Does Style of Thinking Make Differences in Consumer Judgments on Brand Extensions?

Abstract

Category similarity and benefit similarity have been identified as two important factors that determine a brand extension’s success. However, which of these two factors has a greater impact on consumers’ evaluations has received little attention. This study posits that the relative advantages are moderated by people’s style of thinking – holistic versus analytic. Specifically, analytic (holistic) thinkers have more favorable evaluations about benefit-similarity (category-similarity) extensions than category-similarity (benefit-similarity) extensions. Results from an experimental design supported this proposed hypotheses. Keywords: Style of Thinking, Culture, Brand Extension, Benefit Similarity, Category Similarity To cite this document: Shin-Shin Chang, "Does Style of Thinking Make Differences in Consumer Judgments on Brand Extensions?", Contemporary Management Research, Vol.10, No.2, pp.165-178, 2014. Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.7903/cmr.12002