European Journal of Marketing

Self-congruity, brand attitude, and brand loyalty: a study on luxury brands

Fang Liu, Jianyao Li, Dick Mizerski, Huangting Soh,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Fang Liu, Jianyao Li, Dick Mizerski, Huangting Soh, (2012) "Self‐congruity, brand attitude, and brand
loyalty: a study on luxury brands", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 Issue: 7/8, pp.922-937, https://
doi.org/10.1108/03090561211230098
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561211230098
Downloaded on: 16 January 2018, At: 09:16 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 56 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 29430 times since 2012*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2012),"Place branding: creating self-brand connections and brand advocacy", Journal
of Product &amp; Brand Management, Vol. 21 Iss 7 pp. 508-515 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/10610421211276259">https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211276259</a>
(2011),"The role of brand image, product involvement, and knowledge in explaining consumer
purchase behaviour of counterfeits: Direct and indirect effects", European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 45 Iss 1/2 pp. 191-216 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561111095658">https://
doi.org/10.1108/03090561111095658</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:524162 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


EJM
46,7/8
922
Received 13 November 2011
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)
European Journal of Marketing
Vol. 46 No. 7/8, 2012
pp. 922-937
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0309-0566
DOI 10.1108/03090561211230098
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm
Self-congruity, brand attitude,
and brand loyalty: a study on
luxury brands
Fang Liu
Business School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Jianyao Li
Business School, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
Dick Mizerski
Business School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia, and
Huangting Soh
Jushua Research Consultants, Singapore
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to examine the effects of three self-congruity constructs: the brand’s
personality congruity (BPC), the brand’s user imagery congruity and the brand’s usage imagery
congruity, in consumers’ attitude and brand loyalty toward two luxury fashion brands.
Design/methodology/approach – Using a sample of Australian consumers, this study examines
two luxury fashion brands (CK and Chanel) from two product categories, watches and sunglasses.
Structural equation modeling is used to test the hypotheses.
Findings – This study finds that user and usage imagery congruity are stronger predictors for brand
attitude and brand loyalty than BPC in the context of the luxury fashion brands tested. Both user and
usage imagery congruity have significant effects in brand attitude and brand loyalty in most analyses.
This study finds no significant effect of BPC in either brand attitude or brand loyalty for the two
brands tested.
Research limitations/implications – Future studies should include more populations, product
categories and more brands in each category.
Practical implications – Symbolic benefits are key motivations behind luxury brand purchases.
Symbolic benefits are from non-product-related attributes like imagery. One important implication of
the study is that user and usage imagery are more important to build than attempts to develop a
brand’s personality. Because most luxury brands market in multiple product categories, attention
should be paid to the core perceptions of user and usage imagery for the brand when designing
communication strategies for different categories.
Originality/value – This study provides the first evidence that these self-congruity concepts may
represent different imageries that lead to different effects in brand attitude and brand loyalty. Findings
from this study add to the understanding of the consumption of luxury brands.
Keywords Brand image, Brand loyalty, Luxury brands, Premier brands, Self-congruity, Brand attitude,
Brand personality
Paper type Research paper
The authors would like to thank Professor Temi Abimbola, Dr Myfanwy Trueman, Dr Oriol
Iglesias and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.
 Introduction A study on
There has been increasing interest in adopting self-congruity theory in brand studies luxury brands
(e.g. Sirgy, 1986; Kressmann et al., 2006). Self-congruity refers to the likeliness of
comparing oneself with other objects and stimuli. It has been widely adopted in
brand-related research to help both researchers and practitioners understand brand
purchasing behaviour (see literature review by Sirgy, 1986; Sirgy et al., 1997;
Christodoulides and Veloutsou, 2009). 923
There are three important brand self-congruity concepts:
(1) Brand Personality Congruity;
(2) Brand User Imagery Congruity; and
(3) Brand Usage Imagery Congruity.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Aaker (1997, p. 347) defines brand personality as, “the set of human characteristics
associated with a brand.” Brand Personality has five major dimensions:
(1) sincerity;
(2) excitement;
(3) competence;
(4) sophistication; and
(5) ruggedness (Aaker, 1997).

Brand Personality Congruity refers to the relationship between the consumer’s

perception of a brand’s personality and their perception of their own personality (Wee,
2004). For example, the brand personality of an automobile brand may be perceived as
outgoing or aggressive. A potential consumer would be expected to judge if their
personality was outgoing and aggressive to match the perceived personality of the
automobile brand. Many studies have reported that Brand Personality Congruity has a
significant effect in brand evaluations (e.g. Freling and Forbes, 2005; Sweeney and Bao,
2009). However, most of these studies have looked at Brand Personality Congruity as
the only independent variable so the importance of brand personality may have been
exaggerated due to its association with other more salient variables.
Brand User Imagery Congruity is defined as the degree of perceived similarity a
potential buyer sees of the typical user of a brand with himself or herself (Sirgy et al.,
1997). Unlike brand personality, the user imagery perceptions are typically based on
visual aspects of the user such as age, gender, culture or trappings of status like
jewellery or clothing. Keller (1998) states that user imagery attributes are mainly
created directly from the consumer’s own experience with the brand users and are
likely to be related to highly visible products such as automobiles and fashion goods.
Numerous empirical studies (e.g. Sirgy, 1986; Putoni, 2000; Kressmann et al., 2006)
have demonstrated that Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant effect in
brand evaluations.
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity refers to the association between consumers’
perceptions of the typical use of a brand and how the brand is perceived appropriate
regarding the situation of use (Sotiropoulos, 2003). For example, an expensive Channel
bag may be seen appropriate for a formal function but not for an everyday use. Despite
its importance, empirical studies on usage imagery are rarely reported.
 EJM This study focuses on these three types of self-congruity and their relationship to
46,7/8 potential attitude and loyalty toward a luxury brand. The study contributes to the
existing literature in a number of ways. First, no study has examined the impact of all
three types of congruity on attitude and loyalty toward a brand. Most of the previous
research (e.g. Kressmann et al., 2006) focuses on only one type of congruity, such as brand
personality. One exception is Helgeson and Suppellen’s study (2004) that found that
924 Brand Personality Congruity and Brand User Imagery Congruity have important and
equal effects in Swedish consumers’ attitudes toward retail store brands. Liu et al. (2008),
however, reported that Brand User Imagery Congruity had a larger effect in attitudes
toward automobile brands than Brand Personality Congruity. Because the construct of
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity may also be salient in the decision process, an
examination of all three types of brand self-congruity is important for developing a better
understanding of the effects of a consumer’s self-congruity in brand-related decisions.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Second, attitude and loyalty toward a brand are two of the most popular cognitive
predictors of consumers’ behaviour toward a brand (Mitchell and Olson, 1981; Erdem
et al., 2006). A number of studies (e.g. Sirgy et al., 2008) have examined the effect of
self-congruity in consumers’ loyalty toward a brand. Only one study (Liu et al., 2008)
has examined the effect of self-congruity in attitude toward a brand. This study will
examine both attitude and loyalty toward brands for a better understanding of the
effect of buyer or consumer self-congruity in two often used predictors of purchase.
Finally, this study looks into the effect of potential buyers’ self-congruity in their
purchasing of luxury brands. Luxury brands are the most common and obvious
applications to test with regard to image because these brands go beyond functionality
and emphasize the status and image of an individual (Veblen, 1899; Nueno and Quelch,
1998). Despite the growing importance of luxury branding, empirical research on
luxury brands is very limited (e.g. Putoni, 2000; Wiedmann et al., 2007).

Literature review
Brand images, attitude and loyalty toward a brand
A brand’s image is a key component of brand equity, or brand value (Aaker, 1991).
Keller (1993) defines brand image as different types of brand associations as well as the
favourability, strength and uniqueness of these associations. Brand associations are
developed based on product-related and non product-related attributes. Brand
personality, user imagery, and usage imagery are the three main non product-related
attributes in Keller’s, 1998 model of brand equity. Biel (1992) claims that user imagery
is a key form of brand image while Shimp (2010) states that usage imagery has an
important contribution to a brand’s image.
Attitude toward a brand, or Brand Attitude, is another key component for valuing a
brand’s equity. Mitchell and Olson (1981) define Brand Attitude as an individual’s
overall evaluation of a brand. This means that attitude toward a brand mainly depends
on a consumer’s own perceptions regarding a brand, and are argued to be a reliable
predictor of consumers’ behaviour toward brands (Shimp, 2010). Most researchers
(e.g. Aaker, 1996; Faircloth et al., 2001; Helgeson and Supphellen, 2004) regard these
two as distinctive concepts where brand image helps develop potential buyers’ overall
evaluation or attitude toward a brand.
The Brand Loyalty construct signifies the degree of attachment a customer has for a
brand and it is closely linked to use experience. Dick and Basu (1994) and Neal and
 Strauss (2008) both propose that Brand Loyalty have attitudinal and behavioural A study on
dimensions. The attitudinal dimension describes a consumer’s overall satisfaction luxury brands
while the behavioural dimension represents the tendency of a consumer to purchase a
particular brand repeatedly over time.
Some previous studies (e.g. Starr and Rubinson, 1978) find a positive relationship
between attitude and loyalty toward a brand. A similar relationship appears to exist
between a brand’s image and loyalty toward the brand (e.g., Mustafa, 1999). 925
Researchers such as Keller (1993) view loyalty toward a brand as an outcome of
effectively managing knowledge about a brand’s images and attitude toward the
brand. Therefore, both a brand’s image and the buyers’ attitude toward a brand
contribute to loyalty toward the brand (Faircloth et al., 2001).
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Brand Personality Congruity

It has been long suspected that consumers use products and brands to form and
sustain their image (Veblen, 1899). The brand’s image can provide “self-expressive”
benefits where consumers can use visually consumed brands to express their own
image (Aaker, 1996). A brand’s ability to express one’s self-image can be explained by
self-congruity theory (Sirgy et al., 1997). A theory derived from psychology,
self-congruity theory proposes that consumers like to compare themselves with a
brand and see if the brand matches their concept of themselves (Sirgy, 1986).
Past research (e.g. Sirgy, 1986) has suggested that consumers have a better liking
(attitude towards) for brands that are perceived to have strong favourable human
characteristics that are congruent with his or her self-concept. Various studies report
that Brand Personality Congruity has a positive effect in attitude toward the brand
(e.g. De Chernatony and Riley, 1998; Harris and Fleming, 2005). Kim et al. (2001) also
finds that Brand Personality Congruity has a positive effect in loyalty toward the
brand. We propose that:
H1. Brand Personality Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Attitude.
H2. Brand Personality Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Loyalty.

Brand User Imagery Congruity

Brand User Imagery Congruity refers to the relationship between a buyer’s self image
and the perceived image of the user (Sirgy et al., 1997). High self-congruity would mean
that a consumer perceives the user of a particular brand closely matches his or her
image. Consumers are more likely to purchase a particular brand if they perceive it to
be consistent with their self images (Liu et al., 2008).
Sirgy et al. (1997) have shown evidence of using this construct to predict consumers’
attitude and purchase intentions toward brands. Lim and O’cass (2001) find consumers
have more favourable preferences and purchase intentions toward a brand that has a
user image that is congruent with the perceived image of the brand’s target market. Liu
et al. (2008) find that Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive
effect in consumers’ attitude toward an automotive brand whilst Brand Personality
Congruity does not. Both Aaker (1996) and Keller (1998) assert that they need not be
congruent. For example, Levi’s brand personality (tough, durable and simple) is based
 EJM on the firm’s heritage of providing clothes for miners in the 1849 gold rush in
46,7/8 California, while its user imagery now tends to be urban, hip and unisex (Aaker, 1996).
User imagery is said to be developed based on consumers’ perception of the typical
user of a brand whereas brand personality is developed based on interpreting the
brand as having a human personality (Parker, 2005). Helgeson and Supphellen (2004)’s
study has empirically supported that Brand Personality Congruity and Brand User
926 Imagery Congruity may be two distinctive constructs. We hypothesize that:
H3. Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Attitude.
H4. Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Loyalty.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Brand Usage Imagery Congruity

Biel (1992) defines brand usage imagery as the perceived stereotype of the situations in
which a brand or product is generally used. For example, formal wear can be easily
associated with a particular function, which is important and serious. Like user
imagery, usage imagery is typically formed either through direct contact with the
brand or through indirect means like word-of-mouth communications (Keller, 1998).
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity refers to the relationship between a consumer’s
expectations of the typical situations that a brand would be used by him/her, and the
general perceptions of the brand’s usage situations. Even though there has been
substantial discussions on this area (e.g. Biel, 1992; Sotiropoulos, 2003), limited
research has been conducted. The studies done to date (e.g. Liu et al., 2008) tend to
focus on the two other congruity concepts of personality and user imagery.
Research has found that consumers tend to rely on external cues if they do not have
sufficient self-schemas that are congruent with the brand’s image (Aaker, 1999).
However, consumers more easily visualize brand usage imagery of when and how the
brand should be used. Therefore, an association needs to exist between usage imagery
and the potential buyers’ self-congruity. Sotiropoulos (2003) finds that liking the brand is
expected to be higher when a respondent is presented with some usage imagery rather
than with none under conditions of high self-congruity. Therefore, we propose that:
H5. Brand Usage Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Attitude.
H6. Brand Usage Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Loyalty.
We also hypothesize a direct relationship between Brand Attitude and Brand Loyalty.
Figure 1 illustrates the relationships examined in this study.
H7. Brand Attitude has a significant and positive effect in Brand Loyalty.

Luxury brands
There have been a number of studies on luxury brands, the relationship with premium
pricing, and the consumption behaviour of prestige-seeking people (e.g. Vigneron and
Johnson, 1999; Yeoman and McMahon-Beattie, 2006). The 2008 global financial crisis
has slowed luxury brand consumption in most developed economies. However, some
 A study on
luxury brands

927
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Figure 1.
The conceptual model

emerging economies such as China and Russia are still experiencing continuous
growth in luxury consumption. For example, China still maintained a three percent
growth in luxury consumption after the global financial crisis, and it has now become
the third biggest luxury market (Chinadaily, 2008).
A luxury brand is defined as going beyond functionality and emphasizes the status
and image of an individual (Nueno and Quelch, 1998). As compared to necessity
products, luxury products (usually goods) often place more emphasis on image rather
than objective physical attributes. Important reasons for owning luxury products are to:
.
show success and social status;
.
reward own self; and
.
provide me with confidence (KPMG, 2006).

These reasons show that luxury brands provide individuals with relatively more
image and non-functional benefits than necessity products. Numerous studies (Aiello
et al., 2009; Heine, 2010) offer similar findings.
However, what one person perceives as luxury may be ordinary to another. To
minimize confusion, Vigneron and Johnson (1999) suggest a brand should consist of
five unique values in order to be considered as luxury; conspicuous value, unique
value, social value, hedonic value and quality value. Most luxury fashion brands
provide all these five values that help develop a brands’ overall image (Berry, 1994).
Therefore, this study focuses on luxury fashion brands to better understand the
relationships between imagery, self-congruity, attitude and loyalty toward a brand.

Research design
Sample, product and brand selection
This study uses a sample of university students in Australia. There are several reasons
for the choice beyond convenience. University students represent an important present
and future market segment that are “most likely to buy luxury goods and services”
(Hauck and Stanforth, 2007, p. 179). The chosen university for this study is one of the
 EJM most exclusive and expensive universities in one of Australia’s most expensive cities in
46,7/8 2009-2011. Due to the difficulty of getting admitted for enrolment and the associated
education costs, the students in this sample tend to come from families with above
average economic and social status. A major purpose of this study is to understand the
young affluent’s attitudes toward luxury brands because their early perceptions tend
to have effects in their long run behaviours (Unity Marketing, 2007). Finally, university
928 students are relatively homogenous in terms of their age, intelligence and income so
this similarity can reduce the potential effects of these potential covariates in the
results.
After conducting interviews of experts, this study chose luxury brand watches and
sunglasses as two product categories examined. O’Cass and Frost (2002) used these
two categories in a study to examine the effects of brand associations in the status and
conspicuous consumption of luxury brands. A pre-test among 50 undergraduate
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

students found that Calvin Klein (CK) and Channel were perceived as well recognised
luxury brands for watches and for sunglasses.

Questionnaire and scale development

The study adopts Aaker’s (1997) brand personality (BP) scale. The scale has five
dimensions and a total of 42 traits. Numerous studies have suggested precautions in
adopting the BP scale for different cultural contexts (e.g. Aaker et al., 2001; Sung and
Tinkham, 2005). The Australian culture, however, is viewed to be not distinctively
different from the US and UK cultures based on the key cultural dimensions
(e.g. Hofstede, 2001; Liu et al., 2009). Thus, Aaker’s BP scale was adopted for this study.
As some traits are product categories specific, ten of the 42 traits are removed based on
expert opinions. The second pre-test was conducted to test the BP scale, and further
four traits were removed from the measure due to their low factor loadings of less than
0.3 using factor analysis. The questions about self-personality use the same response
scale as brand personality. The absolute differences between brand personality and
self-personality represent the respondent’s Brand Personality Congruity.
The measurement for Brand User Imagery Congruity is adopted from Sirgy et al.
(1997), and includes four statements that are each rated on a five point Likert scale. The
five item measurement of Brand Usage Imagery Congruity was developed based on a
method similar to the one Sirgy et al. (1997) use to develop the scale for Brand User
Imagery Congruity. The measurement for Brand Attitude is adopted from MacKenzie
and Lutz (1989) and includes three semantic differential responses. The six-item
measurement for Brand Loyalty is adopted from Netemeyer et al. (2004) and Zeithaml
et al. (1996). A third pre-test was conducted to ensure the clarity of each item to
respondents and found no problems with the respondents’ interpretation or ability to
respond to the questions.

Data collection and analyses

Data collection
This study uses self-administered surveys completed during a lecture. A total of 391
students participated in the study. After removing the questionnaires that have less
than 50 per cent of the questions answered, 264 valid questionnaires remain for further
analyses. International students’ responses were not used for this study because the
Aaker scale used has been shown to be culturally specific. Also, many of the
 international students that come to the university sampled come from Asian countries A study on
where counterfeit luxury goods were the norm (O’Cass and Frost, 2002). luxury brands
A mixture of 51 per cent males and 48 per cent females offer a good balance of
gender in the sample. Around 58 per cent of the respondents are between 16 and 20
years old with the rest between 20 and 30 years old. Twenty three percent (23 per cent)
of the respondents report spending an average of 100 Australian dollars per month on
non-necessities. Thirty seven percent (37 per cent) report spending between 100 to 200 929
dollars, while 23 per cent report between 200 to 300 dollars spent on non-necessities.
The remaining 17 per cent report an average monthly expenditure of more than 300
dollars on non-essentials.

Construct testing
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Confirmatory factor analyses using the alpha factoring extraction method with
varimax rotation are conducted to test the constructs. Three out of the four items
provide a single significant factor for each brand for Brand User Imagery Congruity.
Another factor analysis finds a single factor for Brand Usage Imagery Congruity,
Brand Attitude and Brand Loyalty. For both CK and Channel luxury brands, a single
factor is an effect for four of the five Aaker Brand Personality Congruity dimensions
(see Table I). The standardized reliability coefficients for all of the measures are larger
than 0.8, indicating a good level of inter-item reliability.

Hypotheses testing
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using the maximum-likelihood estimation
method is used to test the hypotheses (see Figure 2 for the full model). Composite scores
are used to represent each construct. A separate SEM model is tested for CK and
Chanel brands. The model fit indices show that each model provides a good fit to the
data (CK: X 2/df ¼ 1.575, p ¼ 0.078, RMR ¼ 0.060, RMSEA ¼ 0.055, CFI ¼ 0.973,

Measure Brand Items Eigenvalue Total variances (%) Reliability

BUserIC CK 3 2.277 57 0.807

Chanel 3 2.666 67 0.902
BUsageIC CK 5 3.258 65 0.861
Chanel 5 3.702 74 0.915
BA CK 3 2.205 74 0.845
Chanel 3 2.275 76 0.858
BL CK 5 3.015 50 0.821
Chanel 5 3.431 58 0.885
BPC_Sincerity CK 6 2.658 44 0.816
Chanel 6 2.504 42 0.824
BPC_Excitement CK 4 2.082 35 0.837
Chanel 3 2.457 31 0.856
BPC_Sophistication CK 4 1.802 45 0.901
Chanel 4 1.648 42 0.897 Table I.
BPC_Competence CK 4 2.675 45 0.871 Confirmatory factor
Chanel 4 1.627 30 0.889 analyses
 EJM
46,7/8

930
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Figure 2.
The full SEM model

GFI ¼ 0.961, TLI ¼ 0.930; Chanel: X 2/df ¼ 1.512, p ¼ 0.098, RMR ¼ 0.063,
RMSEA ¼ 0.052, CFI ¼ 0.987, GFI ¼ 0.970, TLI ¼ 0.967).
Tables II and III present the effects of all independent variables in Brand Attitude
and Brand Loyalty for the CK and Chanel brands. Brand Personality Congruity is not a
significant effect in the Brand Attitude for either brand. Therefore, hypothesis one is

Standardized regression weights Estimate S.E. C.R. p

sincerity , – -BPC 0.650 0.056 11.560 , 0.001

competency , – -BPC 0.527 0.058 9.135 , 0.001
Sophisticated , – -BPC 0.134 0.043 3.094 0.002
excitement , –-BPC 0.722 0.063 11.388 , 0.001
BA , – -BUserIC 0.459 0.079 5.831 , 0.001
BA , – -BPC 0.088 0.057 1.559 0.119
BA , – -BUsageIC 0.128 0.067 1.900 0.048
BL , – -BUserIC 0.105 0.079 1.335 0.182
BL , – -BPC 0.099 0.051 1.961 0.050
BL , – -BUsageIC 0.290 0.060 4.830 , 0.001
Table II. BL , – -BA 0.311 0.072 4.330 , 0.001
CK – summary for each BUsageIC , – . BPC 0.262 0.056 4.643 , 0.001
hypothesized path and BPC , – . BUserIC 0.338 0.053 6.354 , 0.001
covariance BUsageIC , – . BUserIC 0.285 0.043 6.617 , 0.001
 A study on
Standardized regression weights Estimate S.E. C.R. p
luxury brands
sincerity , – -BPC 0.685 0.052 13.084 , 0.001
competency , – -BPC 0.743 0.067 11.164 , 0.001
Sophisticated , – -BPC 0.066 0.046 1.450 0.147
excitement , –-BPC 0.638 0.072 8.891 , 0.001
BA , – -BUserIC 0.511 0.092 5.554 , 0.001 931
BA , – -BPC 0.110 0.060 1.885 0.060
BA , – -BUsageIC 0.223 0.095 2.357 0.018
BL , – -BUserIC 0.484 0.080 6.086 , 0.001
BL , – -BPC 0.055 0.046 1.182 0.237
BL , – -BUsageIC 0.029 0.075 0.391 0.695
BL , – -BA 0.451 0.060 7.457 , 0.001 Table III.
BUsageIC , – . BPC 0.388 0.063 6.122 , 0.001 Chanel – summary for
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

BPC , – . BUserIC 0.380 0.066 5.792 , 0.001 each hypothesized path

BUsageIC , – . BUserIC 0.685 0.071 9.601 , 0.001 and covariance

not supported. The results show that Brand Personality Congruity is a significant
effect in Brand Loyalty for CK but not a significant effect in Chanel Brand Loyalty.
Thus, hypothesis two is only partially supported. Brand User Imagery Congruity is a
positive effect in Brand Attitude for both CK and Chanel brands. Hypothesis three is
supported. Brand User Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in Brand Loyalty for
the Chanel brand, but is not a significant effect in Brand Loyalty for the CK brand.
Thus, hypothesis four is only partially supported.
The construct Brand Usage Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in Brand
Attitude for both CK and Chanel brands. Thus, hypothesis five is supported. Brand
Usage Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in Brand Loyalty for the CK brand, but
is not a significant effect for the Chanel brand’s loyalty. Therefore, H6 is partially
supported. Finally, the results suggest that Brand Attitude is a significant effect in the
Brand Loyalty for both CK and Chanel brands. Therefore, hypothesis seven is
supported.
An examination of variances reveals that Brand Personality Congruity, Brand User
Image Congruity and Brand Usage Imagery Congruity are significantly associated. For
the CK brand, Brand Personality Congruity and Brand User Imagery Congruity have
the highest correlation, followed by the association of Brand Usage Imagery Congruity
and Brand User Imagery Congruity. The lowest association is Brand Usage Imagery
Congruity with Brand Personality Congruity.
For the Chanel brand, Brand Usage Imagery Congruity and Brand User Imagery
Congruity have the highest correlation, followed by the association of Brand Usage
Imagery Congruity with Brand Personality Congruity. Brand Personality Congruity
and Brand User Imagery Congruity have the lowest significant correlation for the CK
brand. Finally, none of the covariates (such as age, gender, and reported expenditures
on non-necessities) is a significant effect in the findings.

Discussion and conclusion

Summary and research implications
Brand User Imagery Congruity and Brand Usage Imagery Congruity are found to be
stronger predictors of attitude and loyalty toward brands than Brand Personality
 EJM Congruity. The construct of Brand Personality Congruity is not a significant effect in
46,7/8 the attitude toward either brand. For Brand Loyalty, Brand User Imagery Congruity is
a significant effect for the Chanel brand while Brand Usage Imagery Congruity is a
significant effect for the CK brand. Although the Brand Personality Congruity
construct has a significant effect in loyalty toward the CK brand, its significant path
value (0.099) is slightly lower than the Brand Usage Imagery Congruity path value
932 (0.128).
These findings support the claims of Sirgy et al. (1997) that the similarity between a
consumer’s own self-image and the typical user’s image can play a significant role in
consumers’ attitude or purchasing intentions. The findings are also consistent with Liu
et al.’s (2008) results where Brand User Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in
attitudes toward automobile brands. Although the literature regarding usage imagery
congruity is limited, the findings are consistent with Sotiropoulos’s (2003) report that
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

usage imagery has a significant effect in both attitude toward and purchase intentions
for a brand (Sirgy et al., 2008).
The finding that a potential buyer’s Brand Personality Congruity is not an effect in
their attitude toward the luxury brands tested is consistent with Liu et al.’s experience
(2008) with automobile brands. The inconsistent and relatively weak (in this study)
effect of brand personality supports other research (e.g. Kressmann et al., 2006).
However, the effect of Brand Personality Congruity in the loyalty of a brand may be
due to the product categories tested.
Buyer imagery plays an important role in their information processing and their
attitude formation (Mazzocco and Brock, 2006). Brand personality, brand user imagery,
and brand usage imagery are brand concepts heavily based on imagery (Shimp, 2010).
These three brand self-congruity concepts are potential factors of a brand’s image but
may have different effects in decision-making. For example, user imagery and usage
imagery focus on the typical user or the typical usage. The imagery processing
associated with user and usage would appear to be more easily judged than imagining
the brand as a human being (Parker, 2005). More concrete imagery tends to develop
stronger attitudes than abstract imagery (MacInnis and Price, 1987; Keller and McGill,
1994).

Practical implications
There are several practical implications of these findings. As brands are becoming less
and less different in terms of product attributes, how to develop or enhance brand
images via non-product attributes is becoming increasingly important for marketing
any brand (O’Cass and Frost, 2002). The findings that Brand User and Brand Usage
Imagery could enhance a consumer’s positive attitude and loyalty towards a brand
suggests that visual coverage of these elements is not only important, but needs to be
consistent with the imagery desired by the potential market. Therefore, these two
self-congruity concepts may be key factors in maintaining a long-term relationship
between the consumer and the brand. This leaves brand personality as a possibly less
useful area of perceptual management.
Another important implication lies in the product category effects for user and
usage imagery. As discussed earlier, user imagery appears to play a significant role
for developing Brand Loyalty in the category of sunglasses whilst usage imagery is
significant in the category of watches. Because most luxury brands (like Chanel and
 CK) market in multiple product categories, attention should be paid to the core A study on
perceptions of the brand when designing communication strategies for different luxury brands
categories. Ideally, user and usage imagery should be applied in marketing
communications in order to develop a unique position in the market. However, this
ideal solution may not be viable in many circumstances. For example, it is often
difficult to portray both user and usage imagery in a 30-second commercial. Under
this circumstance, brand managers should carefully consider the differentiating 933
effects of user and usage imagery in different product categories and select the best
alternative.

Limitations, future studies and conclusion

There are a number of possible limitations that need to be noted beyond the caution
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

about a limited number of product categories being studied. The sample was only one
of many targets for luxury goods, and only two luxury brands were tested. Students
enrolled in other universities or in other regions of Australia may have different
responses. The scales for self-concept have been shown to be sensitive to use in
different cultures and the perception of these luxury brands.
This study was conducted in a university setting. The respondents’ views may be
different if the data was collected in another format or venue. Although the average
amount spent on non-essential products was not a significant covariate, their
frequency of purchasing luxury brands was not obtained or accounted for in the
results. Future studies should explore the effects of purchase experience.
The self-congruity concept applied in this study refers to the actual self. Sirgy (1986)
claimed that the effect of actual self is often more important than other types of self,
such as ideal self, social self, or ideal social self. However, due to the strong symbolic
values associated with luxury brands, the effect of ideal or social self may be more
important for luxury brands than that for non-luxury brands. Hence, future studies
may include other types of self to broaden our understanding of the impact of
self-congruity in luxury consumption.
Another interesting future pursuit would be a cross-cultural study. People in a
collectivist society are often more influenced by others than those in an individualistic
society (Hofstede, 2001; Choi et al., 2005). This difference implies that user imagery
may play a more important role than usage imagery or brand personality in a
collectivist society, than in an individualistic society. The current study utilizes a
sample from Australia, a population that is regarded as an individualist culture. A
cross-cultural study including both individualistic and collectivist cultures would be
able to test whether culture has an impact in the relationships tested in this study. As
most luxury brands such as Chanel and CK target consumers globally (Wiedmann
et al., 2007), a cross-cultural study would be able to provide important insights to
luxury brands on the issue of localization vs standardization.
The objective of this study was to examine the combined effects of the three brand
self-congruity concepts of potential buyers in their reported attitude and loyalty
toward luxury fashion brands. The findings show that user and usage imagery are
both more of an effect than their perceptions of the brand’s personality. These images
appear to be more readily formed than perceptions of other attributes and could be
applied to non-luxury brands and categories to create a competitive advantage over
other competing brands.
 EJM References
46,7/8 Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing On the Value of a Brand Name, Free
Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, Free Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, J.L. (1997), “Dimensions of brand personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34
No. 3, pp. 347-56.
934 Aaker, J.L. (1999), “The malleable self: the role of self-expression in persuasion”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 45-57.
Aaker, J.L., Benet-Martinez, V. and Garolera, J. (2001), “Consumption symbols as carriers of
culture: a study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 81 No. 3, pp. 492-508.
Aiello, G., Donvito, R., Godey, B., Pederzoli, D., Wiedmann, K., Hennigs, O.N. and Siebels, O.A.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

(2009), “Luxury brand and country of origin effect: results of an international empirical
study”, Journal of Marketing Trends, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 67-75.
Berry, C. (1994), The Idea of Luxury, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Biel, A.L. (1992), “How brand image drives brand equity”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 32
No. 6, pp. 6-12.
Chinadaily (2008), “China’s luxury consumption sapped amid global crisis”, 13 December,
available at: www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-12/13.htm (accessed 15 March 2011).
Christodoulides, G. and Veloutsou, C. (2009), “The impact of self-congruity and brand relations
on brand equity facets”, 37th European Marketing Academy Conference (EMAC), 26-29
May, Nantes, France.
Choi, S.M., Lee, W.N. and Kim, H. (2005), “Lessons from the rich and famous: a cross-cultural
comparison of celebrity endorsement in advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 85-98.
De Chernatony, L. and Riley, F.D.O. (1998), “Modeling the components of the brand”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32 Nos 11/12, pp. 1074-83.
Dick, A.S. and Basu, K. (1994), “Customer loyalty: towards an integrated framework”, Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 99-113.
Erdem, T., Swait, J. and Valenzuela, A. (2006), “Brands as signals: a cross-country validation
study”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 34-49.
Faircloth, J.B., Capella, L.M. and Alford, B.L. (2001), “The effect of brand attitude and brand
image on brand equity”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 61-75.
Freling, T.H. and Forbes, L.P. (2005), “An examination of brand personality through
methodological triangulation”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 148-62.
Harris, E.G. and Fleming, D.E. (2005), “Assessing the human element in service personality
formation: personality congruency and the five factor model”, The Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 187-97.
Hauck, W.E. and Stanforth, N. (2007), “Cohort perception of luxury goods and services”, Journal
of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 175-88.
Heine, K. (2010), “Identification and motivation of participants for luxury consumer surveys
through viral participant acquisition”, The Electronic Journal of Business Research
Methods, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 132-45.
Helgeson, J.G. and Supphellen, M. (2004), “A conceptual and measurement comparison of
self-congruity and brand personality: the impact of socially desirable responding”,
International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 205-33.
 Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and A study on
Organizations across Nations, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Keller, K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity”,
luxury brands
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Keller, K.L. (1998), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing Brand
Equity, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Keller, P.A. and McGill, A.L. (1994), “Differences in the relative influence of product attributes 935
under alternative processing conditions: attribute importance versus attribute ease of
imagability”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 29-49.
Kim, C.K., Han, D. and Park, S.B. (2001), “The effect of brand personality and brand identification
on brand loyalty: applying the theory of social identification”, Japanese Psychological
Research, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 195-200.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

KPMG (2006), “Luxury brands in China”, available at: www.kpmg.fi/ (accessed 18 March 2011).
Kressmann, F., Sirgy, M.J., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., Huber, S. and Lee, D.J. (2006), “Direct and
indirect effects of self-image congruence on brand loyalty”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 59 No. 9, pp. 955-64.
Lim, K. and O’Cass, A. (2001), “Consumer brand classifications: an assessment of
culture-of-origin versus country-of-origin”, Journal of Product & Brand Management,
Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 120-30.
Liu, F., Cheng, H. and Li, J. (2009), “Consumer responses to sex appeal advertising:
a cross-cultural study”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 501-20.
Liu, F., Olaru, D. and Li, J. (2008), “Self congruity and brand attitude: a study of local and foreign
car brands in China”, Proceedings of 2008 Global Marketing Conference, Korean Academy
of Marketing Science, Shanghai.
MacInnis, D.J. and Price, L.L. (1987), “The role of imagery in information processing: review and
extensions”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 473-91.
MacKenzie, S.B. and Lutz, R.J. (1989), “An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of
attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53
No. 2, pp. 48-65.
Mazzocco, P.J. and Brock, T.C. (2006), “Understanding the role of mental imagery in persuasion:
a cognitive resources model analysis”, in Kahle, L.R. (Ed.), Creating Images and the
Psychology of Marketing Communication, Psychology Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 65-78.
Mitchell, A.A. and Olson, J.C. (1981), “Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of
advertising effects on brand attitude?”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 318-32.
Mustafa, T. (1999), “Increasing brand loyalty in the hospitality industry”, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 223-42.
Neal, B. and Strauss, R. (2008), Value Creation: the Power of Brand Equity, Cengage
Learning/South-Western, Independence, KY.
Netemeyer, R.G., Krishnan, B., Pullig, C., Wang, G., Yagci, M., Dean, D., Ricks, J. and Wirth, F.
(2004), “Developing and validating measures of facets of customer-based brand equity”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 209-24.
Nueno, J.L. and Quelch, J.A. (1998), “The mass marketing of luxury”, Business Horizons, Vol. 41
No. 6, pp. 61-70.
O’Cass, A. and Frost, H. (2002), “Status brands: examining the effects of non-product-related
brand associations on status and conspicuous consumption”, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 11 Nos 2/3, pp. 67-87.
 EJM Parker, B.T. (2005), “This brand’s for me: brand personality and user imagery based
self-congruity”, PhD thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
46,7/8 Putoni, S. (2000), “Self-identity and purchasing intension: an extension of the Theory of Planned
Behavior”, in Groeppel-Klien, A. and Esch, F.-R. (Eds), European Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 5, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 130-4.
Shimp, T.A. (2010), Advertising, Promotion, and Other Aspects of Integrated Marketing
936 Communications, 8th ed., South-Western, Boston, MA.
Sirgy, M.J. (1986), Self-Congruity: Toward a Theory of Personality and Cybernetics, Praeger
Publishers, New York, NY.
Sirgy, M.J., Grewal, D., Mangleburg, T.F. and Park, J.O. (1997), “Assessing the predictive validity
of two methods of measuring self-image congruence”, Academy of Marketing Science
Journal, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 229-38.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

Sirgy, M.J., Lee, D.J., Johar, J.S. and Tidwell, J. (2008), “Effects of self-congruity with sponsorship
on brand loyalty”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61 No. 10, pp. 1091-7.
Sotiropoulos, V. (2003), “Luxury fashion brands: the impact of embodied imagery on brand
responses”, Master of Science thesis, Concordia University, Montreal.
Starr, M.K. and Rubinson, J.R. (1978), “A loyalty group segmentation model for brand purchasing
simulation”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 378-83.
Sung, Y.J. and Tinkham, S. (2005), “Brand personality structures in the United States and Korea:
common and culture-specific factors”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 4,
pp. 334-50.
Sweeney, J.C. and Bao, J.Y.E. (2009), “Comparing factor analytical and circumplex models of
brand personality in brand positioning”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 10,
pp. 927-49.
Unity Marketing (2007), “Generations of luxury: what ‘young affluents’ want and what it means
to luxury marketers”, 1 April, available at: www.marketingresearch.com/ (accessed 15 June
2011).
Veblen, T. (1899), Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study in the Evolution of Institutions,
Macmillan, New York, NY.
Vigneron, F. and Johnson, L.W. (1999), “A review and a conceptual framework of
prestige-seeking consumer behavior”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Wee, T.T.T. (2004), “Extending human personality to brands: the stability factor”, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 317-30.
Wiedmann, K.P., Hennigs, N. and Siebels, A. (2007), “Measuring consumers’ luxury value
perceptions: a cross-cultural framework”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, No. 7,
pp. 1-21.
Yeoman, I. and McMahon-Beattie, U. (2006), “Luxury markets and premium pricing”, Journal of
Revenue and Pricing Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 319-25.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of service
quality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 31-46.

About the authors

Dr Fang Liu is an Associate Professor of Marketing in the School of Business, University of
Western Australia. Dr Liu’s research interests centre on brand strategies, marketing
communications, and cross-cultural consumer behaviour. She has published dozens of
peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and conference proceedings in these areas. Prior to her
academic career, Dr Liu has extensive working experience in the area of international trade.
 Dr Jianyao Li (PhD in Marketing, The University of Western Australia) is Assistant Professor A study on
in Marketing and Hospitality Management at the Business School, Sun Yat-sen University in
China. His main research areas include higher education marketing, international marketing, and luxury brands
service marketing. He has published a number of referred conference papers and his work has
also appeared in international journals such as International Marketing Review, and Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics. Jianyao Li is the corresponding author and can be contacted
at: jianyao@mail.sysu.edu.cn
Dr Dick Mizerski is a Winthrop Professor and has the University Chair in Marketing at the 937
University of Western Australia. He has special expertise in consumer decision-making,
advertising and brand management. He has worked as a government regulator of marketing in
the USA, and has over 35 years of marketing consulting experience with some of the world’s
largest marketers of luxury products.
Huangting Soh has obtained an honors degree in Marketing at the University of Western
Australia. She is currently working at a market consulting firm in Singapore.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Jamid Ul Islam, Zillur Rahman, Linda D. Hollebeek. Consumer engagement in online brand
communities: A solicitation of congruity theory. Internet Research 0:ja, 00-00. [Abstract] [PDF]
2. Viktoria Maria Radler. 2017. 20 Years of brand personality: a bibliometric review and research agenda.
Journal of Brand Management 34. . [Crossref]
3. RezaeiSajad, Sajad Rezaei, ValaeiNaser, Naser Valaei. 2017. Branding in a multichannel retail environment.
Information Technology & People 30:4, 853-886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. AlgharabatRaed Salah, Raed Salah Algharabat. 2017. Linking social media marketing activities with brand
love. Kybernetes 46:10, 1801-1819. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Eirini Koronaki, Antigone G. Kyrousi, George G. Panigyrakis. 2017. The emotional value of arts-based
initiatives: Strengthening the luxury brand–consumer relationship. Journal of Business Research . [Crossref]
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

6. KimSoon-Ho, Soon-Ho Kim, LeeSeonjeong (Ally), Seonjeong (Ally) Lee. 2017. Promoting customers’
involvement with service brands: evidence from coffee shop customers. Journal of Services Marketing 31:7,
733-744. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Ananya Rajagopal. 2017. Research continuum on consumer education and brand knowledge: A critical
analysis. Journal of Transnational Management 22:4, 235-259. [Crossref]
8. Youngseon Kim, Nikki Wingate. 2017. Narrow, powerful, and public: the influence of brand breadth in
the luxury market. Journal of Brand Management 24:5, 453-466. [Crossref]
9. MogajiEmmanuel, Emmanuel Mogaji, DanburyAnnie, Annie Danbury. 2017. Making the brand
appealing: advertising strategies and consumers’ attitude towards UK retail bank brands. Journal of Product
& Brand Management 26:6, 531-544. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Munyaradzi W. Nyadzayo, Margaret J. Matanda, Rajesh Rajaguru. 2017. The determinants of franchise
brand loyalty in B2B markets: An emerging market perspective. Journal of Business Research . [Crossref]
11. BerezanOrie, Orie Berezan, KrishenAnjala Selena, Anjala Selena Krishen, TanfordSarah, Sarah
Tanford, RaabCarola, Carola Raab. 2017. Style before substance? Building loyalty through marketing
communication congruity. European Journal of Marketing 51:7/8, 1332-1352. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
12. Danny D. E. Kim. 2017. A Unified Measure of Media Brand Personality: Developing A Media Brand
Personality Scale for Multiple Media. International Journal on Media Management 19:3, 197-221.
[Crossref]
13. Deborah J. MacInnis, Valerie S. Folkes. 2017. Humanizing brands: When brands seem to be like me, part
of me, and in a relationship with me. Journal of Consumer Psychology 27:3, 355-374. [Crossref]
14. Rohail Ashraf, Dwight Merunka. 2017. The use and misuse of student samples: An empirical investigation
of European marketing research. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 16:4, 295-308. [Crossref]
15. HuangChao-Chin, Chao-Chin Huang. 2017. The impacts of brand experiences on brand loyalty:
mediators of brand love and trust. Management Decision 55:5, 915-934. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. GuzmánFrancisco, Francisco Guzmán, PaswanAudhesh K., Audhesh K. Paswan, FabrizeRobert O., Robert
O. Fabrize. 2017. Crossing the border: changes in self and brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing 34:4,
306-318. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Hector Gonzalez-Jimenez. 2017. The self-concept life?cycle and brand perceptions: An interdisciplinary
perspective. AMS Review 7:1-2, 67-84. [Crossref]
 18. , , , , . 2017. The Influence of Excessive Product Packaging on Green Brand Attachment: The Mediation
Roles of Green Brand Attitude and Green Brand Image. Sustainability 9:4, 654. [Crossref]
19. Reza Salehzadeh, Javad Khazaei Pool. 2017. Brand Attitude and Perceived Value and Purchase Intention
toward Global Luxury Brands. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 29:2, 74-82. [Crossref]
20. ChangShing-Wan, Shing-Wan Chang, FanShih-Heng, Shih-Heng Fan. 2017. Cultivating the brand-
customer relationship in Facebook fan pages. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
45:3, 253-270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. Heidarzadeh HanzaeeKambiz, Kambiz Heidarzadeh Hanzaee, EsmaeilpourFariba, Fariba Esmaeilpour.
2017. Effect of restaurant reward programs on customers’ loyalty: evidence from Iran. Journal of Islamic
Marketing 8:1, 140-155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
22. WallaceElaine, Elaine Wallace, BuilIsabel, Isabel Buil, de ChernatonyLeslie, Leslie de Chernatony.
2017. Consumers’ self-congruence with a “Liked” brand. European Journal of Marketing 51:2, 367-390.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

23. Jane Brannen, Cynthia M. Frisby. 2017. Self-Esteem’s Moderation of Self-Congruity Effects on Brand
Loyalty. Theoretical Economics Letters 07:06, 1848-1864. [Crossref]
24. Ju-Young M. Kang, Jieun Kim. 2016. Effect of perceived luxuriousness on brand equity. The Research
Journal of the Costume Culture 24:5, 697-708. [Crossref]
25. Fitria Purnama Sari, Herdiansyah Rhamadan, Muhammad Rifki Shihab. The effects of customization
and permission on location-based advertising toward consumer behavioural intention 245-250. [Crossref]
26. Ju-Young M. Kang, 김김김. 2016. Effect of perceived luxuriousness on brand equity. The Research Journal
of the Costume Culture 24:5, 697-708. [Crossref]
27. VigoloVania, Vania Vigolo, UgoliniMarta Maria, Marta Maria Ugolini. 2016. Does this fit my style?
The role of self-congruity in young women’s repurchase intention for intimate apparel. Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management: An International Journal 20:4, 417-434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
28. ChangYonghwan, Yonghwan Chang, KoYong Jae, Yong Jae Ko, LeiteWalter L., Walter L. Leite. 2016.
The effect of perceived brand leadership on luxury service WOM. Journal of Services Marketing 30:6,
659-671. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
29. EsmaeilpourFariba, Fariba Esmaeilpour, AbdolvandMohammad Ali, Mohammad Ali Abdolvand. 2016.
The impact of country-of-origin image on brand loyalty: evidence from Iran. Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics 28:4, 709-723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
30. Choi, Nak Hwan, 김김김, 김김김. 2016. Roles of Pride, Gratitude and Global Self - Corporate Brand Congruity
in Corporate Association on Positive Behavior. Journal of Distribution Science 14:9, 73-83. [Crossref]
31. Hojoon Choi, Leonard N. Reid. 2016. Congruity effects and moderating influences in nutrient-claimed
food advertising. Journal of Business Research 69:9, 3430-3438. [Crossref]
32. Naeyhun (Paul) Jin, Nathaniel D. Line, Jerusalem Merkebu. 2016. The Impact of Brand Prestige on
Trust, Perceived Risk, Satisfaction, and Loyalty in Upscale Restaurants. Journal of Hospitality Marketing
& Management 25:5, 523-546. [Crossref]
33. SiuNoel Yee-Man, Noel Yee-Man Siu, KwanHo Yan, Ho Yan Kwan, ZengCeleste Yunru, Celeste Yunru
Zeng. 2016. The role of brand equity and face saving in Chinese luxury consumption. Journal of Consumer
Marketing 33:4, 245-256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
34. Milad Dehghani, Mojtaba Khorram Niaki, Iman Ramezani, Rasoul Sali. 2016. Evaluating the influence
of YouTube advertising for attraction of young customers. Computers in Human Behavior 59, 165-172.
[Crossref]
 35. Jihyun Kim, Hyun-Mee Joung. 2016. Psychological underpinnings of luxury brand goods repurchase
intentions: Brand–self congruity, emotional attachment, and perceived level of investment made. Journal
of Global Scholars of Marketing Science 1-16. [Crossref]
36. AagerupUlf, Ulf Aagerup, NilssonJonas, Jonas Nilsson. 2016. Green consumer behavior: being good or
seeming good?. Journal of Product & Brand Management 25:3, 274-284. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
37. Civilai Leckie, Munyaradzi W. Nyadzayo, Lester W. Johnson. 2016. Antecedents of consumer brand
engagement and brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing Management 32:5-6, 558-578. [Crossref]
38. Fajer Saleh Al-Mutawa. 2016. Negotiating Muslim masculinity: androgynous spaces within feminized
fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 20:1, 19-33. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
39. Tereza Vebrová, Kateřina Venclová, Stanislav Rojík. 2016. Customer Segmentation by Factors Influencing
Brand Loyalty and Customer Involvement. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae
Brunensis 64:5, 1797-1804. [Crossref]
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

40. Fariba Esmaeilpour. 2015. The role of functional and symbolic brand associations on brand loyalty. Journal
of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 19:4, 467-484. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
41. Isaac Cheah, Ian Phau, Calvin Chong, Anwar Sadat Shimul. 2015. Antecedents and outcomes of brand
prominence on willingness to buy luxury brands. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An
International Journal 19:4, 402-415. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
42. Huda Khan, Richard Lee, Larry Lockshin. 2015. Localising the packaging of foreign food brands: a case
of Muslim consumers in Pakistan. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24:4, 386-398. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
43. Lorna Ruane, Elaine Wallace. 2015. Brand tribalism and self-expressive brands: social influences and brand
outcomes. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24:4, 333-348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
44. Jinzhao Lu, Yingjiao Xu. 2015. Chinese young consumers’ brand loyalty toward sportswear products: a
perspective of self-congruity. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24:4, 365-376. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
45. Riza Casidy, Asti Nafia Nuryana, Sri Rahayu Hijrah Hati. 2015. Linking fashion consciousness with Gen
Y attitude towards prestige brands. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 27:3, 406-420. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
46. Rajat Roy, Fazlul K. Rabbanee. 2015. Antecedents and consequences of self-congruity. European Journal
of Marketing 49:3/4, 444-466. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
47. Miah Lee, Eunju Ko, Seulgi Lee, Kyulim Kim. 2015. Understanding Luxury Disposition. Psychology &
Marketing 32:4, 467-480. [Crossref]
48. Michael Schade, Rico Piehler, Christoph Burmann. 2014. Sport club brand personality scale (SCBPS):
A new brand personality scale for sport clubs. Journal of Brand Management 21:7-8, 650-663. [Crossref]
49. Albert Barreda, Khaldoon Nusair, Fevzi Okumus, Anil Bilgihan. 2013. Developing a brand structure
pyramid model for travel-related online social networks. Tourism Review 68:4, 49-70. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
50. Carmen-Maria Albrecht, Christof Backhaus, Hannes Gurzki, David M. Woisetschläger. 2013. Drivers of
Brand Extension Success: What Really Matters for Luxury Brands. Psychology & Marketing 30:8, 647-659.
[Crossref]
 51. Robert Davis, Bodo Lang. 2013. Does game self‐congruity increase usage and purchase?. Young Consumers
14:1, 52-66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
52. Liezl-Marié Kruger, Stefanie W. Kühn, Daniel J. Petzer, Pierre G. Mostert. 2013. Investigating brand
romance, brand attitude and brand loyalty in the cellphone industry. Acta Commercii 13:1. . [Crossref]
53. 2013. Loyalty and luxury brands. Strategic Direction 29:2, 31-33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
54. Ning Chen, Tina Šegota. 2012. Resident attitudes, place attachment and destination branding: a research
framework. Tourism and Hospitality Management 21:2, 145-158. [Crossref]
55. 2012. How affluent face luxury choices. Strategic Direction 29:1, 6-8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
56. Cindy Paola Pinzón Rios, Ignacio Osuna Soto, Luis Fernando Jaramillo Carling. Digital Marketing
Strategies for Luxury Cosmetics Brands 126-144. [Crossref]
57. Christopher J. Parker, Stephen A. Doyle. Designing Indulgent Interaction 1-21. [Crossref]
58. Gemma García Ferrer. Consumer Behaviors and Contemporary Attitudes in Luxury Markets 29-45.
Downloaded by LCC International University At 09:16 16 January 2018 (PT)

[Crossref]