within the newly formed group and an injunctive norm effect. These influence distinct behavioral outcomes, including commitment to purchase a sustainable product, the giving of time to the brand to help with its sustainability initiatives, and the giving of time to sustainability charities supported by the brand. Notably, these outcomes do not depend on the selection of individuals with supportive prior attitudes toward sustainability. The results extend knowledge on social consumer behavior, provide support for the argument that specific attitudes may not be necessary for specific behavioral outcomes, and present opportunities for practitioners to use social influence effects to elicit specific consumer behaviors, particularly in the online environment.

Brand extension similarity can backfire when you look for something specific

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to show that high similarity between a parent brand and an extension category can have a detrimental effect on how a brand extension is perceived to perform on specific attributes. This happens because similarity influences the perceived positioning of a brand extension: lower similarity extensions can be perceived as “specialized” products, whereas high similarity extensions are perceived as “all-in-one” products not performing exceptionally well on any specific attribute. Design/methodology/approach The authors test the hypothesized effect through three experimental studies. The authors manipulate similarity both within subjects (Study 1a) and between subjects (Study 1b and Study 2). Further, the authors test the effect for specific attributes that are physical/concrete in nature (Study 1a and Study 1b) as well as attributes that are abstract/imagery-related in nature (Study 2). Findings High compared to low similarity improves perceptions of overall performance (i.e. performance across all attributes). But as expected, the authors also find that a high similarity brand extension is perceived to perform worse on the attribute on which a low similarity brand extension specializes, even when the parent brands of the extensions possess that attribute to the same extent. This perception of attribute performance carries on to influence brand extension purchase likelihood. Practical implications The degree of brand extension similarity has consequences for how brand extensions are perceived to be positioned in the marketplace. Although high similarity extensions receive positive evaluations, they might not be suitable when a company is trying to instil a perception of exceptional performance on a specific attribute. Originality/value The authors demonstrate a consequential exception to the marketing wisdom that brands should extend to similar categories. Although the degree of brand extension similarity has been repeatedly shown to have a positive effect on brand extension evaluation, the authors document a case when its effect is actually detrimental. This study’s focus on the dependent variable of perceived performance on specific attributes is novel in the brand extension literature.

Overconfidence and Underconfidence in Usage Experience

Consumers’ subjective assessment of their knowledge (i.e., knowledge confidence) often does not match their actual knowledge (Alba and Hutchinson 2000). This phenomenon is called knowledge miscalibration. Although previous research investigated the effect of knowledge miscalibration on purchasing decisions (e.g., Alba and Hutchinson 2000; Burson 2007; Kidwell et al. 2008), its role in the usage stage of consumption is little understood. Consumer value as “an interactive, relativistic preference experience” (Holbrook 1996 p.138) reflects consumers’ evaluation of usage. Our aim is to investigate how knowledge miscalibration relates to the dimensions of consumer value. We focused on the four self-oriented dimensions of consumer value in Holbrook’s (1994) framework. Specifically, consumer value is hereby decomposed in efficiency, excellence, play and aesthetics. Furthermore, we conceptualise the relationship between knowledge miscalibration and consumer value separately for overconfidence (i.e., positive knowledge miscalibration) and underconfidence (i.e., negative knowledge miscalibration), as each of these two dimensions of knowledge miscalibration stimulate different behavioural mechanisms.