“Decomposing aesthetic experience:
What is the differential effect of aesthetic coherence on
perceived brand credibility among different sensory and
contextual characteristics?”
Name: Panagiotis Petras Student number: 11087811 Supervisor: Dr. Marco Mosinkoff Date: 18th of August 2016
Word count: 17.288
MSc Business Administration, Marketing Faculty of Economics and Business
Statement of Originality
This document is written by student Panagiotis Petras, 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 a world governed by oversupply and overconsumption consumers seek for signals in products and brands that are able to simplify their decision process by communicating a certain degree of credibility. Moreover, we live in an age where consumption mainly exceeds its primordial purpose and has transformed into an exercise of pleasure and self-identification. In this context, aesthetics and their application to design can communicate credibility and certain brand values as well as facilitate sensory satisfaction. Aesthetic coherence is a crucial factor in this process and describes the notion of congruence among tangible and intangible characteristics of an entity. This research is analyzing the differential effectiveness of the components that interact with consumers to provide an aesthetic experience. We conducted our research by conducting experiments on 2 levels, (1) focusing on the interaction between product characteristics and participant’s senses and (2) focusing on the interaction between contextual associations and respondents associative network. The results indicated a strong connection between aesthetic coherence and perceived brand credibility under any condition. More importantly, the results proved a significant difference in the strength of this connection between the two levels of analysis as well as between the factors under investigation. Finally, the outcomes proved a disproportionate affect of participants between the congruent and the incongruent condition. Implications of the findings are analyzed extensively.
Contents
1 Introduction……….……….……….7
1.1 Purpose……….….…...…9
1.2 Research Questions……….………....….……….…….10
1.3 Objectives………...……….……..10
1.4 Significance and Relevance……….………..11
1.5 Structure of the Thesis……….……..13
2 Literature review……….……....………14
2.1 Aesthetics and Marketing………..………...……….…….14
2.2 Aesthetic Coherence………..15 2.2.1 Visual Congruence………....…....16 2.2.2 Haptic Congruence………....16 2.2.3 Sensory Congruence……….17 2.2.4 Meaning Congruence………16 2.3 Brand Credibility………...19 2.4 Conclusion……….20 3 Research………..………21 3.1 Research Question……….21
3.2 Research Objectives and Hypotheses………21
3.3 Research Design and Analysis……….……...24
3.3.1 Method………....….25
3.3.3 Statistical procedure……….……….…...32
4 Results and Discussion………....………..40
4.1 Linear Regressions……….………..40
4.2 Mixed ANOVA (Visual vs. Haptic Treatments)……….……....48
4.3 ANOVA (Luxury vs. Rural Treatments)……….………49
5 Conclusions………...52
5.1 Contribution and Implications………...54
5.2 Limitations………...56 5.3 Future Research………...57 6 References……….58 Appendices……….62 Descriptive Statistics……….62 Questionnaires………..……….63
Questionnaire 1 (Visual – Congruent)……….64
Questionnaire 2 (Visual – Incongruent)………...66
Questionnaire 3 (Haptic – Congruent)……….68
Questionnaire 4 (Haptic – Incongruent)………...70
Questionnaire 5 (Luxury – Congruent)………...….72
Questionnaire 6 (Luxury – Incongruent)……….….74
Questionnaire 7 (Rural – Congruent)………..….76
Tables Page Table 1 Mean Scores of Perceived Congruence and Luxuriness 29
Table 2 Scale Reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha) 33
Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Visual – Congruent) 36 Table 4 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Visual – Incongruent) 36 Table 5 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Haptic – Congruent) 37 Table 6 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Haptic – Incongruent) 37 Table 7 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Meaning, Luxury – Congruent) 38 Table 8 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Meaning, Luxury – Incongruent) 38 Table 9 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Meaning, Rural – Congruent) 39 Table 10 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Meaning, Rural – Incongruent) 39
Table 11 Regression Analyses Effect Sizes 44
Table 12 Hierarchical Regression (Visual – Congruent) 46
Table 13 Hierarchical Regression (Visual – Incongruent) 46
Table 14 Hierarchical Regression (Haptic – Congruent) 46
Table 15 Hierarchical Regression (Haptic – Incongruent) 47
Table 16 Hierarchical Regression (Meaning, Luxury – Congruent) 47 Table 17 Hierarchical Regression (Meaning, Luxury – Incongruent) 47 Table 18 Hierarchical Regression (Meaning, Rural – Congruent) 48 Table 19 Hierarchical Regression (Meaning, Rural – Incongruent) 48 Figures
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework 22
Figure 2 Research design Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 25
Figure 3 ANOVA Graph, Visual/Haptic x Congruent/Incongruent 51 Figure 4 ANOVA Graph, Luxury/Rural x Congruent/Incongruent 51
1 Introduction
Throughout history and in every known culture people have found pleasure and meaning in the use of their eyes. They have consciously attempted to produce objects of beauty and have delighted in them (Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson 1990, p. 2).
Design is incorporated in a plethora of objects and figures. Industrial design, architecture, fashion, art or a simple packaging are all forms of design that affect our perception and consequently our sensory satisfaction. The aesthetic properties of consumption are present in every single aspect of our lives. Product design, product packaging, store environments, not to mention advertising, they all transmit stimuli willing to communicate certain values, identities, perceptions and moods. In our daily way from the bed to the bathroom we are probably being exposed to a significant amount of design elements, which consciously or not are affecting our perception and state of mood. More than ever, people want to simplify their lives relying more on heuristic purchase decisions, but at the same time seek to enrich their life quality by enhancing their satisfaction gained through their purchases.
In a world governed by oversupply, overexposure and overconsumption, design and aesthetics serve as a determinant factor for product evaluation, brand evaluation and final purchase intention. Aesthetics are able to simplify the selection and decision process for the consumers by providing significant cues about the manufacturer of the product, the credibility and the value of the brand. In addition, aesthetics allow the consumers to experience sensory satisfaction through the engagement with appealing and sophisticated design elements. Empirical evidence illustrates that visual aesthetics play indeed a significant role in consumer preference. When given the choice between two products, equal in price and function, target consumers buy the one they consider to be more attractive (Kotler and Rath 1984). Even
unknown brands, with well-crafted packaging, are chosen over well-known brands with standardized packaging, despite higher prices (Reimann et al., 2010).
Nevertheless, offering an aesthetically designed and packaged product may not be enough to convince consumers of its’ superiority. There are multiple examples of companies that have vainly tried to enter upscale segments by offering highly aesthetic products. Maybe the most illustrative example is Wal-Mart and its failed attempt to market higher-end fashion lines to upscale customers. Of course this reaction seems quite logical considering the image of the company and the context in which Wal-Mart is operating, promoting itself mainly as a cheap megastore, but is this truly the only reason for the unsuccessful implementation of this project?
In contrast to Wal-Mart, a lot of “cheap” companies are operating very successfully in low-price segments offering products that are not only considered aesthetically appealing and sophisticated, but also very popular. A typical example of such a company would be IKEA or, to some extent, HEMA in the Netherlands. Although these two companies represent examples of low-price suppliers, there are examples of companies like the danish household manufacturer Vipp that are able to achieve premium pricing by offering “ordinary” products.
Although aesthetics and good design can facilitate customer preference by constituting products more attractive and differentiated from the competitors’, this is often not enough to arouse the necessary credibility needed to convince customers. Nowadays, consumption is in many aspects considered a pleasure not an exercise in rational discernment (Hewitt, 1987). People seek for stimulation, experience and identification with the products they buy and to further extent with the brands they buy. In this sense, consumers need to recognize and experience a certain degree of aesthetic coherence in their overall perception of a company in order to acknowledge a sophisticated offer (Austin, 2008). For this reason, companies that
integrate aesthetics and design in their activities need to understand and excel at delivering coherence between the elements that constitute aesthetic perception. Aesthetic coherence is considered to be an important factor for the success of the scandinavian business model (i.e. Bang and Olufsen, IKEA, Bolia, Vipp, etc.) but also a crucial component of the strategic approach of companies like Apple and BMW (Austin, 2008).
1.1 Purpose
Prior research has successfully analyzed the effect of aesthetic coherence on the consumer evaluation process by focusing on different outcomes like, credibility, sophistication, likeability, perceived quality, etc. (Van Rompay et al.; 2009, Krishna et al., 2010). These analyses identified a series of factors that facilitate or inhibit an aesthetic response as well as presented interactional effects in this process. Major research has been conducted on the sensory dimension of the interaction between the consumer and the product/brand as well as on the contextual dimension of this relationship. In both cases congruence among the tangible and intangible characteristics of a brand have been identified to be the most important
determinant of a positive aesthetic response and further brand evaluation (Reber et al., 2004; Labroo, 2004; Van Rompay et al., 2011). Although these analyses provide a good
understanding of the way that aesthetic coherence is influencing consumer response, we still lack on knowledge in regards to the role of each component in this interaction processes.
This research aims to fill this gap and provide a better understanding of the role that aesthetic coherence plays in the consumer evaluation process by trying to decompose the elements that constitute an aesthetic experience. We will examine the role of human senses in this process by contrasting the effectiveness of visual and haptic responses to certain stimuli as well as examine the role of human perception in regards to more contextual associations by analyzing
Throughout this analysis will try to offer an answer to question: What is the role of aesthetic coherence among the components that constitute an aesthetic experience and what is their differential effect on the perceived level of brand credibility?
1.2 Research Questions
Throughout this research you will be guided through the following topics, represented by the following questions:
1. What is aesthetic coherence?
2. What are the components of aesthetic coherence?
3. What is brand credibility?
4. What is the connection between aesthetic coherence and brand credibility?
5. What is the individual weight of the components that constitute an aesthetic experience?
1.3 Objectives
This research will be analyzed and structured according to the following objectives that are key to examine the differential effect of the components that constitute an aesthetic
experience and further interaction with the brand:
1) Identify a connection between aesthetic coherence and perceived brand credibility across sensory and contextual conditions.
2) Identify differences between sensory responses in regards to the effectiveness of the connection between aesthetic coherence and perceived brand credibility.
3) Identify differences between contextual associations in regards to the effectiveness of the connection between aesthetic coherence and perceived brand credibility.
4) Identify differences between senses and contextual associations in regards to the effectiveness of the connection between aesthetic coherence and perceived brand credibility.
1.4 Significance and Relevance
In Aristotle’s theory of “aesthesis”, which is the equivalent Greek word for sensation, he introduces his theory of a hierarchical order among our five senses with “touch” being the most important and the other senses increasing the acuity of the touch sensation. Aristotle attached a special role to touch because he believed that the only way to discover the intrinsic nature of an object is through touch. Aristotle proposed the notion, that touch and the cosmos were connected since touch is able to generate sexual stimulation, a crucial factor for the reproduction and
survival of the human species. Coming back to 21st century, the daily life of people has become
fast and shallow. Buying decisions have to be taken fast and among an overwhelming amount of options. In this context, touch has one major disadvantage since consumers have to get in actual contact with the product. This disadvantage has made touch of little use in advertising.
Companies make use of mediums to carry their messages and thus invest mainly in visual, audio or interactive mediums to promote their products. On billboards, bus stations or even on our personal computer, visual advertising and product placement is conquering our attention. Relevant research has proven that the latest technologic evolvements and the omnipresence of smartphone penetration in modern societies have gradually trained consumers to rely more on their sense of vision (Stuth & Mancuso, 2015). In other words, the acuity of our visual perception has been enhanced due to visual exposure.
Acknowledging the complexity of human sensory perception as well as the latest critical developments, it would be of major interest to analyse the implications of a hierarchical order
goods. Purchase decisions for low involvement categories are usually made fast and based on simple heuristic cues since consumers are confronted with a vast amount of different options. The outcomes of this analysis bear significant managerial as well as theoretical implications that are able to provide information and guidance on the sensory interaction between the consumer
and the product. On a theoretical level, it will close the gaps in the literature as defined by Van
Krishna et al. (2010) and Little and Orth (2013) on the interactional level of sensory
experiences. More importantly, the outcomes will extent prior research by adding knowledge on the individual weight of these interactions. On a managerial level, the implications could be considered even more valuable since the applicability of the outcomes can be very extensive. Particularly, it can provide guidance for managers to make right decisions in the design process of their products, but more importantly it can provide information to improve or adapt sensory characteristics to their sales channels. Moreover, it can function as a
framework to evaluate brand credibility as perceived from a consumers’ perspective and identify gaps in the consumer evaluation process.
Furthermore, as prior stated, companies often fail to persuade consumers and earn the required credibility to stimulate demand for their products despite the adoption of sophisticated and aesthetically appealing product design. When looking beyond the initial level of engagement between the consumer and the brand, which is reflected in the contact with the product itself, it is still unclear whether consumers interact more with the product or the context in which it is
presented. By analysing the interactional effects between two contradictory designed products and two contradictory presentation contexts we are am aiming to examine the importance of each of these levels, specifically the congruent product itself and the congruent meanings associated with it. These outcomes will provide useful information to evaluate the importance of secondary brand associations in the context of communication design and use of sales channels. The theoretical
and will add significant information on the interactional level of contextual associations in the realm of brand credibility. Moreover, this research will add to the research by Jin, Lee, and Jun (2015) in regards to the connection between luxuriness and brand credibility by
contrasting the effectiveness of this conceptualization, isolating the added value of luxury associations and applying it onto another product category described by low consumer involvement. More importantly, our findings bear important managerial implication that can provide guidance for proper product positioning by indicating the effectiveness among
contextual associations in a given product category. Further, managers might decide to add or remove associations from their associative network or test applicability of secondary
associations among different sales channels. 1.5 Structure of the Thesis
After a short introduction of the realm of aesthetics in Marketing, the purpose of this research results in specific research questions and objectives that are going to be analysed throughout this research. The second chapter focuses on the elements and concepts that are used in this
investigation. Visual congruence, haptic congruence, meaning congruence and brand credibility are explained and the relationships between these concepts are mentioned. In the third chapter, we present our conceptual framework, state our hypotheses and present our research design. The fourth chapter focuses on the analyses of the hypotheses by stressing the connection between sensory congruence and brand credibility, contextual associations and brand credibility and more importantly focusing on the interactions as well as differences among the factors that constitute an aesthetic experience. Lastly, the fifth chapter presents the outcomes of the analysis and presents the managerial and theoretical implications of our research. Limitations and recommendations for further research are provided in this chapter as well.
2 Literature Review
This part aims to provide an insight into the relevant literature and the topics that are going to be elaborated on.
2.1 Aesthetics and Marketing
A lot of research has been conducted on aesthetics in regards to different elements, particularly on product design (Homburg, Schwemmle and Kuehnl, 2015), packaging (Reimann et al., 2010; Underwood, 2003; etc.), visual advertising (Phillips, McQuarrie and Griffin, 2014) and store aesthetics (Vieira, 2010). Results indicate that the effects of
aesthetics are mainly mediated through aesthetic impressions, semantic interpretations and symbolic associations (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004), which lead to experiential, functional and symbolic benefits for the consumers (Underwood, 2003). In a general sense, an aesthetic response refers to the reaction a person has to an object (e. g., product) based on his or her perception of the object (Berlyne 1974). The reaction is based on the qualities and configurality of the physical features of an object (Veryzer, 1993). An important aspect of aesthetic response to a product or brand is the fact that it is closely related to the consumer’s self-identity since individuals tend to choose products that fit into their self-perception and facilitate self-affirmation (Townsend and Sood, 2012; Berger and Heath, 2007). Another important factor is that a visual identity is able to influence the relationship between the consumer and the brand implying that aesthetics can be a driving force for brand
identification and brand loyalty (Underwood, 2003; Fournier, 1998).
When integrating all these information into a conceptual framework it is clear that aesthetics clearly influence the customer decision process and are able to shape long-term relationships with consumers due to the self-defining aspect of aesthetic preference. In order to understand the mechanism that triggers aesthetic perception and evaluation, a variety of components like
colour, shape, symmetry and congruence have to be taken into account (Crilly, Moultrie and Clarkson, 2004).
2.2 Aesthetic Coherence
In the realm of aesthetic responses, aesthetic coherence among the tangible and intangible characteristics of a product or brand has been identified to be a crucial factor. Specifically coherence or congruence among stimuli has been proven to result in faster reaction times of recognition (Laurienti et al., 2002). The research by Mandler (1982) even indicates that congruence among stimuli result in better information processing. The connection between coherence and aesthetic response is supported on different levels of consumer engagement. This consistency pattern can be applied on almost all aspects of a firm’s actions, including the product itself, the packaging of the product, the communication materials, as well as the characteristics of the store environment, including the personnel. Coherence can result from the combination of several elements (e.g., shape, typeface, color, material, etc.), whilst symbolic meanings are transmitted through the same elements as well. On a sensory level, neurophysiological research has proven that congruent inputs result in faster integration of the inputs and produces more accurate behavioral measures (Gottfried & Dolan, 2003). In line with the above findings, research on contextual associations between the product and the brand has shown that a congruent connection between the cue and the expectations is
facilitating the transfer of positive affect to the overall evaluation (Fiske, 1982). In this sense, this research does not only deal with the effect of the correlation between visual stimuli, different sensory stimuli or the symbolic meaning of those connections, but aims to highlight the interactional effects of these relationships in the realm of aesthetic coherence. Although there are a plethora of elements that can facilitate an aesthetic coherence, we are going to focus on three main elements.
2.2.1 Visual Congruence
In regards to visuals, aesthetic coherence refers to the consistency among visual aspects, implying that ‘‘gestalt’’ patterns such as figure-ground contrast, symmetry and goodness of form lead to more fluent processing (Reber et al., 2004) which subsequently inspires favorable product evaluations (Lee and Labroo, 2004). Psychologists, designers and
sociologists provide a broad framework of analyses on the effect of visual stimuli on human behavior and to further extent on consumer behavior. Recent research even attempts to explain aesthetic perception by exploring the brain activity relating to consumers’ aesthetic experience (Cheung, Law and Yip, 2014). In the majority of these analyses, visual
congruence or “unity” has been identified as a major driver for aesthetic response (Veryzer and Hutchinson, 1998; van Rompay and Pryun, 2011; Creusen, Veryzer and Schoormans, 2010).
2.2.2 Haptic Congruence
For some product categories haptics are an especially important factor for product evaluation. Haptics can have a determining role in the consumer evaluation process, especially when haptic properties are semantically congruent (Krishna et al., 2010). The most extreme example of such an industry is probably the fur industry where purchase decision is mainly based on the touch or “feeling” of the product. Consequently, touch also determines the value of a fur coat. Although in the realm of fashion, the value of a fur coat is usually not
determined by the “style” or design of a coat, not even by the luxury brand that produces it, but is mainly based on a hierarchical framework of sort, species and gender of the fur pelts. The most important factor in this categorization system is touch, specifically the softness, thickness and glance of the fur determines its’ retail price (Copenhagen Fur Auction1, 2016). Relevant research has shown that interaction effects between softness and texture are able to
enhance product evaluation, especially for high quality products (Grohmann, Spangenberg & Sprott, 2007). Other research has proven that touching a product is generating more
confidence in purchasing behavior and improving the perceived level of product quality (Peck & Childers, 2003). In this sense, touch can facilitate favorable product and brand evaluations and even determine the value of a product.
2.2.3 Sensory Congruence
Another component of aesthetic coherence lays in the interaction between our senses.
Congruence between vision, touch, smell or sound is able to enhance aesthetic perception of a specific object under certain circumstances. Specifically, the research by Little and Orth (2013) highlights the interplay between vision and touch through the finding that consumers’ bimodal brand evaluations are impacted by the presence of package-infused haptics,
particularly when these are semantically congruent with visuals. The findings further support a positive relationship between the presence of visual coherence and more positive brand evaluations in terms of competence and sophistication. The importance of sensory interplay and specifically the crucial role of haptics was further supported by the work of Krishna and Morrin (2008) who found that haptic quality of a cup of water could alter perception in regards to the the taste of the water itself. This example highlights the crucial role of sensory perception and proves that congruence patterns among the sensory characteristics of a product can be key to consumer evaluation. Other researches revealed similar findings by indicating that multisensory congruence facilitates the evaluation of brands as more sophisticated (Van Rompay et al., 2009), or higher in quality (Krishna et al., 2010).
2.2.4 Meaning Congruence
than they are for products that do not exhibit such proportionate relationships and where aesthetic responses are more favorable for products that exhibit unity than they are for products that do not exhibit unity (i. e., disunity, lack of coherence). Second, on the
contextual level where associative connections between the different attributes of the brand (design, packaging, promotion, context, etc.) produce more favorable responses that result in a higher perceived level of credibility.
Meaning congruence refers to the more symbolic associations of aesthetics in consumer minds as an outcome of interactional effects between different marketing mix elements. Meaning congruence is mediated through stimuli (visuals, haptics, etc.) that qualify the interaction between the consumer and the company. It is based on the fact that people use a consistency principle to assess perceived truthfulness of communication partners (Friedman, 1979; Lightfoot and Bullock, 1990; Rotenberg, Simourd and Moore, 1989), which supports the findings that meaning congruence has a positive effect on perceptions of brand credibility, brand aesthetics and brand value (Van Rompay et al., 2011). Spangenberg, Sprott, Grohmann & Tracey (2006) proved that congruence between smell and the product being sold produces more favorable perceptions of the product being sold. This outcome was based on an
experiment where the gender of the retailer’s ambient smell was matched to the product being sold. Other analyses showed that perceived brand aesthetics partially mediate congruence effects on price expectations indicating that consumers expect to pay more for coherent variants because they are considered more attractive (Van Rompay et al., 2011). In the realm of symbolic associations additional factors have to be taken into account. Positive or negative perceptions associated with the manufacturing process of a product, the country of origin, etc. can have a significant influence on consumer evaluation. These factors have a great impact on the perceived symbolic value of a brand and thus need to be “in line” with the overall
identified a positive relationship between country images and brand awareness, perceived quality and brand loyalty (Jung, Lee, Kim and Yang, 2013). Moreover Jin, Lee, and Jun (2015) indicate that brand credibility can be facilitated through a congruent luxury image and secondary “luxury” associations. Specifically, they support the notion that coherence is a component of luxuriness, which further can facilitate brand credibility as function of coherent characteristics that are associated with a luxury image.
2.3 Brand Credibility
According to Erdem and Swait (2004), source credibility has two components, namely expertise and trustworthiness and is associated with the believability of an entity’s intentions at a particular time. Brand credibility is closely connected with the outcomes of a company and is defined as: “The believability of the product information contained in a brand, which requires that consumers perceive that the brand have the ability (i.e., expertise) and
willingness (i.e., trustworthiness) to continuously deliver what has been promised” (Erdem and Swait, 2004). In this sense, the brand takes the role of the guarantor to diminish the asymmetric information between the two transacting parties. Since the consumer has no prior information about the product of interest, the brand is functioning as a good or bad signal, depending on whether the brand delivered what it promised or not. A determining factor for credibility is consistency among the marketing mix elements of a company (Erdem and Swait 1998). The concept of consistency implies that impressions of trustworthiness and expertise are mediated through harmony and convergence among the activities of a company. This explanation draws a clear line between consistency and congruence as defined by Van
Rompay et al. (2011), implying that an overall consistent or coherent pattern among activities is closely related to credibility.
2.4 Conclusion
The above review highlights the importance of our senses as well as of our associative network in the process of aesthetic response. Prior research has shown that congruence has a positive effect on consumer evaluations and is closely related to credibility and quality expectations (Veryzer and Hutchinson, 1998). Except of the unilateral effect of aesthetic coherence across our senses, research has indicated that congruence on an interactional level can enhance positive brand evaluations (Krishna et al., 2010). Visual congruence is mainly facilitated through specific gestalt patterns whereas haptic congruence through semantic connections. Similarly, meaning congruence can take the form of different associative contexts, but is also proven to facilitate positive brand evaluations due to the application of a consistency pattern (Van Rompay et al., 2011). Finally, credibility was defined as the ability of a company to convince consumers of its reliability by signaling consistency across its activities.
Although prior research provides a good understanding of these relationships, there is still a gap concerning a more integrated approach on the differential effect of each of these
elements. Specifically, we don not have any information about the intensity of our sensory interactions or about the existence of a hierarchical order among our senses in the process of brand evaluation. In the same line of reasoning, although we know about the effect of meaning congruence on the perceived level of credibility, we are unable to compare the impact of meaning congruence to the impact of clearly sensory evaluations. Finally, prior research has focused on the advantages of luxury associations in regards to brand credibility, but we are still unable to explain if luxuriness indeed attaches added value to the brand if the product is already aesthetically coherent and thus scoring high in credibility (Jin, Lee, and Jun, 2015).
The present study aims to fill these gaps by analyzing the differential effects of our senses and associations on the perceived level of credibility according to the objectives that have been set initially. We believe that our outcomes can have significant implications for scholars by extending our knowledge on the field of aesthetic coherence as well as important practical implications by providing a better understanding of consumer response to certain stimuli.
3 Research
3.1 Research Question
What is the differential effect of aesthetic coherence on perceived brand credibility among different sensory and contextual characteristics? And what are the interaction effects between these connections?
3.2 Research Objectives and Hypotheses
In order to answer the research question this analysis incorporates two main objectives. The first objective focuses on the interaction of the consumer with the product itself and aims to highlight differences in consumer perception between our visual and haptic senses.
Specifically, we test whether initial visual or haptic contact can have a differential effect on perceived brand credibility. By using two contrary products, one aesthetically coherent and one aesthetically incoherent, we cover the whole spectrum of aesthetic preference and evaluate consumer perception for both conditions.
The second objective of this research aims to identify a pattern in consumer preference in regards to different contextual associations. Specifically, we test consumer evaluations of brand credibility by controlling for congruence and context (luxury/rural) and try to identify a preference scheme. Since 2 products and 2 contexts are used, participants were presented with
a matrix of 4 different combinations featuring 2 rural and 2 luxury options in the vertical axis, but at the same time 2 aesthetically coherent and 2 aesthetically incoherent options in the horizontal axis. The purpose is to identify differences in aroused credibility among these 4 options and to identify further interactions between factors. In this sense, this research analyzes consumer perception of brand credibility by examining respondents’ change of evaluation among congruent and incongruent options, examining the effectiveness of each level of initial interaction between the consumer and the product/brand as well as test for the existence of a contextual and associative preference scheme in regards to natural soap bars. Consequently the hypotheses of this research are formulated as follows:
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
H1a. Visual congruence will positively influence perceived brand credibility.
We expect that congruence between the visual characteristics of the products will affect participants in their evaluation on the perceived degree of brand credibility. In line with the outcomes of Reber et al. (2004) and Lee & Labroo (2004) we assume a positive connection between congruence and perceived brand credibility since visual congruence allows fluent processing and triggers positive product evaluations.
H1b. Haptic congruence will positively influence perceived brand credibility.
In line with the research of Little and Orth (2013), since the haptic properties of the products are in line with their visual characteristics, we expect that participants will be affected in their evaluation of perceived credibility by the physical features of the product under examination.
H1c. Meaning congruence in the luxury context will positively influence perceived brand credibility.
H1d. Meaning congruence in the rural context will positively influence perceived brand credibility.
In line with the findings of Friedman (1979) we expect that participants will assess the truthfulness of the communication and consequently their evaluation on brand credibility according to the perceived level of meaning congruence. In this sense, participants will reveal better evaluations of perceived brand credibility for the contextually congruent advertisement and worst evaluations for the incongruent advertisement. This relationship applies to both, the luxury and the rural condition.
H2. The strength of the relationship between congruence and perceived brand credibility is different amongst factors.
Acknowledging the research of Stuth & Mancuso (2015) on the enhanced effectiveness of visual
perception as well as the research by Jin, Lee, and Jun (2015) on the connection between brand
credibility and luxuriness, we expect to identify different levels of strength that describe the
connection between congruence and perceived credibility. In this sense, we assume that the relationship between aesthetic coherence and brand credibility is perceived as more or less important between the two levels of analysis.
H3. Perceived brand credibility will be higher in the visual condition in comparison to the haptic condition.
In line with the outcomes of Stuth & Mancuso (2015), we expect that participants will rate brand credibility higher when they initially engage with the visual properties of the product rather than with its’ haptic properties. In addition, we expect this phenomenon to dominate in both, the congruent and the incongruent condition.
H4. Perceived brand credibility will be higher in the luxury condition in comparison to the rural condition.
We expect that participants will evaluate the degree of perceived credibility higher in the luxury context, for both the congruent and the incongruent condition when given the option between a rural and a luxury promotional context. We base our assumption on the research of Jin, Lee, and Jun (2015) who identified a strong connection between luxuriness and perceived brand credibility.
H5. There is an interaction between the levels of the factors “congruence” and “context”. In line with the above hypotheses about the differential effectiveness of the conditions under examination, we expect to identify specific interaction effects between the different levels of the factors. In this way we expect to explain divergence of usual response patterns based on the interaction effects between the levels, namely luxury – rural and congruent – incongruent.
3.3 Research Design and Analysis
In this section a detailed analysis of the research and analysis methods is provided that was used to conduct this research and interpret the data.
3.3.1 Method
In order to conduct this study, a quantitative research was performed using cross-sectional data gathered through an experimental survey consisting of 8 different versions of a
questionnaire. Each questionnaire included the same questions regarding the perceived level of credibility and perceived level of congruence. The research is divided into two levels of analysis. The first level focuses on the characteristics of the product itself (primary brand elements) and specifically on the human senses that interact with the product. The second level focuses on contextual characteristics of the brand (secondary brand associations) and specifically on the promotional context in which a product is presented. Each of these analyses is further divided into a 2x2 factor analysis. The “sense” group exhibits a between subject design with repeated measures and the “context” group exhibits a within-within subject design with repeated measures. In order to highlight differences among settings, the research includes two contradictory products, one with congruent design properties and one with incongruent properties, as well as two contradictory contexts, a luxury and a rural.
Figure 2. Research design
Experiment 1. “sense”-group and experiment 2. “context”-group.
levels and the within subjects factor is divided into the congruent/incongruent levels. In order to prevent bias, the visual/haptic settings have been conducted with different respondent and under different conditions, excluding any possibility of prior exposure to visual or haptic properties of the products to each group of participants respectively. In the visual part, respondents were presented two different questionnaires, each questionnaire featuring a picture of a product, one congruent and one incongruent. The questionnaires were distributed online, mainly through convenience sampling using social media. In the haptic part, the products were not visible to the participants and respondents’ evaluations were based exclusively on their sense of touch. Participants were given two questionnaires, each
concerning one of the two products (congruent/incongruent). Data were collected offline by randomly distributing questionnaires, mainly at the Amsterdam Fashion Institute and the Science Park Campus of the University of Amsterdam.
In the “context” group, the within subjects factor congruence (congruent/incongruent) remains the same and the other within factor is divided into the luxury and the rural level. In order to track change in the evaluation process among respondents, both parts have been conducted with the same participants. In the luxury part, respondents were presented an advertisement as it would be featured in a magazine presenting each of the products in a clearly luxury context (advertisements were fictionally created for the purpose of this research). In the rural part, respondents were presented an advertisement featuring each of the products in a rural context. The questionnaires were distributed online through
convenience sampling, mainly through social media.
Experimental Reasoning
The experiments were designed to highlight specific phenomena of the consumer evaluation process. For this reason the products as well as the brands have been chosen to highlight
differences in consumer mindsets. For our experiments we decided to use natural soap bars and specifically soap bars that included donkey milk to highlight differences in perceptions about the specific ingredient. Donkey milk was used to identify division among participants since donkey milk is an ingredient that arouses different sets of associations to consumers depending on their prior associations. In line with this reasoning, the brands of the soap bars were also chosen to accurately represent two very distinct associative networks, a luxury brand connecting donkey milk to exclusivity and prestige and a casual brand connecting donkey milk to ruralness and simplicity.
Validity of Treatments
In order to qualify appropriateness of the products that were used for this research, products were selected according to specific visual and haptic properties that were crucial for the development of this study. Each product was chosen in accordance to relevant literature and prior experiments in the field. The principles of unity, geometrizing, symmetry, proportion, balance, homogeneity, harmony and straight-line design (directive) have been taken into account during the evaluation process (Page, 2002, Veryzer, 1993; Veryzer & Hutchinson, 1998; Duke, 1992). In addition, based on the research of Krishna (2010), 5 basic dimensions of haptic characteristics were identified as important, namely shape, texture, hardness, temperature and weight. It has been decided to keep temperature constant for both samples since temperature was irrelevant in the chosen product category (natural soap bar) as well as disregard the factor weight since both products would be of equal weight and quantity. Finally, shape, hardness and texture of the products were taken into account. Moreover, in accordance with the research of Little & Orth (2013) on the interplay between visual and haptic elements, the chosen products are semantically congruent among their haptic and visual characteristics by providing subconscious semantic connections (e.g. straight
lines/edges and hard/sleek material). In this sense, the congruent product was selected in accordance to the above concepts, incorporating relevant typeface, shape, colors, material, etc. whereas the incongruent product was selected in opposition to the reported concepts. Moreover sematic-associative connections between the product category (natural soap bars) and the packaging were taken into account. Thus, the congruent product was packaged in a case made of natural cardboard (natural material) whereas the incongruent product was packaged in plastic foil (superficial material).
Following this way of reasoning, the same concepts have been applied for the creation of the advertisements. Typeface, layout, images and texts have been generated in line with the concepts of elaborateness, proportion, color scheme harmony and uniformity (Little & Orth, 2013).
Finally, since the two advertisements were featuring a luxury and a rural context and each of the products was chosen to be in favor of one of the 2 contexts (luxury packaging – rural packaging), additional secondary association were created in order to support fit or misfit between the products and the advertising context. Specifically, the luxury advertisement aroused luxury associations of exclusivity, uniqueness, beauty and attractiveness whereas the rural advertisement featured rural images, casual typeface and simple communication tone. For each kind of questionnaire, a pretest was performed to validate the appropriateness of the product/picture/advertisement used. Consequently, in the beginning of each questionnaire respondents were asked to evaluate in a 7-point Likert scale the level of congruence of the product or the fit between the product and the advertisement. In addition, appropriateness of the generated luxury/rural advertisements were validated by asking respondents to evaluate a set of characteristics associated with luxuriness. The mean scores of perceived congruence for each treatment supported the appropriateness of the selected items and thus validated the treatments.
Table 1: Mean scores for treatment validation
Treatment Perceived congruence Perceived luxuriness
1. Visual (congruent product) 2,23 - 2. Visual (incongruent product) 4,14 - 3. Haptic (congruent product) 2,29 - 4. Haptic (incongruent product) 4,29 - 5. Meaning (congruent luxury) 2,68 2,58 6. Meaning (incongruent luxury) 5,07 4,21 7. Meaning (congruent rural) 1,87 3,08 8. Meaning (incongruent rural) 4,06 3,51 Scale measure levels: 1=highest congruence, 7=lowest congruent. See appendices for Std. deviations.
Furthermore, to prevent potential bias in regards to the country of origin of the products respondents were informed in the introduction part of the questionnaire that both products originated from the same country.
Sample
The sample consisted in total of 213 international participants of which 90 (42,3%) were men, 122 (57,3%) women and 1 (0,5%) unknown. 131 (61,5%) participants were aged 18–24, 75 (35,2%) were aged 25–34, 2 were aged 35–44 (0,9%) and 5 (2,3%) unknown. The major nationalities represented were 84 Dutch, 45 Greek, 18 German, 9 Norwegian, 6 Italian, 5 British and 46 others.
3.3.3 Measurement of Variables
Credibility
Credibility has been measured using the fifteen-item portion of Ohanian (1990) who divided credibility into three sections. Since this scale was initially designed to evaluate celebrity
taken into account. Finally, the questionnaire included 2 sections and ten items with 5 items describing trustworthiness and 5 items describing expertise. Respondents were asked to rate their perceived degree of credibility for each brand on a 7-point Likert scale (Strongly agree – Strongly disagree).
Luxuriness
In order to evaluate the appropriateness of the products and advertisements featured in the experiment as well as identify possible interactions between luxuriness, congruence and credibility, a validated scale measuring luxuriness has been adopted. The validated scale of Yongjun, Sejung, Hongmin and Young‐A (2015) was used which includes 6 items, namely sincerity, excitement, sophistication, professionalism, attractiveness and materialism. This model is built on the Brand Personality model of Aaker (1997) by isolating 3 out of 5 traits and combining them with 3 additional traits (professionalism, attractiveness and materialism) exclusively relevant for luxury brands. Respondents were asked to rate these 6 items on a 7-point Likert scale (Strongly agree – Strongly disagree).
Congruence
Congruence has been measured by asking respondents directly to rate their perceived level of visual, haptic or meaning congruence without the use of a multiple item scale. The reason for this approach resides in the fact, that a more detailed rating of visual or haptic properties would require specified knowledge on behalf of the respondents or a certain degree of
familiarity with gestalt and design concepts. In this sense, the internal validity of the research would be threatened since regular participants would most likely skip items or provide inaccurate ratings. In addition, this research aims to understand the effect of aesthetic coherence on a generalizable level and not only among a design-affine population, thus an
overall and simplified rating of congruence seemed more appropriate. Specifically, visual congruence was rated on a 7-point Likert scale by asking: “Taking into account the visual properties of the product packaging, please indicate: The product looks aesthetically
congruent” (Strongly agree – Strongly disagree). In addition haptic congruence was rated on a 7-point Likert scale similarly: “Taking into account shape, hardness and material of the product packaging, please indicate: The product feels aesthetically congruent” (Strongly agree – Strongly disagree). Finally, in order to measure meaning congruence, respondents were asked to rate, on a 7-point likert scale, the fit between the product/brand and the Gestalt of the advertisement by responding to the question: “How would you evaluate the fit between the product/brand and the Gestalt (layout) of the advertisement?” (Extremely good –
Extremely bad).
Control variables
The statistical analyses have been conducted while controlling for gender and age. These information were collected in the first section of the questionnaires alongside with the nationality of the respondents.
Scales
The variables credibility and luxuriness have been measured using scales proposed in the literature. For every single of the 8 settings (different versions of the questionnaires) the Cronbach’s Alpha has been tested. For credibility, a reduced version of Ohanian’s (1990) 7-point Likert scale was used resulting in a 10 item scale (1=”strongly agree”, 7=”strongly disagree”) all with 0.85 ≤ a ≤ 0.98. For luxuriness, the model developed by Yongjun, Sejung, Hongmin and Young‐A (2015) was used which incorporates 6 characteristics. A 6-item,
7-point Likert scale was developed based on this model (1=”strongly agree”, 7=”strongly disagree”) all with a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.89 ≤ a ≤ 0.96.
3.3.3 Statistical procedure
Data were collected by means of one online and one offline survey. The online survey
administration started on May 20th and the offline survey on June 3rd 2016. The online survey was closed almost 3 weeks later and the offline survey was completed almost 2 weeks later. Data analyses were performed using the IBM’s Statistical software Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS). A reliability analysis was performed in order to test the internal consistency of all scales in all questionnaires (see Table 1). All variables revealed a Cronbach’s alpha > .7 which indicates a high level of internal consistency of the items that were used in the
questionnaires. Subsequently, new variables were computed from the existing ones in order to proceed to hypotheses testing. These variables were created by computing the means of all composing items. This procedure was performed for every variable and for each setting separately. In addition, means, standard deviations and correlations were computed (see Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10). Most variables were normally distributed or close to normal distribution, although many scores were close to ±1 for skewness and kurtosis, which
indicates a moderate positive or negative level of skewness and kurtosis (relevant table in appendices). This is something that was expected though since respondents were presented with two contradictory products or advertisements generating responses that scored in general on the two extremes. Skewness was substantially positive for the perceived level of
congruence in the congruent rural setting (skewness = 1,188) and substantially negative for the perceived level of congruence in the congruent rural setting (skewness = -1,033). Again this is not surprising since respondents evaluated the same advertisement first with the
congruent product and after that with the incongruent product. In addition the level of
perceived credibility in the haptic setting was also substantially positively skewed (skewness =1,107). Finally, the perceived level of luxuriness in the congruent luxury setting is
substantially leptokurtic with a kurtosis value of 1,550.
Table 2: Reliabilities (Cronbachs’s alpha)
Hypotheses H1a-H1d and H2 were tested by means of hierarchical linear regressions in order to identify a direct relationship between the perceived level of congruence and the perceived level of credibility. For each treatment, regressions were conducted with (1) congruence as the independent variable and (2) credibility as the dependent variable while controlling for gender and age. In step one, the control variables gender and age were used. In step 2, the perceived level of congruence was integrated into the model
In order to prove interactions among factors and identify differences in evaluation scores, 2 different Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) have been performed, each applying to a different set of hypotheses and research objectives (see Figure 2). Appropriateness of matrices were validated by the mean scores of perceived congruence (see Table 1).
In order to test for hypothesis H3, a mixed (within x between subjects) 2-way factorial ANOVA (2 factors each with 2 levels) with repeated measures was performed. For the purposes of this analysis, the responses of both treatment groups were integrated by creating the variables TOT_cred_con and TOT_cred_incon. Additionally the dummy variable “sense”
Variables
Treatment Credibilty Luxuriness
1. Visual (congruent) .949 - 2. Visual (incongruent) .965 - 3. Haptic (congruent) .894 - 4. Haptic (incongruent) .924 - 5. Luxury (congruent) .968 .906 6. Luxury (incongruent) .975 .927 7. Rural (congruent) .954 .894 8. Rural (incongruent) .980 .957
was created (0=visual, 1=haptic) to control allocation between the values of the new variables. The between factor “sense” has to levels, namely “visual” and “haptic” and was tested with different subjects for the purposes of this hypothesis. The within factor
“congruence” has also two levels, namely “congruent” and “incongruent” and was used to identify change in respondent’s evaluation. To conduct the mixed factorial ANOVA various tests were performed to test for the assumptions of the model. Since normality of the
variables was already tested, tests for sphericity and homogeneity of variances were conducted. First, Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity was performed to test for sphericity among factor levels, but did not provide any values. This is normal and expected though since the analysis included only two levels of each factor and thus, did not apply to sphericity.
Sphericity is only relevant for analyses with ≥3 levels where sequent comparisons among the levels are necessary. Second, the Levene’s test was performed to test for homogeneity of variances. The test was non significant p =.350 > 0.001 for the values of the variable TOTcred_con indicating that the variances are not statistically significant from each other. For the variable TOTcred_incon p =.004 < .05 indicating that there is a tendency for heterogeneity of variances, although according to Tabachnick and Fidell (2014) this assumption should not be considered problematic nor should data be transformed or manipulated unless p < .001.
Hypotheses H4 and H5 were tested by means of a 2-way factorial ANOVA (2 factors with each 2 levels) with repeated measures. Since this analysis represents a within-within subjects design, variables were categorized and allocated accordingly in the system. The between factor “context” has to levels, namely “luxury” and “rural”. The other within factor “congruence” is identical to the precedent analysis and displays the same levels, namely “congruent” and “incongruent”. Again tests for normality and sphericity were needed.
Normality was already tested (see skewness/kurtosis in appendices) and sphericity was not applicable since the analysis contains only 2 factors with 2 underlying levels.
36 Tabl e 3 : Me an s, St an da rd D ev ia tio ns, C or re la tio ns Q ue st io nn air e 1 : V isu al-Co ngr ue nt (V isu al s etti ng - co ng ru en t p ro du ct) Var iab le s M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Gen der 1. 48 0. 50 - 2. Age 2. 60 0. 51 -.0 8 - 3. Percei ved Cohe re nce 2. 23 1. 12 -.1 8 .0 8 1 4. P erc eiv ed C re dib ility 2. 56 0. 96 -.0 4 .0 2 .4 3** (.95) 5. P erc eiv ed So ph isti cati on 2. 29 0. 96 -.0 7 .0 7 .5 5** .7 2** (.78) N= 10 8, R elia bilit ie s a re re po rte d a lo ng th e d ia go na l. **. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 01 level (2 -ta ile d). Tabl e 4 : Me an s, St an da rd D ev ia tio ns, C or re la tio ns Q ue st io nn air e 2 : V isu al-In co ngr ue nt (V isu al s etti ng - in co ng ru en t p ro du ct) Var iab le s M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Gen der 1. 48 0. 50 - 2. Age 2. 60 0. 51 -.0 8 - 3. Percei ved Cohe re nce 4. 14 1.6 7 -.0 3 -.0 8 1 4. P erc eiv ed C re dib ility 3. 36 1. 27 -.0 6 .0 1 .5 6** (.97) 5. P erc eiv ed So ph isti cati on 4. 71 1. 52 -.0 2 -.0 2 .8 1** .7 5** (.84) N= 10 8, Re lia bil itie s a re re po rte d a lo ng th e d ia go na l. **. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 01 level (2 -ta ile d). Ag e w as co de d a s f oll ow s: ( 1) un de r 1 8, (2 ) 1 8-24, (3) 25 -34, (4) 35 -44, (5) 45 -54, (6 ) 5 5-64, (7) 65 -74, (8) 75 -84, (9) 85 or ol de r. G en de r w as co de d a s f oll ow s: (1 ) M ale , (2 ) Fe m al e.
Tabl e 5 : Me an s, St an da rd D ev ia tio ns, C or re la tio ns Qu est io nn air e 3 : H ap tic -Co ngr ue nt (Ha pti c s etti ng - co ng ru en t p ro du ct) Var iab le s M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Gen der 1. 67 0. 47 2. Age 2. 14 0. 38 -.0 7 3. Percei ved Co heren ce 2. 29 1. 11 .0 6 -.1 1 - 4. P erc eiv ed C re dib ility 2,67 0,83 -0,08 -0,06 .5 3** (.8 9) 5. P erc eiv ed So ph isti cati on 4. 60 1. 37 -.0 2 .0 5 .7 4** .7 1** (.79) N= 10 5, R elia bilit ie s a re re po rte d a lo ng th e d ia go na l. **. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 01 level (2 -ta ile d). *. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 05 level (2 -tai le d). Tabl e 6 : Me an s, St an da rd D ev ia tio ns, C or re la tio ns Q ue st io nn air e 4 : H ap tic -In cong ruent (Ha pti c s etti ng - in co ng ru en t p ro du ct) Var iab le s M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Gen der 1. 67 0. 47 2. Age 2. 14 0. 38 -.0 7 3. Percei ved C oh eren ce 4. 29 1. 47 -.0 0 .2 4* - 4. P erc eiv ed C re dib ility 3. 80 0. 99 -.0 9 -.0 9 .6 4** (.92) 5. P erc eiv ed So ph isti cati on 4. 60 1. 37 -.0 2 .0 5 .7 4** .7 1** (.80) N= 10 5, R elia bilit ie s a re re po rte d a lo ng th e d ia go na l. **. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant at th e 0. 01 le ve l (2 -ta ile d). *. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 05 level (2 -ta ile d).
38 Tabl e 7 : Me an s, St an da rd D ev ia tio ns, C or re la tio ns Q ue st io nn air e 5 : Me an in g-Co ngr ue nt (lu xu ry ) (Luxury se tti ng - luxur y p ro du ct) Var iab le s M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Gen der 1. 48 0. 50 - 2. Age 2. 60 0. 51 -.0 8 - 3. Percei ved Co heren ce 2. 68 1. 44 -.0 5 -.1 7 1 4. P erc eiv ed C re dib ility 2. 61 1. 03 .0 1 .0 6 .3 5** (.97) 6. Percei ved L uxu rin ess 2. 59 0. 96 .0 9 .0 5 .3 9** .6 0** (.90) N= 10 8, R elia bilit ie s a re repor ted along the di ag ona l. **. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 01 level (2 -ta ile d). *. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 05 level (2 -ta ile d). Tabl e 8 : Me an s, St an da rd D ev ia tio ns, C or re la tio ns Q ue st io nn air e 6 : Me an in g-In co ngr ue nt (lu xu ry ) (Luxury se tti ng - rural p ro du ct) Var iab le s M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Gen der 1. 48 0. 50 - 2. Age 2. 60 0. 51 -.0 8 - 3. Percei ved Co heren ce 5. 07 1. 83 -.0 1 .0 9 1 4. P erc eiv ed C re dib ility 3. 90 1. 34 .0 5 -.0 3 .6 7** (.98) 6. P erc eiv ed Luxur ine ss 4. 21 1. 31 .0 4 -.0 2 .7 4** .8 1** (.93) N= 10 6, R elia bilit ie s a re re po rte d a lo ng th e d ia go na l. **. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 01 level (2 -ta ile d). *. C or rel ati on is s igni fic ant a t t he 0. 05 level (2 -ta ile d).
