UNHEALTHY BRANDS GOING HEALTHY?!
The Impact of a Healthy Extension Introduction on the Perceived
Healthiness of Brands.
The Role of Consumer Health Consciousness
by
Maria Dimcheva Djigovska
1
The Impact of a Healthy Extension Introduction on the Perceived
Healthiness of Brands.
The Role of Consumer Health Consciousness
Master thesis
by
Maria Dimcheva Djigovska
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business
MSc Marketing Management
19.06.2015
Nieuwe Ebbingestraat 84A 9712 NN Groningen The Netherlands +31 617 640 553 Student number 2695146 m.d.djigovska@student.rug.nl maria.djigovska@gmail.com
2
Executive summary
The current study aims at gaining better understanding of consumer responses to food brand repositioning with a focus on unhealthy brands. This research paper investigates consumers’ perceived healthiness of brands after the introduction of a healthy line extension and a healthy category extension respectively. In order to measure the success of the brand repositioning of unhealthy brands into healthier, analysis is being conducted for two types of brands in the snack category – an unhealthy (chocolate candy bar) and a healthy one (fruit and nut bar) that introduce a healthy line and category extension. In addition, health perceptions of the extended products are measured. Furthermore, the research examines how individual level of health consciousness affects brand perceived healthiness.
The current paper contributes in several ways to brand theory and has some useful managerial implications regarding food branding.
Based on the results from the study, it can be inferred that after the launch of a healthy extension the health perceptions of the parent brand do not change significantly. The most interesting finding is that the type of extension alone affects health perceptions of the brand and of the extension. This brings an important insight for food marketers which is that applying a line or a category extension branding strategy may be more or less effective to change the perceived healthiness of a brand. Our results indicate that introducing a category extension is a more effective strategy to enhance health perceptions of the parent brand and to reposition an unhealthy brand into a healthier. Similarly, the branding strategy of healthy category extension is more successful in terms of increased health perceptions of the extension as well.
3 Moreover, the study does not provide evidence that consumers’ level of health consciousness affects brand perceived healthiness. On the other hand, results indicate that BMI as another health-related measure influences health perceptions of brands. Useful insight is that, in general, consumers with high BMI perceive brands as more healthful compared to people with low BMI and this is true irrespective of the objective healthiness of brands.
4 Preface
This research paper marks the end of my Marketing experience at the University of Groningen. Studying Marketing at RUG was a great opportunity and challenge to test my skills, learn and develop. Here I gained valuable Marketing knowledge and practical insights about the marketing world and I learned very important life lessons. Living in Groningen and studying at the University of Groningen was an exciting journey with happy, challenging and hard moments.
Before diving into the Marketing world outside university and into the challenge called life, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor prof. Koert van Ittersum for his help and guidance, valuable and constructive feedback throughout the whole process of writing my Master thesis during the last semester.
I would also like to express my special thanks to Krasimir Hristov for his advice, encouragement and great support during the hardest times of my life in the Netherlands.
I must thank to all my friends and family who assisted me emotionally and spiritually. In addition, I would like to thank to the 207 respondents who took part in my study as they contributed considerably to this research.
Maria Djigovska
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive summary ...2 Preface...4 1. INTRODUCTION ...6 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...9Healthy Food Names and Healthy Food Labeling ...9
Line and Category Extensions ...10
Health Consciousness ...13
Hypotheses ...15
3. METHODOLOGY ...19
Research Design. Participants and Data Collection ...19
Measurement ...23
4. RESULTS ...25
Perceived Healthiness of Parent Brand ...25
Perceived Healthiness of Extension ...33
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ...39
Conclusions ...39
Managerial Implications and Recommendations ...42
Limitations and Directions for Future Research ...44
REFERENCES ...46
APPENDICES ...51
Appendix A: Qualtrics questionnaire...51
6
1. Introduction
The growing problem of obesity and other dietary diseases has made people reconsider their eating behavior and has led to a rise in consumers’ attention and interest in healthy foods. Companies are also becoming progressively aware of health issues and are focusing their marketing efforts based on this trend (Dodd and Morse 1994). Consequently, the restaurant and food industry has started to increasingly offer health-oriented products to consumers. As a result, the launch of new healthy brands, low-fat products, functional foods, healthy or diet versions of different brands has experienced a high increase in the market (Bech-Larsen and Grunert 2003). Furthermore, recent reports argued that healthy brand extensions dominated within new product launches (Food and Drink Europe 2005).
Within the food industry the companies suffering the most from this trend are those from unhealthy food product categories and as a consequence, they are trying to respond to it by communicating health-related elements of their brands and by introducing healthy alternatives or diet versions of their brands. Additionally, for companies offering healthy brands it is a challenge to build and maintain high health perceptions of their brands, and thus they develop their product portfolio by introducing new healthy extensions.
7 Given that, some questions arise such as: how are consumers going to perceive a new healthy extension and the parent brand after the launch of a healthy extension and how will they react to such a change? More interestingly, how unhealthy brands can show the fit between the parent brand and the new extension as the original brand is already perceived to be unhealthy and the extended product is supposed to be health-related, and would this lead to customer confusion?
Besides, well-established brands are difficult to reposition as they are associated with established representations (Lee and Shavitt 2009). As an illustration, for a well-established unhealthy brand like McDonald’s, which is generally perceived as unhealthy, would be very hard to change the already established strong associations of unhealthfulness in consumers’ minds (Lee and Shavitt 2009).
With the growth of health consciousness in people companies strive for changing consumers’ health perceptions of their brands. Introducing a new healthy product in the product mix or significantly altering the name of an existing product may affect brand evaluations, perceived product healthiness, purchase intentions. Based on the ideas above the main research questions of this study have been formulated:
How do consumers respond to the repositioning of a relatively unhealthy brand into a healthier alternative?
How does the introduction of a healthy extension affect consumers’ perceived healthiness of brands?
This research paper aims to examine consumer responses to two strategies of brand repositioning of unhealthy brands into healthier alternatives:
8 2) a category extension (or brand extension as often called in the brand literature) when a company well-known for unhealthy products introduces a new healthy product under the same brand name, but into a new product category.
This research is focused particularly on investigating how healthy category and line extensions of an unhealthy brand influence consumers’ health perceptions of the parent brand and the extension. Therefore, it is worth mentioning that the effect of only healthy extensions would be examined. In addition, even though the focus is on repositioning of unhealthy brands into healthier alternatives, the effect of healthy extensions on a healthy parent brand will also be examined to compare results based on the objective healthiness of parent brands.
As the increasing interest of both consumers and marketers in healthy foods is relatively a new market trend, marketing scientists have recently started to investigate issues related to it. This topic has received relatively little attention from the highly respected marketing journals. Several studies have investigated the effects of a health- or diet-related product name, organic and fair trade labeling on product perceptions and evaluations. On the other hand, there is much research related to line and brand extensions such as drivers of extension success, risks and negative effects of extensions. However, to the best of my knowledge, none of them has focused particularly on the effects of healthy extensions on perceived healthiness of unhealthy parent brands.
9 brand. Furthermore, insights on how health perceptions are affected by consumer health consciousness are presented.
The rest of this academic research paper is organized as follows. Firstly, a theoretical framework is provided in which relevant literature and concepts will be discussed. A conceptual model and hypotheses of this study will be introduced as well. Furthermore, the research methodology will be explained. Subsequently, the study results will be presented and analyzed. Lastly, conclusions, academic and managerial contribution, and limitations of the research will be outlined.
2. Theoretical framework
Healthy food names and healthy food labeling
Companies are increasingly communicating health-related elements of their brands to the customers (Kim, Cheong, Zheng 2009) in their striving to offer healthier options. Additionally, studies prove that changing the name of a product, the use of organic, bio and fair-trade labeling affects consumers’ health perceptions, evaluations and attitudes toward brands.
10 Similarly, ethical food labeling (e.g. organic, fair trade) seems to affect product perceptions and consumption as well. For instance, fair trade products are perceived as healthier (Schuldt, Muller, Schwarz 2012) and as more tasteful (Lotz, Christandl, Fetchenhauer 2013). Organic labels also have an impact on brand perceptions and according to Bauer, Heinrich and Schäfer (2013) organic labeling has a positive effect on consumers' purchase intentions and their willingness to pay a price premium.
Line and category extensions
As consumers are becoming more and more concerned about their health, an option for companies to respond to this trend is to implement new product introduction strategy. However, this carries high risk that the product would not be accepted. It is well-known that a big percentage of new products fail and according to Crawford (1997) this failure rate is around 40%. Accordingly, companies are increasingly using well-known brand names to more easily enter new markets.
One widely-used approach is line extension, a branding strategy in which the original brand extends the scope of the product it represents by modifying features in the same product category under the same brand name (e.g. Diet Coke), e.g. new flavors, forms, color, added ingredients, size (Aaker and Keller 1990; Lee 1994). On the other hand, a brand extension (also known as category extension or franchise extension) occurs when a brand applies the same brand name to enter a different product category (Aaker and Keller 1990; Lee 1994).
11 a replacement for the brand extension definition above. Also, according to Farquhar (1989, p.30) a category extension “applies an existing brand name to a new product category”.
Therefore, in order to avoid confusion with the use of terms and for readability purposes in this paper brand extensions (as often called in the brand literature) will be referred to as category extensions implying the firm’s branding strategy of using the brand name to enter a different product category.
According to Aaker (1991, p. 208), a study indicated that “only 5% of new product introductions were new brands, 6% were category extensions and 89% were line extensions”. The latter two strategies are implemented because familiarity and reputation of the parent brand are supposed to reduce the initial marketing costs and enhance the success of the new product introduction (Lee 1994). This implies that in the case of healthy extensions of unhealthy brands, there is a high risk that the perceptions of unhealthfulness of the parent brand will transfer to the extended product which is not desirable as the new product is intended to carry healthy associations.
12 1990; Boush and Loken 1991; Lee 1994).Therefore, a healthy line or category extension of an unhealthy brand most probably would be perceived as dissimilar and atypical of the brand which might be a big problem for the company. In contrast, a healthy extension of a healthy brand is expected to be successful as both the extension and the parent brand carry healthy associations.
13 Health consciousness
As a matter of fact, the extent to which consumers are involved with the products can affect their behavior such as their product evaluations, health perceptions toward brands, purchase intentions. Involvement levels vary across consumers for the different product categories. As defined by Zaichkowsky (1985, p. 342) involvement is “a person's perceived relevance of the object based on inherent needs, values and interests”. It results from “the personal meaning or significance the individual attributes to the characteristics of that product” (Nkwocha et al. 2005, p. 50) and as Zaichkowsky (1985) argues involvement comes from the interaction between consumers and products (Chaudhuri, 2000).
In the context of healthy food products we assume that consumers’ involvement with the product is reflected by their individual level of health consciousness. Health consciousness could be defined as “the extent to which health concerns are integrated into a person’s daily activities” (Jayanti and Burns, 1998, p. 10). Health-conscious consumers are concerned about, motivated to improve and maintain their health and quality of life, and engage in healthy behaviours (Michaelidou and Hassan 2008). Accordingly, we assume that individuals with high health consciousness are highly involved in healthy food products and exhibit high level of motivation when purchasing healthy food options.
14 brand name to make product inferences. Low product involvement causes people to take the “peripheral route” of processing information and customers “evaluate products according to some superficial analysis of the readily available and salient cues in the stimuli presented to them” (Nkwocha et al. 2005, p. 51) such as brand name and perceived fit between the parent brand and the extension product.
Research shows that the individual health consciousness level is in close relation to how customers seek and respond to health information (Dutta-Bergman 2004, Kaskutas and Greenfield, 1997) and it could be inferred that consumer responses to food brands and their extensions depend on their health consciousness. As people with high health consciousness are oriented toward maintaining healthy lifestyle and engage in healthy eating, we assume that they take the central route of processing health related information. This means that they would respond more favorably to the new healthy brand/line extension of an unhealthy brand as they would focus primarily on the product itself, on the attribute information rather than the fit between the original brand and the brand extension compared to consumers with lower health consciousness. This is important as the fit between an unhealthy parent brand and a healthy extension might be far from good.
15 Hypotheses
Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the relations that will be explored in this research paper.
0
Figure 1: Conceptual framework of the study
The main purpose of this study is to measure the impact of a healthy extension on the perceived healthiness of brands. We also examine the role of consumers’ health consciousness in health perceptions of brands.
Health perceptions of the parent brand
The perceived healthiness of a brand is very likely to be influenced by its objective healthiness. Two brands from the snack food category have been chosen in the research – one unhealthy and one healthy respectively. Snickers, a brand for a chocolate candy bar, represents the unhealthy brand option and Eat Natural, a brand famous for its fruit and nut
H
1H
4H
7H
3H
5H
6H
2 OBJECTIVE HEALTHINESS OF PARENT BRANDhealthy (chocolate candy bar) vs.
unhealthy (fruit and nut bar)
PERCEIVED HEALTHINESS OF BRAND
TYPE OF EXTENSION
Line (granola bar) vs.
category (raw mixed nuts)
HEALTH CONSCIOUSNESS
High vs. Low
16 bars, represents the healthier option. Accordingly, we assume that consumers would tend to perceive the healthier snack brand Eat Natural to be more healthful:
H1: The objective healthiness of a brand (healthy vs. unhealthy) positively affects
consumers’ perceived healthiness of that brand.
The perceptions of brand healthiness may change when the brand introduces a healthy extension to its product portfolio. As research has proven the way consumers evaluate the extended product may influence the post-extension evaluations of the original brand (e.g. Lane and Jacobson 1997; Loken and John 1993). Thus, it could be considered that a healthy line and category extension might lead to increased perceptions of brand healthiness for both an unhealthy and a healthy brand which lead us to the following hypothesis:
H2: The perceived healthiness of brands increases after the introduction of a healthy (A)
line extension and (B) category extension.
Furthermore, with regard to the health perception differences between a parent brand and a healthy line extension, they would probably be perceived as not that huge compared to differences between a parent brand and a healthy category extension as the line extension is in the same product category and the category extension is a product that enters a new product category. On that account, we assume that consumers will perceive a healthy category extension to be healthier than a healthy line extension which, in turn, may lead to healthier brand perceptions of a brand introducing a healthy category extension compared to a healthy line extension. The expectations above lead us to the next hypothesis:
H3: The effect of objective healthiness of a brand on the perceived healthiness of that brand
17 As individuals may perceive and assess products of different levels of involvement differently, category extension strategies may not be equally successful for the different product categories (Nkwocha and Johnson 1999). It goes without saying that this could be true also for line extensions. Therefore, we suppose that consumers respond to and evaluate line/category extensions in a different way based on their health consciousness. Moreover, as previously discussed, while consumers high on health consciousness would thoroughly inspect the product healthy characteristics and would focus on the product itself not on the brand name and fit between the parent brand and the extension, consumers low on health consciousness may rely more or salient cues such as brand name to make health evaluations of the product (Nkwocha et al. 2005). Based on these insights, the following hypothesis has been outlined:
H4: H3 that the effect of objective healthiness of a brand on the perceived healthiness of
18 Health perceptions of the extension
When introducing an extension, the parent brand associations might transfer to the new product (Aaker and Keller 1990) and consequently, we expect that the perceived healthiness of the extended product is very likely to be affected by the objective healthiness of the parent brand. Accordingly, the following hypothesis has been formulated:
H5: The perceived healthiness of a healthy extension is greater for a healthy (vs. unhealthy)
parent brand.
As previously discussed, regarding the differences between line and category extensions we assumed that consumers will have higher health perceptions toward a healthy category extension than healthy line extension, and thus we have framed the next hypothesis as follows:
H6: The effect of objective healthiness of the parent brand on perceived healthiness of the
extension is moderated by the type of extension introduced.
19 evaluation is affected by “category-thought valence” (e.g. product fit alike thoughts) again solely in the low motivation situation, but not in the high motivation one.
Consequently, we expect that consumers high on health consciousness will have higher perceptions of healthiness toward the extension compared to consumers with low level of health consciousness. Based on these insights and assumptions the last hypothesis has been framed as follows:
H7: The perceived healthiness of an extension is moderated by the consumers’ level of
health consciousness.
3. Methodology
Research design. Participants and data collection
The research design is a 2 x 2 between-subjects factorial design, with two independent variables: objective brand healthiness (unhealthy (Snickers) vs. healthy brand (Eat
Natural)) and extension type (line vs. category extension).
Therefore, there were four conditions in this research and participants were randomly assigned to only one of them (Table 1):
1) Unhealthy brand Snickers introducing a healthy line extension granola bar;
2) Unhealthy brand Snickers introducing a healthy category extension raw mixed nuts; 3) Healthy brand Eat Natural introducing a healthy line extension granola bar;
20 Table 1: 2x2 between-participants study design
Brand healthiness (objective)
Type of branding strategy Unhealthy - Chocolate candy bar (Snickers) Healthy - Nut and fruit bar
(Eat Natural) Line extension 1) Snickers
Granola bar 3) Eat Natural Granola bar Category extension 2) Snickers Mixed nuts 4) Eat Natural Mixed nuts
With regard to the line extensions, they happen when the parent brand launches a new product in the same category targeting a new segment through new flavors, added ingredients, package sizes, etc. In our case the healthy line extension is a granola bar which the parent brand (Snickers and Eat Natural respectively) launches in the same category – the snack category.
On the other hand, category extensions happen when the original brand is applied to enter a different product category and in our study the chosen healthy category extension is a package of raw mixed nuts. Four pictures were created for hypothetical, fictitious new healthy extensions (see Figure 2).
21 Random assignment of subjects to conditions ensures that differences in their backgrounds and personalities are spread evenly across conditions in order to eliminate or minimize the intervention of extraneous variables which might alter the study results (Aronson, Wilson, Brewer 1998).
Figure 2: Healthy line and category extensions for the unhealthy (Snickers) and healthy (Eat Natural) brand
The research is an experiment conducted online on Qualtrics (Appendix A: Qualtrics Questionnaire). Participants were informed that the study is about food branding but its purpose was not disclosed to them in order to avoid affecting their responses. They were “forced” to answer all questions so that there were no missing values in the survey.
22 Table 2: Participants – descriptive statistics
Gender Frequency Percentage Age
Male 80 38.65 % Mean 25.74
Female 127 61.35 % Range 19 - 66 years
Total 207 100.00 % SD 6.27
Education Frequency Percentage Current occupation Frequency Percentage No high school 1 0.48 % Student 78 37.68 %
High school 18 8.70 % Employed 79 38.16 %
Bachelor’s degree
118 57.00 % Student and employed
44 21.26 %
Master’s degree 67 32.37 % Unemployed 5 2.42 %
PhD 0 0.00 % Retired 1 0.48 %
Other 3 1.45 %
Figure 3: Respondents nationality chart
23 The main goal of this research paper is to measure how the introduction of a healthy extension (line vs. category extension) affects consumers’ perceived healthiness toward the parent brand and the extended product. The role of health consciousness (high vs. low) on health perceptions toward the brand and the extension is also examined.
Measurement
Perceived healthiness of parent brand before the extension introduction. Perceived healthiness of extension.
Perceived healthiness of parent brand after the extension introduction
The concepts of perceived healthiness of the parent brand (before the extension introduction), extension and parent brand after the extension introduction were measured by means of 4 items on a 7-point Likert scale where 1 stands for “Strongly disagree”, 7 – for “Strongly agree” (Appendix A: Qualtrics Questionnaire). Reverse coding was done for the reversed questions.
To guarantee internal consistency of the items included in the concepts, a reliability analysis was conducted. The reliability tests indicated Cronbach’s Alphas above .9 which shows very high internal consistency (Table 3).
Table 3: Reliability of the scales
Construct Cronbach’s Alpha
Perceived healthiness of parent brand before the extension introduction
.929 Perceived healthiness of extension .901 Perceived healthiness of parent brand
after the extension introduction
.935
24 healthiness of extension, Perceived healthiness of parent brand after the extension introduction.
Health consciousness
Ten items that reflect the extent to which the participants are conscious about their health were used to measure health consciousness. Subjects were asked to respond to the statements on a scale from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”), only the first item “How often do you do sports?” was on a scale from 1 (representing “never”) to 7 (representing “3 or more times per week”) – check Appendix A: Qualtrics questionnaire. The reliability test for this measure indicated Cronbach’s Alpha .778, which is above .7, and thus the measure is reliable (Leech, Barret, Morgan 2015).
Subsequently, we created the sum variable health consciousness by combining its corresponding 10 items.
BMI
25 Based on the individual results of weight and height we calculated the respondents’ BMI and divided the sample into people with high BMI (≥ 25, overweight) and with low BMI (< 25, with regular weight).
4. Results
Perceived healthiness of parent brand
The main goal of our research was to investigate the change in mean scores of perceived healthiness of the parent brand before and after the extension introduction. As participants were asked about their perceptions of healthiness toward the brand before and after the launch of the extended product, we conducted Repeated Measures ANOVA analysis in order to explore how the objective healthiness of brands, the type of extension and health consciousness influence the perceived healthiness of the parent brand. Table 4 on the next page presents the main findings of the Repeated Measures analysis.
26 Table 4: Results of the Repeated Measures ANOVA (dependent variable: Perceived
healthiness of PB1)
Repeated Measures ANOVA
F Hypothesis df Error df Sig. Perceived Healthiness of PB 1.442 1 199 .231
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Objective Healthiness of PB 26.290 1 199 .000**
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Type of Extension 5.194 1 199 .024*
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Health Consciousness 1.496 1 199 .223
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Objective Healthiness of PB * Type of Extension
.007 1 199 .933
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Objective Healthiness of PB * Health Consciousness
.650 1 199 .421
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Type of Extension * Health Consciousness
.142 1 199 .706
Perceived Healthiness of PB * Objective Healthiness of PB * Type of Extension * Health Consciousness
.079 1 199 .779
†p < .10 *p < .05 **p < .01
Figure 4: Main effect of objective healthiness and type of extension on perceived healthiness of PB (before and after the extension introduction)
27 Effect of objective healthiness of parent brand on its perceived healthiness The results on Table 4 suggest that the objective healthiness of the parent brand has a significant positive effect on its perceived healthiness (F(1,199) = 26.29, p = .000). Figure 5 below is a visual presentation of the main effect of the type of PB (healthy vs. unhealthy) on its perceived healthiness. The mean scores of the perceived healthiness of the unhealthy brand before the extension are almost two times lower than that of the healthy brand (Figure 5). Moreover, the scores of the perceived healthiness of the healthy parent brand after the extension introduction are also significantly higher than those of the unhealthy brand (Figure 5). These findings indicate that the healthy brand Eat Natural has higher health perceptions than the unhealthy Snickers and the selected products indeed differ based on their healthiness.
This result confirms H1 that The objective healthiness of a brand (healthy vs. unhealthy)
positively affects consumers’ perceived healthiness of that brand.
28 Pre and Post health perceptions of the parent brand
On Figure 5 it can be seen that after the introduction of a healthy extension the health perceptions of the unhealthy brand increase and those of the healthy brand decrease. However, the results of the Repeated Measures ANOVA analysis indicate that the perceived healthiness of parent brand does not change significantly after the introduction of a healthy extension (F(1,199) = 1.442, p = .231, Table 4), and thus the differences between pre- and post- health perceptions are not statistically significant.
Consequently, H2: The perceived healthiness of the parent brand increases after the
introduction of a healthy (A) line extension and (B) category extension is not supported.
Role of type of extension
Subsequently, we explored whether the type of extension introduced moderates the influence of objective healthiness of a brand on its perceived healthiness.
29 Figure 6 illustrates that after the introduction of a healthy extension the health perceptions of the unhealthy brand increase and of the healthy brand decrease. Regarding the healthiness of the parent brand, for an unhealthy parent brand the increase in health perceptions is similar irrespective of the type of extended product (line vs. category). In contrast, for a healthy parent brand, when the extension is a category extension, the perceived healthiness of the healthy brand decreases less than when a line extension is introduced.
However, it is evident from the output on Table 4 that the interaction effect between Perceived healthiness of PB * Objective healthiness of PB * Type of extension is statistically insignificant (F(1,199) = .007, p = .933). Consequently, the findings do not support H3: The effect of objective healthiness of a brand on the perceived healthiness of
that brand is moderated by the type of extension introduced.
30 Figure 7: Main effect of type of extension on Perceived healthiness of PB
Role of health consciousness
In order to test H4: H3 that the effect of healthiness of a branded product on the
perceived healthiness of that brand product is moderated by the type of extension introduced is valid only for consumers with low level of health consciousness, we included
the level of consumers’ health consciousness (high vs. low) as another independent variable in the Repeated measures analysis. As it can be clearly seen from Table 4 the four-way interaction effect Perceived healthiness of PB * Objective healthiness of PB * Type of extension * Health consciousness is not significant (F(1,199) = .079, p = .779). Consequently, there is no proof that H3 is valid only for low health conscious people, and
thus we reject H4.
31 Role of BMI
As our findings show no evidence that health consciousness has a significant role on the explored relations, we conducted additional analysis to inspect the effect of consumers’ Body Mass Index (BMI) as another health related measure.
Despite the insignificant main effect of Perceived healthiness in the previous analysis, here with this analysis in which we included BMI in the place of health consciousness, we do find a significant main effect of Perceived healthiness (F(1,199) = 4.910, p = .028, Appendix B, Output 1). This finding suggests that the differences between pre- and post- health perceptions are statistically significant and this effect seems consistent with our expectations regarding H2 that the perceived healthiness of the parent brand significantly
changes after the introduction of a healthy extension.
Another interesting finding is that results reveal a significant interaction effect between Perceived Healthiness of PB and the BMI measure (F(1,199) = 5.211, p = .023, Appendix B, Output 1). In other words, BMI affects perceived healthiness of brands irrespective of their objective healthiness. Figure 8 below shows that consumers with high BMI evaluate brands as more healthful than those with low BMI.
32 With regard to the objective healthiness of parent brands, Figure 9 below is in line with the previous finding that consumers with high BMI evaluate brands as more healthful compared to people scoring low on BMI and it could be seen from the graph that this is true irrespective of the objective healthiness of brands. This is confirmed in Appendix B, Output 1 and according to the results the interaction between Perceived healthiness of PB * Objective healthiness of PB * BMI is not statistically significant (F(1,199) = .057, p = .812), and thus BMI does not influence the effect of objective healthiness on perceived healthiness of PB.
33 Perceived healthiness of the extension
An ANOVA test was performed in order to explore how the objective healthiness of brands, the type of extension and health consciousness influence perceived healthiness of the extended product. Results can be found in Table 5 below.
Table 5: Results of ANOVA (dependent variable: Perceived healthiness of extension)
ANOVA
Dependent Variable: Perceived healthiness of extension
Source Type III
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Objective Healthiness of PB 26.159 1 26.159 19.971 .000** Type of Extension 5.575 1 5.575 4.256 .040* Health Consciousness .134 1 .134 .102 .750
Objective Healthiness of PB * Type of Extension .031 1 .031 .024 .878
Objective Healthiness of PB * Health Consciousness
.000 1 .000 .000 .993
Type of Extension * Health Consciousness 1.526 1 1.526 1.165 .282
Objective Healthiness of PB * Type of Extension * Health Consciousness .524 1 .524 .400 .528 Error 260.654 199 †p < .10 *p < .05 **p < .01
Effect of objective healthiness on perceived healthiness of the extension
34 influences the health perceptions of the new healthy extension. These results are in line with H5: The perceived healthiness of a healthy extension is greater for a healthy (vs.
unhealthy) parent brand.
Figure 10: Perceived healthiness of extension for the healthy and unhealthy brand respectively
Role of type of extension on perceived healthiness of extension
Results from Table 5 suggest that there is not a significant effect of type of extension on the influence of the objective healthiness of a parent brand on perceived healthiness of the extension (F(1,199) = .24, p = .878, Table 5). Figure 11 clearly shows that the lines are almost parallel which proves that there is no interaction effect. This finding rejects H6: The
35 Figure 11: Effect of type of extension on the influence of objective healthiness of PB on perceived healthiness of extension
However, results indicate that the type of extension alone has a significant main effect on the perceived healthiness of extension (F(1,199) = 4.256, p = .040, Table 5). As it is visible from Figure 11 and Figure 12 the health perceptions of the extension are higher when the type of extension is category versus line extension and this is true regardless of the objective healthiness of PB.
36 Furthermore, in our research we measured the health perceptions of the products granola bar and raw mixed nuts in general. Results prove that the raw nuts are perceived as significantly healthier than the granola bar (F(1,205) = 36.884, p = .000, Appendix B Output 2). Figure 13 clearly presents this difference. In our study the granola bar is the product introduced as a line extension and a package of mixed raw nuts - as a category extension product.
Figure 13: Perceived healthiness of granola bar and raw nuts in general
Role of Health consciousness on perceived healthiness of extension
With regard to the role of individual level of health consciousness, results do not prove that the perceived healthiness of an extension is moderated by the consumers’ level of health consciousness (F(1,199) =.000, p = .993, Table 5). Thus, our findings do not support H7.
37 confirm that the objective healthiness of the parent brand has a significant main effect on the perceived healthiness of the extended product.
In summary, our results suggest that the objective healthiness of brands affect health perceptions of brands and their extended products (H1 and H5). Although our findings did
38 Table 6: Overview of hypotheses
Hypotheses Result Comments
H1: The objective healthiness of a brand (healthy vs. unhealthy) positively affects consumers’ perceived healthiness of that brand.
Supported
H2: The perceived healthiness of brands increases after the introduction of a healthy (A) line extension and (B) category extension. Not supported Post health perceptions do not change significantly after the extension introduction
H3: The effect of objective healthiness of a brand on the perceived healthiness of that brand is moderated by the type of extension introduced. Not supported Sign. main effect of type of extension on PB perceived healthiness
H4: H3 that the effect of healthiness of a brand on the perceived healthiness of that brand is moderated by the type of extension introduced is valid only for consumers with low level of health consciousness. Not supported Sign. main effect of BMI on PB perceived healthiness
H5: The perceived healthiness of a healthy extension is greater for a healthy (vs. unhealthy) parent brand.
Supported
H6: The effect of objective healthiness of the parent brand on perceived healthiness of the extension is moderated by the type of extension introduced. Not supported Sign. main effect of type of extension on perceived healthiness of extension
H7: The perceived healthiness of an extension is moderated by the consumers’ level of health consciousness.
39
5. Conclusions and discussion
Conclusions
The main goal of this research paper was to gain a better understanding of consumer responses (health perceptions in particular) to food branding strategies of line and category extensions with a focus on unhealthy parent brands. This study investigates consumers’ health perceptions of brands before and after the launch of a healthy extension (line and category). We performed the analysis for two types of brands in the snack food category – a chocolate candy bar Snickers representing the unhealthy option and a fruit and nut bar Eat Natural representing the healthy alternative, and we measured the effect of the type of extension introduction on consumers’ perceived healthiness of the parent brand and the extension. Therefore, the experiment had a 2 x 2 between-participants design in which the two factors were objective healthiness of brand (healthy vs. unhealthy) and healthy type of extension (line vs. category extension). Moreover, the study examined how consumers’ level of health consciousness influences perceived healthiness of brands and their extensions.
The main research findings are outlined as follows:
- In line with our predictions the objective healthiness of the brand was found to significantly influence its perceived healthiness. This means that the healthy brand is perceived as significantly healthier than the unhealthy brand (H1) and the selected
brands in the study indeed differ in terms of their healthiness.
- Subsequently, we investigated the change in perceived healthiness of brand after the extension introduction and more specifically whether the brand health perceptions increase after the introduction of a healthy extension (H2). Our findings suggest that the
40 established reputation and specific associations of healthiness in consumers’ minds that are hard to change, which is in line with the finding of Lee and Shavitt (2009). Consequently, we reject H2.
- The main focus of this study was to examine whether the type of extension introduced moderates the effect of objective healthiness on perceived healthiness of the brand (H3).
Our findings do not provide statistical evidence that the type of extension introduced influences the effect of objective healthiness on the perceived healthiness of the brand. Therefore, H3 was rejected. Despite this, we reveal an interesting result: a significant
main effect of the type of extension on health perceptions of brands. Consequently, this suggests that applying a line or a category extension branding strategy may be more or less effective to change the perceived healthiness of a brand. Results indicate that after the introduction of a healthy category extension, the perceived healthiness of the original brand significantly increases and this finding suggests that introducing a category extension versus a line extension might be a more effective strategy to enhance health perceptions of the parent brand. Moreover, the study results show that consumers in general perceive mixed raw nuts as a healthier product than a granola bar which may explain the results that the introduction of a healthy category extension is more effective in increasing health perceptions of PB.
- Additionally, as the difference in health perceptions might be influenced by consumers’ involvement with the product, health consciousness was expected to moderate the explored effects (H4). However, when exploring the role of consumer health
41 - Moreover, in this study we examined the health perceptions of the extended product. As anticipated, results show that the same healthy extension is evaluated differently when under a healthy or unhealthy original brand. This is in line with previous studies that indicate that parent brand evaluations might affect extension evaluations (Aaker and Keller 1990). In our case, the perceived healthiness of the unhealthy brand has transferred to the new product and has affected the perceived healthiness of the extension and consumers evaluate it as less healthful than the same product but under the healthy parent brand. This finding confirms H5.
- Furthermore, our findings suggest that there is no evidence that the effect of perceived healthiness of PB on perceived healthiness of the extension is different for a category compared to line extension, thus H6 needs to be rejected. However, as it can be inferred
from the results, the type of extension alone has a significant effect on the perceived healthiness of the extension. Our results reveal that the health perceptions of the extension are higher when the extension type is a category versus a line and this is true regardless of the objective healthiness of PB. This confirms our expectations that when a product is introduced in a new product category, the health perception differences between a parent brand and an extension are higher, and thus a healthy category extension is perceived as healthier than a healthy line extension.
42 Managerial implications and recommendations
Apart from the contributions to theory, the current research paper contributes with several managerial implications that can be used by food marketers regarding branding strategies of line and category extensions.
Firstly, the introduction of a healthy extension does not change significantly the perceived healthiness of brands which might suggest that a new product introduction under a new healthy parent brand name might be a more successful strategy for an unhealthy brand to reposition into a healthier.
Secondly, the use of type of extension can enhance perceived healthiness of a brand as applying a line or a category extension branding strategy may be more or less effective in changing the health perceptions of brands. Results prove that the branding strategy of a healthy category extension is more successful in terms of increased health perceptions of original brand and of the extension. This is a critical managerial insight as introducing a healthy product under the same brand name into a new product category, different from that of the parent brand (thus applying category extension) is a more successful strategy to improve the unhealthy image of an unhealthy brand in consumers’ minds and to reposition the unhealthy brand into a healthier alternative, compared to modifying product features (e.g. new flavors, forms, color, added ingredients, size) in the same product category (line extension introduction). Consequently, a recommendation for marketers striving to reposition an unhealthy brand into a healthier is to apply category extension strategy and this way to improve the unhealthy reputation of the unhealthy brand.
43 extension evaluations and the associations of unhealthfulness have spread on to the extended product. Consequently, a recommendation for companies from unhealthy brands trying to reposition into healthier alternatives is to introduce a category extension and elaborate on the healthy characteristics of the extended products which is consistent with previous research which showed that negative associations could be neutralized by focusing in detail on the attributes of the extension than reminding of positive associations with the parent brand (Aaker and Keller 1990). This knowledge is very critical especially for companies from unhealthy brands in order to make successful strategic repositioning decisions.
44 Limitations and directions for future research
Although this research paper brings some valuable insights to the topic of healthy brand extensions, the study has several limitations that are worth mentioning and it provides some interesting directions for further research which could bring more light on the matter.
The first limitation of the study concerns its generalizability. The research is limited to only one product category – the snack food category. Whether the results from this study could be transferred to other food product categories could be a direction for future research. For instance, it would be interesting to examine the topic for beverages (e.g. soft drinks), a fast food restaurant, and even for a non-food product category (e.g. beauty care products).
Secondly, the study was conducted via an online questionnaire on Qualtrics which confronted customers with a more artificial situation compared to a lab study or a field experiment. Consequently, a further research in a laboratory or a field study could be conducted to examine the topic of interest.
Next, the sample consists of mostly young people – students in their twenties and a research focused on different age groups might bring different outcomes and insights about consumers’ health perceptions of brands and extensions.
Another limitation of this research is that even though two well-known brands have been chosen in the research (Snickers, the unhealthy one and Eat Natural, the healthy alternative), the study does not take into account consumers’ prior knowledge of the parent brands. It is possible that the participants had broader knowledge about one of the brands than the other and this could have affected the results.
46
References
Aaker, D. 1991. Managing Brand Equity. New York: The Free Press
Aaker, D., Keller, K. 1990. Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions. Journal of
Marketing, 54 (January): 27-41
Andrews, J. C., Netemeyer, R. G., Burton, S. 2009. The Nutrition Elite: Do Only the Highest Levels of Caloric Knowledge, Obesity Knowledge, and Motivation Matter in Processing Nutrition Ad Claims and Disclosures? Journal of Public Policy and
Marketing, 28(1): 41-55
Aronson, E, Wilson, T. D., Brewer, M. B. 1998. Experimentation in Social Psychology. The Handbook of Social Psychology 1: 99-142
(http://leeds-faculty.colorado.edu/junggran/7310/ED_aronson.pdf)
Bauer, H., Heinrich, D., Schäfer, D. 2013. The Effects of Organic Labels on Global, Local, and Private Brands More Hype than Substance. Journal of Business Research, 66: 1035– 1043
Bech-Larsen, T., Grunert, K. G. 2003. The Perceived Healthiness of Functional Foods: A Conjoint Study of Danish, Finnish and American Consumers’ Perception of Functional Foods. Research report. Appetite, 40: 9-14
Bhat, S., Reddy, S. K.. 2001. The Impact of Parent Brand Attribute Associations and Affect on Brand Extension Evaluation. Journal of Business Research, 53: 111 –122
Bottomley, P., Doyle, J. R. 1996. The Formation of Attitudes towards Brand Extensions: Testing and Generalising Aaker and Keller’s Model. International Journal of Research
in Marketing, 13(4): 365–377
Bottomley, P., Holden, S. J.S. 2001. Do We Really Know How Consumers Evaluate Brand Extensions? Empirical Generalizations Based on Secondary Analysis of Eight Studies.
47 Boush, D. M., Loken, L. 1991. A Process-Tracing Study of Brand Extension Evaluation.
Journal of Marketing Research, 28: 16-28
Broniarczyk, S. M., Alba, J. W. 1994. The Importance of the Brand in Brand Extension.
Journal of Marketing Research, 31(2), Special Issue on Brand Management (May):
214-228
Chaudhuri, A. 2000. A Macro Analysis of the Relationship of Product Involvement and Information Search: The Role of Risk. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 8(1) (Winter): 1-15
Crawford, C. M. 1997. New Products Management. 5th ed., Irwin, Chicago
Dodd, T., and S. Morse. 1994. The Impact of Media Stories Concerning Health Issues on Food Product Sales. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 11, no. 2: 17-25
Dutta-Bergman, M. 2004. Primary Sources of Health Information: Comparison in the Domain of Health Attitudes, Health Cognitions, and Health Behaviors. Health
Communication, 16: 273-288
Farquhar, P. H. 1989. Managing Brand Equity. Marketing Research 1(3): 24-33
Gurhan-Canli, Z., Maheswaran, D. 1998. The Effects of Extensions on Brand Name Dilution and Enhancement. Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (4): 464-473
Irmak, C., Vallen, B., Robinson, S. 2011. The Impact of Product Name on Dieters’ and Nondieters’ Food Evaluations and Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 38 (August)
Jayanti, R. K., Burns, A. C. 1998. The Antecedents of Preventive Healthcare Behavior: An Empirical Study. Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 26: 6-15
48 Keller, K. L., Aaker, D. A. 1992. The Effects of Sequential Introduction of Brand Extensions. Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (February): pp. 35–50
Keller, K., Lehmann, D. 2006. Brands and Branding: Research Findings and Future Priorities. Marketing science, 25, no. 6 (November-December): 740-759
Keller, S. B., Landry, M., Olson, J., Velliquette, A. M., Burton, S., Andrews, J. C. 1997. The Effects of Nutrition Package Claims, Nutrition Facts Panels, and Motivation to Process Nutrition Information on Consumer Product Evaluations. Journal of Public Policy and
Marketing: 256-269
Kim, K., Cheong, Y., Zheng, L. 2009. The Current Practices in Food Advertising The Usage and Effectiveness of Different Advertising Claims. International Journal of
Advertising, 28(3): 527–553
Kotler, P., Keller, K. L. 2012. Marketing Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson, 14th ed.
Lane, V., Jacobson, R. 1997. The Reciprocal Impact of Brand Leveraging: Feedback Effects from Brand Extension Evaluation to Brand Evaluation. Marketing Letters, 8(3): 261–271
Lee, M., 1994. Informational and Motivational Influences on Consumer Evaluations of Line and Brand Extensions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8(4), June: 475-496 Lee, K., Shavitt, S. 2009. Can McDonald's Food Ever Be Considered Healthful? Metacognitive Experiences Affect the Perceived Understanding of a Brand. Journal of
Marketing Research, (2), April: 222-233
Leech, N. L., Barret, K. C., Morgan, G. A. 2015. IBM SPSS for Intermediate Statistics. Routledge Taylor & Francis, 5th edition
49 Lotz, S., Christandl, F., Fetchenhauer, D. 2013. What is Fair is Good: Evidence of Consumers' Taste for Fairness. Food Quality and Preference, 30(2): 139-144
MacKenzie, S. B., Spreng, R. A. 1992. How Does Motivation Moderate the Impact of Central and Peripheral Processing on Brand Attitudes and Intentions? Journal of
Consumer Research: 519-529
Michaelidou, N., Hassan, L. M. 2008. The Role of Health Consciousness, Food Safety Concern and Ethical Identity on Attitudes and Intentions towards Organic Food.
International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32: 163–170
Molini, V., Nube, M., Boom, B. 2009. Adult BMI as a Health and Nutritional Inequality Measure: Applications at Macro and Micro Levels. World Development (8), no. 7: 1012-1023
Nijssen, E. J., Bucklin, L. P., Uiji, R. 1995. The Effect of Involvement upon Brand Extensions. M. Bergera (Ed.). Proceedings of the 25th EMAC Annual Conference, Paris:
1020-1024
Nkwocha, I., Johnson, W. C. 1999. How Product Involvement Moderate Brand Extension Evaluations: A Proposed Study. Joseph Chapman (Ed.), Proceedings of the Association of
Marketing Theory and Practice, Jackson, FL: 352-358
Nkwocha, I., Bao, Y., Brotspies, H. V., Johnson, W. C. 2005. Product Fit and Consumer Attitude toward Brand Extensions: The Moderating Role of Product Involvement. Journal
of Marketing Theory and Practice, 13(3), Summer: 49-61
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. 1984. The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 46 (January): 69-81
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., Schumann, D. 1983. Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer
50 Rangaswamy, A., Burke, R. R., Oliva, T. A. 1993. Brand Equity and the Extendibility of Brand Names. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(3): 61–75
Reddy, S. K., Holak, S. L., Bhat, S. 1994. To Extend or Not to Extend: Success Determinants of Line Extensions. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(2), Special Issue on Brand Management (May): 243-262
Schuldt, J. P., Muller, D., Schwarz, N. 2012. The “Fair Trade” Effect: Health Halos from Social Ethics Claims. Social Psychological and Personality Science, published online 3 January 2012, http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/1948550611431643 Smith, D. C., Park, C. W. 1992. The Effects of Brand Extensions on Market Share and Advertising Efficiency. Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (August): 296- 313
Völckner, F., Sattler, H. 2006. Drivers of Brand Extension Success. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), April: 18-34
Wansink, B., van Ittersum, K., Painter, J. 2004. How Diet and Health Labels Influence Taste and Satiation. Journal of Food Science, 69(9)
Zaichkowsky, J. L. 1985. Measuring the Involvement Construct. Journal of Consumer
Research, 12 (December): 341-352
Food and Drink Europe 2005. “Healthy” Brand Extensions Lead New Products. Available from: http://www.foodanddrinkeurope.com/Products-Marketing/Healthy-brand-extensions-lead-new-products, access date: 23-Mar-2005
51
Appendix A: Qualtrics Questionnaire
IntroductionDear Participant,
Thank you for taking the time to participate in my research!
I am currently a Master student in Marketing at the University of Groningen and this study is part of my academic research project regarding food branding.
The questionnaire will take you approximately 3-5 minutes. There are no right or wrong answers, it is your opinion that matters.
Your participation is voluntary and there are no incentives for participating in the study. The data will remain anonymous.
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at
m.d.djigovska@student.rug.nl.
Thanks!
Maria Djigovska
MSc student in Marketing
1 Condition: SNICKERS - Line extension
Please carefully read the sentences below and then please answer the questions openly and truthfully.
Snickers is the brand name of the American chocolate candy bar made by Mars Inc.
The Snickers candy bar was created in 1930 and consists of nougat, peanuts and caramel with a milk chocolate coating.
52 Below there are several statements about Sn icker s brand.
Please carefully read the statements and indicate to wh at exten t you agr ee or disag r ee with them.
Neither
I get a good impression from this brand.
I intend to buy this brand.
I like this brand.
Snickers has a lot of health benefits.
Eating Snickers is good for my health.
It is highly unlikely that I buy this brand.
I think Snickers is unhealthy. I find this brand boring.
I would never buy this brand. I find this brand unattractive. I would probably buy this brand.
Eating Snickers is bad for you.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat Disagree Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
Please carefully read the sentences below and then please answer the questions openly and truthfully.
Snickers has recently introduced a new product to the market (an extension) - Sn icker s Gr an o la bar (see the picture below).
53 Below there are several statements about Sn icker s Gr an o la bar - th e new Sn icker s exten sio n on th e p r evio u s pict u r e.
Please carefully read the statements and indicate to wh at exten t you agr ee or disag r ee with them.
Neither
Eating Snickers Granola bar is bad for you.
I find this extension unattractive.
I would never buy this product. Eating Snickers Granola bar is good for my health.
I get a good impression from this product.
It is highly unlikely that I buy this product.
I intend to buy this product.
I like Snickers Granola bar. I would probably buy this new product.
Snickers Granola bar has a lot of health benefits.
I think Snickers Granola bar is unhealthy.
I find this extension boring.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat Disagree Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
Below there are several statements about Sn icker s br an d in gen er al.
54
In your opinion how healthy is a granola bar? Eating Snickers is bad for you.
I find this brand boring.
I intend to buy this brand. I would never buy this brand. It is highly unlikely that I buy this brand.
I find this brand unattractive. I get a good impression from this brand.
I think Snickers is unhealthy. I would probably buy this brand.
Snickers has a lot of health benefits.
Eating Snickers is good for my health.
I like this brand.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
Please take a look at the picture below and then ind icat e th e exten t to wh ich you evaluat e th e pr o d u ct as h ealt h y by using the slider (0 being the least healthy, 100 - healthiest).
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
50
This section contains questions about yourself. Please carefully read them before you provide your answers.
Three or
How often do you do sports?
Never Once per month Once per 3 weeks Once per 2 weeks Once per week Twice per week more times per week
55
I am interested in information about my health.
I don't take efforts to eat healthy.
I try to avoid eating unhealthy foods.
I try to avoid foods that are high in fat.
Good health takes active participation on my part. I am concerned about my health only when I get sick. I try to eat more fresh fruit and vegetables on a daily basis. I take much notice of health- related recommendations from media.
To show that I am paying attention I will choose the first option.
I usually read the ingredients on food labels.
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
2 Co n d it io n : SNICKERS - Cat eg o r y exten sio n
Please carefully read the sentences below and then please answer the questions openly and truthfully. Sn icker s is the brand name of the American chocolate candy bar made by Mars Inc.
The Snickers candy bar was created in 1930 and consists of nougat, peanuts and caramel with a milk chocolate coating.
56 Below there are several statements about Sn icker s brand.
Please carefully read the statements and indicate to wh at exten t you agr ee or disag r ee with them.
Neither
I get a good impression from this brand.
It is highly unlikely that I buy this brand.
Snickers has a lot of health benefits.
I find this brand unattractive. I would probably buy this brand.
I like this brand.
Eating Snickers is good for my health.
I intend to buy this brand. Eating Snickers is bad for you. I would never buy this brand. I find this brand boring.
I think Snickers is unhealthy.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat Disagree Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
57 Below there are several statements about Sn icker s Mixed nu t s - th e new Sn icker s exten sio n on th e p r evio u s pict u r e.
Please carefully read the statements and indicate to wh at exten t you agr ee or disag r ee with them.
Neither
I find this extension unattractive.
I think Snickers Mixed nuts is unhealthy.
I intend to buy this product. I like Snickers Mixed nuts. I would never buy this product. I find this extension boring. Snickers Mixed nuts has a lot of health benefits.
It is highly unlikely that I buy this product.
Eating Snickers Mixed nuts is bad for you.
I get a good impression from this product.
Eating Snickers Mixed nuts is good for my health.
I would probably buy this new product. Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat Disagree Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
Below there are several statements about Sn icker s br an d in gen er al.
Please carefully read the statements and indicate to wh at exten t you agr ee or disag r ee with them.
Neither
I would probably buy this brand.
I get a good impression from this brand.
Snickers has a lot of health benefits.
Eating Snickers is bad for you. It is highly unlikely that I buy this brand.
I would never buy this brand. Eating Snickers is good for my health.
I think Snickers is unhealthy. I find this brand boring. I like this brand.
I find this brand unattractive.
I intend to buy this brand.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat Disagree Agree nor Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree
