The Effect of Consumers’ Openness to Experience on
Perceived Brand Personality and Brand Trust
by
Jérémy Choda 11770112
Supervised by
Dhr. Drs. Ing. A.C.J. Meulemans
Bachelor’s Thesis June 2020
BSc Business Administration University of Amsterdam
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Jérémy Choda who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Abstract
In today’s competitive markets, brand managers and marketers are aiming to increase consumers’ brand trust. Previous theories have shown that a stronger brand personality has an effect on brand trust. However, we can wonder how consumers’ personality trait
influences that relationship. We propose that consumers’ openness to experience as an effect on brand trust. Therefore, we hypothesize that consumers’ openness to experience has a positive effect on brand trust, and that the level of perceived brand personality as a positive effect on brand trust. Those hypotheses are leading to the main research question investigating the effect of consumers’ openness to experience on the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust. We tested these hypotheses analyzing the results of a sample of 142 respondents, focusing on three brands in the shoe industry: Nike, Gucci, and Skechers. The hypothesis suggesting a positive relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust was supported while the answer to the research question was mitigated.
This research gives practical and theoretical implications providing additional insights on previous findings and literature supporting the importance of a strong brand personality to improve brand trust.
Table of Content
1. Introduction 5
2. Theoretical Framework 7
2.1. Brand Personality 7
2.2. Brand Trust 7
2.3. Consumers’ Openness to Experience as personality trait 8 2.4. Relationship between Brand Personality and Brand Trust 8
3. Conceptual Models 9
4. Contribution to Theory and Society 12
4.1. Academic Knowledge 12
4.2. Managerial Implications 12
5. Method 13
5.1. Pre-test Design and Sample 13
5.2. Research Design and Sample 13
5.3. Procedure 15 6. Results 17 6.1. Reliability Analysis 17 6.2. Correlation Analysis 18 6.3. Hypotheses Testing 18 7. Discussion 23
7.1. Discussion of the Results 23
7.2. Limitations and Future Research 25
8. Conclusion 26
9. References 27
10. Appendix 28
10.1. Pre-Test Questionnaire 28
10.2. Final Survey Questionnaire 30
10.3. Demographics 34
10.4. Reliability Analysis 35
10.5. Correlation Analysis 38
10.6. Regression Analysis between openness to experience and brand trust 41 10.7. Regression Analysis between perceived brand personality and brand trust 42
1. Introduction
Brand personality is an important concept in marketing and is used to differentiate from competitors (Japutra & Molinillo, 2019). The concept of brand personality is defined as a set of characteristics associated to a brand (Aaker, 1997). As markets are becoming more and more competitive, it is important for brands and managers to understand this concept in order to keep and attract customers. To do so, managers are increasing the importance of satisfying their customers’ needs and establishing long-term relationships with them (Ahmad & Thyagaraj, 2015). Customers all have different tastes and preferences but can be divided by marketers into customers’ segments with similar behaviors and preferences (Mishra & Datta, 2008) which will help to reach the target audience while creating and advertising products. Understanding consumers' traits of personality is also key in order to understand how it is influencing their perception of the brand. Indeed, as it has been researched by Perrewé and Spector (2002), personality traits have an influence on the relationship between brand trust and brand loyalty. In 1990, Goldberg identified the big five personality factors as: Extroversion; Agreeableness; Conscientiousness; Neuroticisms; and Openness to Experience. Those personality traits can also influence the relationship between brand trust and brand loyalty.
Therefore, this research will explore the effect of consumers’ personality trait openness to experience as a moderator on the relationship between brand personality and brand trust. Some shoe brands personalities will be explored as having an effect on consumers brand trust. This aim to gain relevant knowledge for practices that brand managers can make use of, as well as providing further theory on the subject for academic purpose.
The first part of this thesis will be the theoretical framework which will be based on previous researches and findings. Researches about the relationship between brand personality and brand trust have previously been conducted as well as researches about consumers big five personality traits. This will give a better understanding along with the definitions of the main variables and moderator which will allow to put forth the hypotheses. However, as far as we know, there is a knowledge gap existing on the influence of consumer openness to
experience as a moderator on the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust. Thereby, this is leading to the research question of this study:
“To what extend can perceived brand personality moderated by consumers’ openness to experience influence brand trust?”
The theoretical framework will be followed by the conceptual models which will provide models for the different hypotheses as well as for the research question. Following that part, there will be the contribution to theory and society chapter. This chapter will explain the importance of the research question and thesis for academic purpose. The chapter will also provide managerial implications of the paper and will, therefore, link the research question to organizational concepts useful for managers. Then, the method of data collection and pre-test will be detailed and explained in the method chapter. Further, the results of the analyzes of the data collected will be reported. Those results will then be discussed in the discussion part and recommendations will be provided.
2. Theoretical Framework
A clarification of the main concepts and their relations is important in order to answer the main research question. Therefore, the following chapter contains a literature review of the key elements of this research; brand personality, brand trust, and consumer’s openness to experience.
2.1 Brand Personality
Brand personality is defined by Aaker (1997) as “a set of human characteristics associated to a brand”. Aaker (1997) research presented the brand personality framework including five distinct personality dimensions perceived by consumers: Sincerity, Excitement,
Competence, Sophistication, and Ruggedness. The creation of brand personality is influenced and developed by different factors of exposure a brand receives such as advertising, distribution, price, or word-of-mouth (Shank & Langmeyer, 1994). Maintaining those elements consistent and distinctive in the different communication channels and over time will make the brand personality stronger and clearer (Batra, Lehmann, & Singh, 1993). Brand personality enhances marketing effectiveness by differentiating the brand from its competitors. Brand personality has therefore been part of the marketing strategies of many brands in order to allow consumers to see the brand as a symbol (Sung & Kim, 2010). According to Escalas and Bettman (2003), the social benefit of being associated with a brand is valued by consumers because it allows them to present themselves to others in different social contexts. Consequently, consumers are using brands to communicate their identity, status, and ambitions (Maehle, Otnes, & Supphellen, 2011).
2.2 Brand Trust
In many businesses relationships, trust has a big role to play and affects those relationships (Delgado-Ballester, Munuera-Aleman, & Yague-Guillen, 2003). According to Agustin and Singh (2005) trust can be defined as “a consumer's confident beliefs that he or she can rely on the seller to deliver promised services, whereas a relational value can be defined as consumer's perceptions of the benefits enjoyed versus the cost incurred in the maintenance of an ongoing exchange relationship”. Brands trusted by consumers are more likely to be bought repeatedly and are seen as more credible (Amine, 1998). Consumers trust brands that are able to keep their promises and maintain their level of value at any time (Delgado-Ballester et al., 2003). The conceptualized model by Fournier (1998) implied that
relationships consumers have with brands have similar qualities than the ones they have with humans. In the model, all marketing activities and management decisions have been used to define the ‘behavior’ of the brand which can be used to analyze the brand as an
influential member of the relationship. The metaphor of brand-as-human can be used to define the brand behavior and personality. The concept of brand personality, in which
consumers can link different attributes and adjectives to a brand further support the idea that a relationship exists with consumers (Fournier, 1998).
2.3 Consumer’s Openness to Experience as personality trait
To define personality, Courtney Ackerman (n.d.) cites two authors. According to Revelle (2013), personality is “the coherent pattern of affect, cognition, and desires and goals as they lead to behavior”. On the other hand, the American Psychological Association defines it as “individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving” (2017). The big five personality factors have been identified by Goldberg (1990) and are the
following: Extroversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticisms, and Openness to Experience. This model has later been validated and studied extensively (Costa, & McCrae, 1992). According to John and Srivastava (1999) “Openness to experience (versus closed-mindedness) describes the breadth, depth, originality, and complexity of an individual’s mental and experiential life”. Openness to experience relates to someone’s willingness to try new ideas, their ability to think outside the box and be vulnerable (Courtney Ackerman). Prior researches have shown that an individual’s personality determines their consumptions behavior (Mishra & Datta, 2008) as well as satisfaction and post-purchase attitude
(Mooradian & Olver, 1997).
Consumers' personality openness to experience has been shown to have a positive influence on the perceived hedonic value of a product. Moreover, individuals scoring high on this personality trait have a stronger reaction to emotional factors shared by a brand
(Matzler, Bidmon, & Grabner-Kräuter, 2006). Therefore, from the readings and findings of previous researches, it is to be expected that consumers scoring high on openness to experience as a personality trait increase their brand trust. Consequently, the following can be derived as the first hypothesis:
H1: Consumers openness to experience personality trait increases brand trust.
2.4 Relationship between brand personality and brand trust
As mentioned before, consumer value the social benefit of being associated with a brand because it allows them to present themselves to others in many different social contexts (Escalas & Bettman, 2003). Previous researchers have found that consumers perceived sense of trust and loyalty to a brand increases when the brand has a well-established personality. This is due to consumers having a stronger emotional tie to the brand (Siguaw, Mattila, & Austin, 1999). Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, and
Ruggedness have been defined has consumers’ perceived brand personalities (Aaker, 1997). A field experiment conducted by Aaker, Fournier, and Brasel (2004) showed that brands scoring high on sincerity as consumers’ perceived personality trait are able to build stronger relationships.
Being a trusted brand is likely to lead to more purchases and increase credibility from consumers (Amine, 1998). Therefore, given the existing literature and knowledge, it is likely that a stronger level of perceived brand personality can have a stronger effect on
consumers’ brand trust. Therefore, the following hypothesis can be put forth:
H2: The level of perceived brand personality is positively related to brand trust.
The next chapter will present the models of the previously stated hypotheses and will
introduce the research question of this study with the conceptual model.
3. Conceptual Models
In this section, the hypotheses are presented again based on the theoretical framework developed previously. The hypotheses will then lead to the research question to be presented with a conceptual model.
As far as we know, there is a research gap on brand personality and brand trust moderated by the consumers’ personality traits. Therefore, this research will focus on the relationship between perceived brand personality and consumer’s brand trust moderated by the effect of the consumer openness to experience as a personality trait. This research will be based on the shoe industry and the effect of brand personality on brand trust moderated by one of the big five personality traits, in the case of this research, openness to experience. The literature review has helped to lead to two hypotheses from this relationship. The first hypothesis is about the effect of consumers personality traits openness to experience on brand trust. This is presented as the following:
H1: Consumers openness to experience personality trait increases brand trust.
Figure 1: Model of the relation between consumers openness to experience and brand trust
.
The second hypothesis is about the relationship between perceived brand personality and the effect on brand trust. The following is put forth as the hypothesis:
H2: The level of perceived brand personality is positively related to brand trust.
Figure 2: Model of the relation between perceived brand personality and brand trust. Consumers openness to
experience
Brand trust
Perceived Brand
Those hypotheses are then leading to the research question of this paper. The research question will, therefore, be:
“To what extend can perceived brand personality moderated by consumers’ openness to experience influence brand trust?”
In the following conceptual model, perceived brand personality will be the dependent variable as it is the variable that managers have power on and can, therefore, be changed and modified. Brand trust will be the dependent variable as it is influenced by the
independent variable and the moderator. One of the big five personality traits, consumer’s openness to experience, will be the moderator of the relationship between the dependent and independent variables. The moderator is the variable that affects the strength of the relationship between brand personality and consumers’ brand trust. Openness to experience has been chosen to be investigated as the moderator because previous research showed that this personality trait influences consumptions behavior (Mishra & Datta, 2008).
Moderator
Dependent Variable Independent Variable
Figure 3: Conceptual model of the relation between perceived brand personality and brand trust moderated by openness to experience.
Perceived Brand Personality
Brand Trust Openness to Experience
4. Contribution to Theory and Society
4.1 Academic KnowledgeAfter reviewing previous research and findings, this study will provide further knowledge on the effect of perceived brand personality on brand trust mediated by openness to experience as a personality trait of the consumer. The research will provide further academic knowledge about the subject and give suggestions for further research to be conducted in order to extend the knowledge of the effect of brand personality on consumers.
4.2 Managerial Implications
Providing further understanding of the relation between brands and consumers can benefit to the society as a whole. Indeed, both parties of this relationship can take advantages of the results of this research as well as previous ones. The findings provided can help customers understanding their relationships with brands by giving them more insights about their preferences. Furthermore, this research will provide some managerial implications. In point of fact, the findings can help brand managers and marketers to understand and have a better knowledge of the influence of perceived brand personality on consumers’ brand trust. The research also gives insight about the influence of consumers’ personality traits in this relationship. Understanding the effect of brand personality on consumers will help managers to develop their brand accordingly, depending on their target market and customer segment. This research could also be helpful for future marketing campaigns by giving insight on which customer segment is more attractive to the brand depending on their personality. Entrepreneurs can also use the findings of this research to better create a new brand and focus on its personality to increase consumers trust. Being able to increase brand trust could lead to more fidelity from the customers. This would eventually create more purchases of the brand from the consumers which therefore would lead to an increase in revenues for the brand.
5. Method
In this chapter, the research method used for this thesis is presented. First, the pre-test design and sample are presented in order to understand how brands were chosen to be included in the final survey. Then, the main survey design and sample are explained and detailed followed by the statistical procedure.
5.1 Pre-Test Design and Sample
In order to select brands with the strongest personality, a pre-test was conducted. The objective of the pre-test was to select three brands within the shoe category that consumers perceived with the strongest personality. The pre-test included six brands from different class level, low, medium, and high. The six selected brands were the following: Skechers and Converse for the low-class category, Vans and Nike for the medium-class category, and Gucci and Louis Vuitton for the high-class category. From those six brands, the ones scoring the highest on their perceived personality within each class category were identified and selected in order to be included in the final survey. In order to measure the level of perceived brand personalities, two adjectives related to each of the five personality traits (Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, and Ruggedness) were taken from the brand personality framework by Aaker (1998). Therefore, respondents were asked to rate ten adjectives for each specific brand. Respondents scored the adjectives on a 7-points Likert scale ranging from (1) strongly agree to (7) strongly disagree. The questionnaire used for this pre-test can be found in appendix 10.1.
A total of 18 respondents completed the pre-test questionnaire (N=18). For reasons of convenience, the questionnaire was sent to family and friends via email and social media. From the sample of 18 respondents, 66.6% were male (N=12) leaving 33.4% to be female (N=6). The age of the respondents ranges between 20 to 60 years old. Within that age range, the majority of the participants were within 20 to 22 years old, this being equal to 57.9% of all respondents (N=11).
5.2 Research Design and Sample
For this research, a quantitative method was used in order to analyze the effect of perceived brand personality on brand trust moderated by consumers’ openness to experience. This survey was conducted in a group with four other students. The other students were
researching about the relationship between brand personality and brand trust moderated by each one of the big five personality traits; Extroversion; Agreeableness; Conscientiousness; Neuroticisms; and Openness to Experience (Goldberg, 1990). The survey was created
collectively with the other students which allowed us to reach more people. A cross-sectional survey design was used and created with the online survey software Qualtrics. This
questionnaire was sent via emails and social media platforms such as Facebook. This survey type and distribution techniques were used for convenience purposes. The
questionnaire was conducted in English and respondents were ensured that their data would be treated anonymously and exclusively used for this study research. The questionnaire used for the final survey can be found in appendix 10.2.
The final sample contained 201respondents (N=201) who completed the
questionnaire. The response rate could not be measured since the survey was share across social media by all the students of the group. Out of the 201 respondents, 44 did not finish completing the survey. Their data was therefore deleted. Moreover, the questionnaire included a validity question asking respondents to select strongly disagree on a 7-point Likert scale. The data of all participants that did not select the right answer to the validity question was taken out of the analysis, which accounted for 15 respondents. Therefore, from the total sample of 201 respondents, 59 were taken out because of validity reasons or
missing answers. Finally, the sample used in the analysis consisted of 142 respondents (N=142). Questions concerning the demographics of the respondents were asked at the end of the survey. Out of the 142 respondents from the valid final sample, 53.5% were female (N=76) and 45.8% were male (N=65), 1 respondent preferred not to disclose which accounts for 0.7%. Respondents were aged between 18 to 66 years old with most of them (80.6%) being aged between 18 to 26. Demographics can be found in appendix 10.3.
The personality traits of consumers were measured using the HEXACO-60 (Ashton & Lee, 2009). HEXACO-60 is a list of 60 items measuring each of the big five personality traits (Extroversion; Agreeableness; Conscientiousness; Neuroticisms; and Openness to
Experience). For the reason that the 60 items were considered too long for this survey, five items were selected to measure each of the big personality traits. On a 7-points Likert scale ranging from (1) Strongly disagree to (7) Strongly agree, respondents had to rate the degree to which they personally relate to the statements. In order to improve reliability, a total of seven items were reverse coded, out of which two were measuring openness to experience.
Next, brand equity was measured using the items from the cross national CBBE scale developed by Zarantonello and Pauwels-Delassus (2015). Items with the highest factor loading developed by Severi and Ling (2013) were also included in the survey. Those items allowed to measure perceived brand personality as well as brand trust. Participants were presented with the brand logo, a screenshot of the Instagram page of the brand and a
shoe from the brand. Respondents were then asked to rate the 21 items selected on a 7-points Likert scale ranging from (1) Strongly disagree to (7) Strongly agree. This was repeated for the three brands included in the research. Based on the pre-test, the selected brands were Nike, Gucci, and Skechers.
5.3 Procedure
The data was analyzed using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences). First, the respondents that did not answer the validity question right were deleted from the data set. A reliability check was performed with a Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.896. The data was then tested for assumptions for linear regression; linearity, normality, homoscedasticity, and multicollinearity. Then, the personality trait questions that were reversed have been recoded. The mean values of the five items that measured openness to experience were computed to create a new variable. This new variable was used in the analyses measure the effect of openness to experience as a moderator.
Later, for each of the brands, the means of the items measuring perceived brand personality were computed to create new variables corresponding to the respective brands’ personality. The items were the following; “The brand has a personality”, “The brand is interesting”, and “I have a clear image of the person that would use the brand”. It is
important to notice that those brand personality variables have been used to measure how strong perceived brand personality is. The pre-test was used to know which of the brand personality dimension was the strongest for each brand. Nike scored the highest on competence, Gucci on sophistication, and Skechers on sincerity. Later, for each of the brands, the means of the items measuring brand trust were computed to create new variables measuring brand trust to be used in the analyses. The items computed together were the following; “I trust the company that makes the brand”, “I like the company that makes the brand”, and “The company that makes the brand has credibility”.
To test hypothesis 1, the relationship between consumer openness to experience and brand trust, linear regression will be utilized with openness to experience as the
dependent variable and brand trust as the independent variable. Each brand trust variables from Nike, Gucci, and Skechers have been computed as a new variable called brands trust to test for this hypothesis. For hypothesis 2, the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust, a linear regression will be conducted with perceived brand personality as the dependent variable and brand trust as the independent variable. Those linear regressions will be performed for each of the three brands, namely; Nike, Gucci, and Skechers. Gender will be used as the control variable in the regression analyses. Finally, the
moderation effect of consumer openness to experience on the relationship between
perceived brand personality and brand trust will be analyzed using the PROCESS macro of Hayes (2018) Model 1. This analysis will have perceived brand personality as the dependent variable, consumer openness to experience as the moderating variable, and brand trust as the independent variable.
6. Results
This chapter will present the results of the analysis performed from the data gathered with the survey. Starting with the reliability analysis, then the correlation statistics are described. This will be followed by the hypotheses testing.
6.1 Reliability Analysis
In order to confirm the quality of the measurements used, reliability analyses are performed. The reliability analysis for the personality trait openness to experience is measured with the respective five items from the HEXACO-60 scale. The brands personality dimensions reliability are measured using the items from the cross national CBBE scale. The results are presented in Table 1, SPSS outputs in appendix 10.4.
Table 1.
Reliability statistics: Openness to experience and Brands personalities
Scale Cronbach's Alpha
N of Items Openness to experience 0.66 5 Nike personality 0.592 3 Gucci personality 0.511 3 Skechers personality 0.449 3 Nike trust 0.815 3 Gucci trust 0.797 3 Skechers trust 0.75 3
The results obtained from the analyses show that openness to experience has an
acceptable Cronbach’s α > 0.60. Nike personality results show a Cronbach’s α of 0.592, this can also be acceptable as the value is relatively close to 0.60. However, Gucci personality and Skechers personality respectively have Cronbach’s α of 0.511 and 0.449. Those values are below the accepted Cronbach’s α of 0.60. Nonetheless, they will be considered
reasonable in this research and some limitations will be developed accordingly. Nike trust, Gucci trust, as well as Skechers trust all have good Cronbach’s Alpha with all of their value being above 0.7 (Nike trust Cronbach’s α=0.815; Gucci trust Cronbach’s α=0.797; Skechers trust Cronbach’s α=0.75).
6.2 Correlation Analysis
A correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between the different variables. An overview of the descriptive statistics including means, standard deviation, and reliability analysis are presented in the correlation matrix in Table 2. From the correlation matrix, it can be interpreted that Nike personality is significantly related (p <0.01) to Nike trust with a Pearson correlation coefficient r= 0.520. Furthermore, Gucci personality has a significant relation (p <0.01) to Gucci trust with a Pearson correlation coefficient r= 0.455. Gucci trust is also significantly related (p <0.01) to gender with a Pearson correlation coefficient r= 0.245. Additionally, Skechers personality is significantly related (p <0.01) to Skechers trust with a Pearson correlation coefficient of r= 0.499. Finally, it can be seen in the matrix that other variables are significantly related. However, significant relations such as Nike personality and Gucci personality or Nike trust and Skechers trust are not relevant in this analysis. SPSS outputs in appendix 10.5.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics and correlations.
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. Gendera 1.55 0.513 2. Nike personality 5.291 0.947 -0.035 3. Gucci personality 4.401 0.914 0.061 0.427** (0.415) 4. Skechers personality 4.204 0.942 0.216** 0.229** 0.198* (0.498) 5. Nike trust 5.019 1.04 0.047 0.520** 0.380** 0.245** (0.628) 6. Gucci trust 4.47 1.094 0.245** 0.262** 0.455** 0.250** 0.549** (0.710) 7. Skechers trust 4.207 0.816 0.088 0.259** 0.224** 0.499** 0.312** 0.191* (0.735) 8. Openness to experience 5.101 1.002 0.098 0.152 0.151 0.099 -0.094 -0.039 0.075 (0.693)
Notes. N=142. Cronbach's Alphas are in parentheses on the diagonal. a1= male, 2 = female.
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
6.3 Hypotheses Testing
To test for hypothesis 1, openness to experience positively influence consumers brand trust, a linear regression analysis was performed. The means of the brand trust variable of each brand were computed to create the independent variable, brands trust of this analysis. Openness to experience was used as the dependent variable and gender was used as the control variable. The regression results show that in model 2, R2= 0.001 which means that
0.01% of the total variance is explained by the model as a whole. The R2 change= 0.006 which means that 0.06% of the variance in the dependent variable, openness to experience, is explained by the variance in the independent variable, brand trust. From the coefficient table, unstandardized β= -0.102 gives the value of decrease in brand trust for each unit increase in openness to experience (SE= 0.114; t= -0.892). Finally, this model does not provide statistical significance which means that hypothesis 1 is not supported and the results of the regression analysis are not relevant. Therefore, consumers’ openness to experience does not influence brand trust. SPSS outputs in appendix 10.6.
Then, a linear regression was performed to test for hypothesis 2, perceived brand personality has a positive effect on brand trust. This hypothesis was tested over the three different brands with gender as a control variable. Therefore, the first regression analyzes the effect of Nike perceived brand personality, as the dependent variable, on Nike brand trust, as the independent variable. From the results, 27.3% of the variance is explained by the model as a whole (R2= 0.273). 27.2% of the variance in Nike perceived brand personality is explained by the variance in Nike brand trust (R2 change= 0.272). For each increase in one unit of Nike perceived brand personality, Nike brand trust increases by 0.474
(unstandardized β=0.476; SE= 0.066; t= 7.217). The model is statistically significant (p<0.05).
The same analysis has been performed for Gucci perceived brand personality (dependent variable) effect on Gucci brand trust (independent variable). The results from this analysis show that the model as a whole explains 21% of the variance (R2= 0.21). The variance in Gucci brand trust explains for 20.6% of the variance in Gucci perceived personality (R2 change= 0.206). The value of Gucci brand trust increases by 0.391 for each unit increase in Gucci personality (unstandardized β= 0.391; SE= 0.065; t= 6.022). Furthermore, this model is statistically significant (p<0.05).
Then, a similar regression has been conducted with the dependent variable being Skechers perceived brand personality and Skechers brand trust as the independent variable. The results show that 23.2% of the variance in Skechers perceived brand personality is
explained by Skechers brand trust (R2 change= 0.232), 27.9% of the variance is explained by the model as a whole (R2= 0.279). For each unit increase in Skechers perceived
personality, Skechers brand trust increases by 0.558 (unstandardized β = 0.558; SE= 0.083; t= 6.694). The model is statistically significant (p<0.05). Taken together, the results of each brand are significant. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is supported, namely, perceived brand personality has a positive effect on brand trust. SPSS outputs in appendix 10.7.
To test for the main hypothesis, the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust moderated by consumers’ openness to experience, the PROCESS macro (model 1) of Hayes (2018) was used. For each of the brands (Nike, Gucci, and Skechers), perceived brand personality was used as the dependent variable, brand trust as the
independent variable, and consumer openness to experience as the moderator. The results for Nike perceived brand personality and Nike brand trust showed that when openness to experience is low, there is a negative relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust (b= -0.0832, se= 0.0765, t= -1.0868, 95% CI= [-0.2345, 0.0682]). However, the relationship does not show significant interaction (p>0.05), therefore this relationship
analysis is not supported. Table 4 shows a summary of the results of this analysis, more can be found in appendix 10.8.1.
Table 4.
Regression table testing for the moderating effect of openness to experience on the relationship between Nike perceived brand personality and Nike brand trust.
b se t p Constant 0.3826 2.1965 0.1742 0.862 [-3.9605, 4.7257] Nike personality 1.0259 0.4027 2.5478 0.0119 [0.2297, 1.8221] Openness to Experience 0.2871 0.4222 0.68 0.4976 [-0.5478, 1.122] Nike personality x Openness to experience -0.0832 0.0765 -1.0868 0.279 [-0.2345, 0.0682]
The same analysis was performed with Gucci perceived brand personality and Gucci brand trust moderated by openness to experience. The results of this analysis show that when consumers score average on openness to experience (mean value of 4.00 of the computed items measuring openness to experience), this improves the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust (b= 0.8452, se= 0.1453, t= 5.8184, 95% CI= [0.5580, 1.1324], p<0.01). When consumers openness to experience increases, there is still a positive relationship between brand personality and brand trust. However, those effects on
the relationships are not as strong as the effect of consumers scoring average on the personality trait. Indeed, when consumers score 5.2 on openness to experience personality, the value of the effect is of 0.579 (b= 0.5794, se= 0.0892, t= 6.4959, 95% CI= [0.4030, 0.7558], p<0.01). When consumers personality trait score is of 6.2, the value of the effect is of 0.358 (b= 0.3579, se= 0.1242, t= 2.8809, 95% CI= [0.1123, 0.6036], p<0.01). This analysis is showing significant results. Table 5 and 6 show a summary of the results of this analysis, more can be found in appendix 10.8.2.
Table 5.
Regression table testing for the moderating effect of openness to experience on the relationship between Gucci perceived brand personality and Gucci brand trust.
b se t p Constant -4.3009 2.7098 -1.5872 0.1148 [-9.659, 1.0572] Gucci personality 1.7311 0.4891 3.5394 0.0005 [-0.754, 2.6981] Openness to Experience 1.0886 0.5126 2.1237 0.0355 [0.075, 2.1021] Gucci personality x Openness to experience -0.2215 0.0915 -2.4194 0.0168 [-0.4025, -0.0405] Table 6.
Conditional effects of the focal predictor at values of the moderator, openness to experience, on the relationship between Gucci perceived brand personality and Gucci brand trust.
Openness to Experience b se t p 4.000 0.8452 0.1453 5.8184 .0000 [0.558, 1.1324] 5.200 0.5794 0.0892 6.4959 .0000 [0.4030, 0.7558] 6.200 0.3579 0.1242 2.8809 .0046 [0.1123, 0.6036]
Then, the analysis testing for the relation between Skechers brand personality and Skechers brand trust moderated by consumers’ openness to experience was conducted. The result shows a negative effect of the moderator on the relationship between brand personality and brand trust (b= -0.0337, se= 0.0640, t= -0.5273, 95% CI= [-0.1602, 0.0927]). However, the results are not significant (p>0.05), therefore this relationship analysis is not supported. Table 7 shows a summary of the results of this analysis, more can be found in appendix 10.8.3.
Table 7.
Regression table testing for the moderating effect of openness to experience on the relationship between Skechers perceived brand personality and Skechers brand trust.
b se t p Constant 1.7989 1.4525 1.2385 0.2176 [-1.0731, 4.6709] Skechers personality 0.6101 0.3361 1.8150 0.0717 [-0.0546, 1.2747] Openness to Experience 0.1116 0.2789 0.4003 0.6896 [-0.4398, 0.663] Skechers personality x Openness to experience -0.0337 0.064 -0.5273 0.5988 [-0.1602, 0.0927]
7. Discussion
The goal of this research is to contribute to additional academic knowledge and provide practical implications for management teams and marketing strategies as well as society as a whole. This section will describe and discuss the findings of the analyses conducted and compare them with prior research findings introduced in the theoretical framework, leading to an answer to the research question of this study; “To what extend can perceived brand personality moderated by consumers’
openness to experience influence brand trust?”. Then the limitations of this study will be discussed and directions for future research will be suggested.
7.1 Discussion of the Results
Previous research findings showed that consumers’ openness to experience improved their hedonic value perception of products (Matzler et al., 2006) and that an individual’s
personality determines their consumptions behavior (Mishra & Datta, 2008).
Even though products value perception and consumptions behavior are not directly measuring brand trust, it was expected that consumers scoring high on openness to experience as a personality trait would increase their brand trust. This would help brand managers and marketers understanding some of the reasons consumers trust their brand. However, the results of this study show that the relationship between consumers’ openness to experience and brand trust is not supported. Hence, this means that no significant effects between openness to experience and brand trust have been found. The reason no
significant effects have been found in this relationship might depend on the brands
investigated. Indeed, this relation has been tested on three brands that some respondents might be less aware of than others and not very familiar with. This, therefore, limits the respondents ability to trust a particular brand. Nevertheless, the brands have been selected based on the pretest and the ones participants knew better were included in the final survey, which eventually limits the chances that respondents were not familiar with the brands.
The results of the analyses testing for the effects in the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust are supporting hypothesis 2. The relationship has been tested for each of the brands, Nike personality effects on Nike trust; Gucci personality on Gucci trust; and Skechers personality on Skechers trust. All three of those relationships analyses provided results with an effect between the variables. Indeed, for each of the brands, perceived brand personalities are positively related to brand trust. Those findings align with previous research suggesting that consumers perceived sense of trust and loyalty to a brand increases when the brand has a well-established personality which is
due to consumers having a stronger emotional tie to the brand (Siguaw et al., 1999).
Consequently, this means that consumers trust towards a brand increases when their perception of brand personality is stronger. For brand managers and marketers, this implies that they should focus on building a strong brand personality along with having
well-developed strategies to communicate the wanted brand personality to their customers. With improving their brand personality and its communication, customers trust toward the brand is likely to increase and therefore could lead to an increase in sales and loyalty.
Then, the analysis of the relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust moderated by openness to experience was conducted for each of the brands. The results of two of the brands were not significant, respectively, Nike and Skechers relationships between perceived brand personality and brand trust moderated by
consumers’ openness to experience. This means that no effects have been found of the moderator on the relation between perceived brand personality and brand trust for Nike and Skechers. Nevertheless, it is important to notice that those results might be affected by the low Cronbach’s Alpha values of the items measuring perceived brand personality. The analysis of the relationship between Gucci perceived brand personality and Gucci brand trust moderated by openness to experience does, however, show significant interaction. The results show that consumers’ openness to experiences increases the effect of Gucci
perceived brand personality on Gucci brand trust. Since the results are not showing significant effects for each of the brand and only Gucci can support the effect of the moderator on the main relationship, the answer to the research question; “To what extend can perceived brand personality moderated by consumers’ openness to experience influence brand trust?” will be mitigated. Indeed, it can only be stated that perceived brand personality has an effect on brand trust. However, the results are not significant enough to prove an effect of openness to experience as a moderator on this relationship.
Practical implications for brand managers would be, as suggested before, to still improve their brand personality and its communication to increase brand trust. Moreover, as only Gucci provided a moderated relationship between perceived brand personality and brand trust, it would be interesting for managers to study and understand the differences between Gucci and Skecher or Nike. Doing this could help them find useful insights used by Gucci management and marketing teams to have their brand trust increase, partly due to consumers personality traits.
7.2 Limitations and Future Research
The first limitation of this study concerns the items measuring the respondent’s personality traits. As mentioned before, the survey was conducted with other students researching the main relationship mediated by the other personality traits from the Big 5. Therefore, for convenience reasons, only five items measuring each of the personality traits were included in the survey. Including more items to measure the personality traits could improve the reliability of the study and improve the Cronbach’s Alpha value of the variable used in the analysis.
Secondly, brands included in the survey to measure brand trust as well as perceived brand personality were selected based on the pre-test. This pre-test got 18 respondents and aimed to select the brands scoring the highest on items measuring brand personality.
Therefore, respondents from the main survey could have not been familiar enough with the presented brands, which eventually limits their ability to rate their perceived brand
personality and brand trust. This might as well be a reason for the low Cronbach’s Alpha values of the items measuring brands perceived personality. To improve measurement of perceived brand personality, future research should take into consideration the level to which respondents are familiar with the brand.
Thirdly, this research focuses on perceived brand personality as a whole. It would be interesting for further research to investigate the effect of the different brand personalities (Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, and Ruggedness) introduced in the theoretical framework on brand trust moderated by consumers’ personality traits.
Finally, even though this study contains some limitations, some hypotheses have been supported and the results obtained were in line with those of previous findings
introduced in the theoretical framework. This allowed to draw some managerial and practical implications regarding those supported findings.
8. Conclusion
All in all, this study researched the effects of perceived brand personality on brand trust moderated by consumers’ openness to experience. To explore the effects of those relationships, three brands perceived personality and brand trust were studied as well as consumers’ personality traits. The results revealed mitigated findings regarding the main relationship moderated by openness to experience as only one of the investigated brands explained for significant effects. However, the results of the analyses of the effects of perceived brand personality on brand trust provided evidence of a positive relationship between the two variables. This, therefore, contributes to the importance for management to have a clear and well-communicated brand personality to increase consumers’ trust towards their brand.
9. References
Aaker, J., (1997), Dimensions of Measuring Brand Personality, Journal of Marketing Research 34, 347-356.
Aaker, J., Fournier, S., & Brasel, S. A. (2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer research, 31(1), 1-16.
Agustin, C., & Singh, J. (2005). Curvilinear effects of consumer loyalty determinants in relational exchanges. Journal of marketing research, 42(1), 96-108.
Ahmad, A., & Thyagaraj, K. (2015). ’Understanding the Influence of Brand Personality on Consumer Behavior. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 3(1).
American Psychological Association. (2017). Personality. American Psychological
Association. Retrieved March 10, 2020, from http://www.apa.org/topics/personality/ Amine, A. (1998). Consumers' true brand loyalty: the central role of commitment. Journal of
strategic marketing, 6(4), 305-319.
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of personality assessment, 91(4), 340-345. Costa Jr, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and
individual differences, 13(6), 653-665.
Courtney E. Ackerman, MSc., Big Five Personality Traits: The Ocean Model Explained. Retrieved, March 10, 2020, from https://positivepsychology.com/big-five-personality-theory/
Delgado-Ballester, E., Munuera-Aleman, J. L., & Yague-Guillen, M. J. (2003). Development and validation of a brand trust scale. International journal of market research, 45(1), 35-54.
Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2003). You are what they eat: The influence of reference groups on consumers' connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 339-348.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of consumer research, 24(4), 343-373.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative" description of personality": the big-five factor structure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 59(6), 1216.
Japutra, A., & Molinillo, S. (2019). Responsible and active brand personality: On the relationships with brand experience and key relationship constructs. Journal of Business Research, 99, 464-471.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and
Maehle, N., Otnes, C., & Supphellen, M. (2011). Consumers' perceptions of the dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Consumer behaviour, 10(5), 290-303.
Matzler, K., Bidmon, S., & Grabner-Kräuter, S. (2006). Individual determinants of brand affect: the role of the personality traits of extraversion and openness to
experience. Journal of Product & Brand Management.
Mishra, P., & Datta, B. (2008). Consanguinity Between Consumer and Brand Personality: A Review. ICFAI Journal of Consumer Behavior, 3(3).
Mooradian, T. A., & Olver, J. M. (1997). “I can't get no satisfaction:” The impact of
personality and emotion on postpurchase processes. Psychology & Marketing, 14(4), 379-393.
Perrewé, P.L. and Spector, P.E. (2002), “Personality research in the organizational sciences”, in Ferris, G.R. (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, JAI Press, Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp. 1-63.
Revelle, W. (2013). Personality theory and research. Personality Project. Retrieved March 10, 2020, from https://www.personality-project.org/index.html
Severi, E., & Ling, K. C. (2013). The mediating effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand image and perceived quality on brand equity. Asian Social Science, 9(3), 125 Shank, M. D., & Langmeyer, L. (1994). Does personality influence brand image?. The
Journal of psychology, 128(2), 157-164.
Siguaw, J. A., Mattila, A., & Austin, J. R. (1999). The brand-personality scale: An application for restaurants. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 48-55. Sung, Y., & Kim, J. (2010). Effects of brand personality on brand trust and brand
affect. Psychology & Marketing, 27(7), 639-661.
Zarantonello, L., & Pauwels-Delassus, V. (2015). The handbook of brand management
10. Appendix
10.1 Pre-test QuestionnaireIn this survey we are testing the relationship between sneaker brands and their perceived
brand personality. We will show you a picture of each sneaker brand and a statement. Please
indicate to what extent you agree, (1) being strongly agree and (7) being strongly disagree.
This test is anonymous. You can retract your entry at any point during the test.
Respondents were asked to rate the following adjectives from the brand personality framework by Aaker (1998) on a 7Points Likert scale, (1) Strongly agree to (7) Strongly disagree. The same adjectives were measured for each of the brands. The brands included were: Converse, Gucci, Skechers, Nike, Louis Vuitton, and Vans.
Please note to what extent you agree that the following adjectives relate to this brand (Brand
name).
1. Hard-Working
2. Confident
3. Down-to-Earth
4. Imaginative
5. Outdoorsy
6. Honest
7. Upper-Class
8. Though
9. Up-to-Date
10. Glamourous
What is your gender?
Male (1)
Female (2)
Prefer not to disclose (3)
What is your age?
10.2 Final Survey Questionnaire
You are being invited to participate in a research study titled “The impact of brand
personality on consumer equity”. The purpose of this research study is to research the impact
that brand personalities have on consumer equity.
If you agree to the term and participate in the study, you will be asked to complete an online
questionnaire.
*Use the images provided as well as your own experience to answer the questions about the
brands. Note: there are no right or wrong answers. The survey is completely anonymous and
the data provided will be used only for this specific study. Thank you very much for your
help!
This survey is conducted by Igor Tipaev, Pim Kastermans, Jeremy Choda, Gregor Ellerkamp,
and Zachary Clark; Business Administration students at the University of Amsterdam under
the supervision of drs. Antoon Meulemans. In case of any questions regarding the survey or
the processing and storage of your data you can send an email to:
jeremy.choda@student.uva.nl
By clicking “I agree” below you are indicating that you are at least 18 years old, have read
and understood this consent form and agree to participate in this research study.
o
I agree (1)
o
I disagree (2)
Big 5 personality traits rated on a 7points Likert scale, (1) Strongly disagree to (7) Strongly agree. HEXACO-60 (Ashton, & Lee, 2009).
Agreeableness:
1. I rarely hold a grudge, even against people who have badly wronged me.
2. People sometimes tell me that I am too critical of others. (REVERSE)
3. I tend to be lenient in judging other people
4. Most people tend to get angry more quickly than I do.
5. I am usually quite flexible in my opinions when people disagree with me.
Extraversion:
6. I feel reasonably satisfied with myself overall
7. I rarely express my opinions in group meetings (REVERSE)
8. On most days, I feel cheerful and optimistic.
9. In social situations, I’m usually the one who makes the first move
10. When I’m in a group of people, I’m often the one who speaks on behalf of the group.
Conscientiousness:
11. I plan ahead and organize things, to avoid scrambling at the last minute.
12. I often push myself very hard when trying to achieve a goal.
13. When working on something, I don’t pay much attention to small details. (REVERSE)
14. I always try to be accurate in my work, even at the expense of time
Neuroticism:
16. I worry a lot less than most people do (REVERSE).
17. I feel strong emotions when someone close to me is going away for a long time.
18. I remain unemotional even in situations where most people get very sentimental.
19. When I suffer from a painful experience, I need someone to make me feel comfortable.
20. I feel like crying when I see other people crying.
Openness to Experience:
21. I would be quite bored by a visit to an art gallery (REVERSE)
22. I would enjoy creating a work of art, such as a novel, a painting, a song
23. I think paying attention to radical ideas is a waste of time (REVERSE)
24. People have often told me that I have a good imagination
25. I like people who have unconventional views
This is a question to test the validity of your answers. Please select strongly disagree.
Strongly agree (1) Agree (2) Somewhat agree (3) Neither agree nor disagree (4) Somewhat disagree (5) Disagree (6) Strongly disagree (7) Validity test (1)o
o
o
o
o
o
o
The following items were rated on a 7points Likert scale, (1) Strongly disagree to (7) Strongly agree. Cross national CBBE scale (Zarantonello, & Pauwels-Delassus, 2015).
1. I aware this particular brand
2. Some characteristics of the particular product/brand come to my mind quickly. 3. I know how this particular brand looks.
4. I consider myself to be loyal to this brand 5. I will not switch to another brand next time
6. I usually use this brand as my first choice in comparison with the other brands 7. The brand is a good value for money
8. Within the product category, I consider the brand a good buy
9. Considering what I would pay for the brand, I would get much more than my money’s
worth
10. The brand has a personality
11. The brand is interesting
12. I have a clear image of the type of person that would use the brand
13. I trust the company the makes the brand
14. I like the company that makes the brand
15. The company that makes the brand has credibility 16. This brand uses very good quality products.
17. This brand offers consistent quality
18. This brand offers very reliable products 19. This particular brand has a differentiated image in comparison with the other brands. 20. This particular brand has a clean image.
The same items were used to measure for Skechers showing the following images:
What is your gender?
Male (1)
Female (2)
Prefer not to say (3)
10.4 Reliability Analysis
10.4.1 Openness to Experience reliability analysis
10.4.3 Gucci perceived brand personality reliability analysis
10.4.5 Nike brand trust reliability analysis
10.4.7 Skechers brand trust reliability analysis
10.6 Regression analysis between openness to experience and brand trust (H1)
10.7 Regression analysis between perceived brand personality and brand trust (H2)
10.7.1 Regression analysis between Nike brand personality and Nike brand trust
10.7.2 Regression analysis between Gucci brand personality and Gucci brand trust
10.7.3 Regression analysis between Skechers brand personality and Skechers brand trust
10.8 Moderation Effects Regression Analysis
10.8.1 Analysis of the moderation effects of openness to experience on the relationship between Nike perceived brand personality and Nike brand trust
10.8.2 Analysis of the moderation effects of openness to experience on the relationship between Gucci perceived brand personality and Gucci brand trust
10.8.3 Analysis of the moderation effects of openness to experience on the relationship between Gucci perceived brand personality and Gucci brand trust
