Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 904–909
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Journal of Business Research
Brand passion: Antecedents and consequences Noel Albert a,⁎, Dwight Merunka a, b, 1, Pierre Valette-Florence c, 2 a b c
EUROMED Marseille, Domaine de Luminy BP 291, 13288 Marseille Cedex 9, France University Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille (IAE), and EUROMED Marseille. Clos Guiot, 13540 Puyricard, France University PMF of Grenoble (IAE), Domaine Universitaire, BP 47, 38040 Grenoble, France
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 1 July 2011 Received in revised form 1 October 2011 Accepted 1 November 2011 Available online 5 January 2012 Keywords: Brand passion Brand commitment Brand trust Brand identiﬁcation Partial least squares
a b s t r a c t This research explores the antecedents and consequences of brand passion. Consumer–brand relationship constructs (brand identiﬁcation and brand trust) may inﬂuence consumers' passion for a brand. Brand passion in turn may inﬂuence brand commitment, willingness to pay a higher price for the brand, and positive word of mouth. A partial least squares structural equation model applied to data collected from a representative sample of 1505 study participants demonstrates that brand passion depends on brand identiﬁcation and brand trust. Consumer's passion for a brand has great managerial relevance and a direct effect on word of mouth and commitment, as well as an indirect effect on willingness to pay a higher price, as mediated by commitment. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Brands help deﬁne consumers' lives and play a central role in people's consumption behavior (Ahuvia, 2005a; Wallendorf & Arnould, 1988). Strong relationships bind consumers and their preferred brands (Fournier, 1998), such that some consumers may develop into a true cult for some brands (Belk & Tumbat, 2005). Consumer brand relationship constructs such as brand trust (Hess, 1995), brand identiﬁcation (Escalas & Bettman, 2003), and brand commitment (Fullerton, 2005) appear central to many branding studies. Affective constructs such as brand love (Carroll & Ahuvia, 2006) or brand attachment (Park, MacInnis, & Priester, 2006) also inﬂuence consumer behavior. The recently proposed concept of brand passion (i.e., a strong positive feeling toward a brand) features examples and evidence of consumer enthusiasm (Bauer, Heinrich, & Marin, 2007; Belk, Ger, & Askegaard, 2003; Matzler, Pichler, & Hemetsberger, 2007) and activities such as belonging to a brand community (Schouten & McAlexander, 1995). However, the relationship of brand passion to other consumer–brand relationship constructs remains unclear, as does the position of this concept in a nomological network that includes managerial outcomes such as positive word of mouth (WOM) or willingness to pay a price premium for the brand.
Two studies explicitly explore the concept of brand passion and demonstrate that brand passion relates to brand characteristics (Bauer et al., 2007) or consumer characteristics (Matzler et al., 2007). Studies in social psychology show that the relationship between two individual entities also can be a source of passion (Driscoll, Davies, & Lipetz, 1972). The inﬂuence of the relationships between consumers and their brands on the development of passion for a brand remains an open question though. Passion is a relational construct, and therefore, the consumer– brand relational constructs that branding literature establishes as important also may inﬂuence brand passion. This study explores brand passion according to the inﬂuence of consumer brand relationship constructs, adding a new dimension to the understanding of passion for a brand. This investigation also aims to measure the impact of brand passion on end-effect relational constructs (e.g., brand commitment). The overall objective is therefore to build a model that establishes the nomological relationships between brand passion and other well-known consumer brand relationship constructs. Demonstrating the existence of such relationships may conﬁrm the importance of brand passion, from both academic and managerial perspectives. 2. Consumer brand relationships This section deﬁnes the main concept of brand passion and introduces the relational constructs in the model.
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: + 33 491 827 800. E-mail addresses: [email protected]
(N. Albert), [email protected]
(D. Merunka), pierre.valette-ﬂ[email protected]
(P. Valette-Florence). 1 Tel.: + 33 442 280 829. 2 Tel.: + 33 476 825 611. 0148-2963/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.12.009
2.1. Brand passion Hatﬁeld and Walster (1978, p. 9) deﬁne passion as “a state of intense longing for union with another. Reciprocated love (union with other) is associated with fulﬁllment and ecstasy …, a state of
N. Albert et al. / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 904–909
profound physiological arousal.” Baumeister and Bratslavsky (1999, p. 52) provide another deﬁnition and indicate that passion involves “strong feeling for the other person. These feeling are typically characterized by physiological arousal and the desire to be united with the other person in multiple senses.” Therefore, interpersonal passion implies the partner's presence in the person's thoughts, the idealization of both the partner and the relationship, sexual attraction, and a desire for reciprocity (Hatﬁeld, 1988). Some of these characteristics are irrelevant in a consumption context; consumers probably do not expect full reciprocity from the brand (Ahuvia, 2005b) though loyal and committed customers might anticipate better rewards from their brand partner (Palmatier, Dant, Grewal, & Evans, 2006). In a consumption context, brand passion is “a primarily affective, extremely positive attitude toward a speciﬁc brand that leads to emotional attachment and inﬂuences relevant behavioral factors” (Bauer et al., 2007, p. 2190), which “describes the zeal and enthusiasm features of consumer–brand relationships” (Keh, Pang, & Peng, 2007, p. 84) and “reﬂects intense and aroused positive feelings toward a brand” (Thomson, MacInnis, & Park, 2005, p. 80). A passionate consumer engages in an emotional relationship with the brand and misses the brand when unavailable (Matzler et al., 2007). Therefore brand passion appears to be an intense feeling of consumers toward the brand (Bauer et al., 2007; Hatﬁeld & Walster, 1978; Keh et al., 2007; Thomson et al., 2005). This feeling implies the consumer's willingness to form a close relationship with the partner (brand) and his or her physiological arousal from possessing or consuming that brand (Baumeister & Bratslavsky, 1999; Hatﬁeld & Walster, 1978). Brand passion encompasses two components: the presence of the brand in the consumer's mind and the idealization of the brand (Albert, Merunka, & Valette-Florence, 2008). Building on these developments, this study deﬁnes brand passion as a psychological construct comprised of excitation, infatuation, and obsession for a brand. Bauer et al. (2007) study the determinants of brand passion and ﬁnd inﬂuences of four brand characteristics: uniqueness, selfexpression ability, prestige, and hedonic features. Brand uniqueness is an antecedent of brand passion, though conceptually this element is considered as a dimension of consumer's affect (Ahuvia, 1993; Albert et al., 2008; Vincent, 2004). Brand passion also reﬂects individual factors, such as extraversion (Matzler et al., 2007). Yet other determinants, such as brand identiﬁcation or brand trust, remain ignored, despite their inﬂuences on consumers' feeling of affect toward the brand (Albert, Merunka, & Valette-Florence, 2010). 2.2. Relational concepts Previous developments indicate that a limitation of brand passion models is the lack of integration into the consumer–brand relationship paradigm (Fournier, 1998). Following Fournier's (1994, 1998) relationship quality theory, this study proposes that brand passion derives from other components (trust, self-connection, brand identiﬁcation) and can inﬂuence brand commitment. In contrast with prior models that decompose consumer brand relationships to identify these components, the present investigation seeks to establish relationships between these components. The focus centers on brand trust and brand identiﬁcation as determinants of brand passion; both concepts empirically determine brand affect. Brand commitment also appears in the proposed model, because this component is a consequence of brand affect (Carroll & Ahuvia, 2006; Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). Brand identiﬁcation is central to consumption (Escalas & Bettman, 2003; Fournier, 1998), as research into the importance of special possessions and consumers' self-concept already details (Belk, 1988; Kleine, Kleine, & Allen, 1995). Brand identiﬁcation refers to the brand's ability to deliver information (e.g., values, personality) about the consumer (Fournier, 1998) or the degree of integration of
the brand into the consumer's self-concept (Escalas & Bettman, 2003). Because a brand has a symbolic value (Belk, 1988; Keller, 1993), the brand can help consumers deﬁne themselves as persons. Several studies demonstrate the importance of brand and product identiﬁcation (Belk, 1988; Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Kleine et al., 1995), in that consumers buy brands with an image or personality congruent with their self-concepts (Sirgy, 1982). Brand trust is critical to relational marketing (Hess, 1995; Kennedy, Ferrel, & LeClair, 2000) as a determinant of brand commitment (Morgan & Hunt, 1994) and affect (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). This trust refers to consumers' expectations about the brand's reliability in a risky situation (Delgado-Ballester, Munuera-Aleman, & Yaguë-Guillén, 2001) or willingness to rely on the brand to perform stated functions (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). Trust can be unidimensional (Morgan & Hunt, 1994), bidimensional (Ganesan, 1994; Kumar, Scheer, & Steenkamp, 1995), or tridimensional (Hess, 1995). If multidimensional, brand trust comprises ability, honesty, and altruism. Finally, brand commitment represents the strength of the relationship between a consumer and a brand or organization (Fullerton, 2005; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Deﬁned as “an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship” (Moorman, Zaltman, & Deshpande, 1992, p. 316), commitment usually comprises two components, affective and cognitive (Fullerton, 2005; HarrisonWalker, 2001). Affective brand commitment rests at the heart of brand–consumer relationships, grounded in identiﬁcation, attachment, and shared values. This construct stems from a holistic judgment and does not depend directly on brand evaluations. Affective commitment may explain brand loyalty (Belk & Tumbat, 2005) and encourages customers to join brand communities (McAlexander, Schouten, & Koenig, 2002). Other studies investigate cognitive brand commitment (Anderson & Weitz, 1992; HarrisonWalker, 2001) and note that consumers prefer relationships with brands when they confront a lack of credible alternatives or develop positive brand personality judgments (Fullerton, 2005). Because brands have important meaning for consumers (Ahuvia, 2005a; Wallendorf & Arnould, 1988), switching brands implies a loss of associated meaning. For the present study, commitment represents a global construct that includes both components (Fullerton, 2005). 3. Research hypotheses Consumer brand relationship literature provides a foundation for the proposed model, which includes major brand relationship constructs (brand trust, brand identiﬁcation, and brand commitment), as well as major behavioral outcomes: WOM and willingness to pay a higher price for the brand. Fig. 1 depicts the proposed model. When a consumer identiﬁes with a brand, she or he develops positive feelings (Harrison-Walker, 2001). Passion for a brand then should develop if the brand plays an important role in the consumers' identity construction. Ahuvia (1993) demonstrates that an object or brand must appear to be part of the consumer to induce love. A loved object expresses the consumer's deeply held values and
Word of Mouth
H3 Brand Trust
Fig. 1. Research model.
Willingness to Pay More
N. Albert et al. / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 904–909
highlights the consumer's identiﬁcation with the brand (Carroll & Ahuvia, 2006). A self-expressive brand also encourages brand passion (Bauer et al., 2007). H1. Brand identiﬁcation relates positively to brand passion. Brand identiﬁcation and brand commitment should link, in that both represent a strong relationship between the consumer and the brand (Keh & Xie, 2009). Fullerton (2005) also indicates that brand commitment takes root from the consumer's identiﬁcation with the brand; in an organizational context, the shared values between a supplier and a ﬁrm increase the supplier's commitment to the ﬁrm (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). A company with high customer identiﬁcation also beneﬁts from customer loyalty (Keh & Xie, 2009). Finally, research into brand communities demonstrates that identiﬁcation with a brand community leads to brand commitment (Algesheimer, Dholakia, & Herrmann, 2005).
H7. Brand passion relates positively to word of mouth. If committed consumers pay premium prices for valued brands (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001; Keller, 1993: Palmatier et al., 2006; Reichheld, 1996) and engage in positive WOM activities (Dick & Basu, 1994), then the following hypotheses should receive empirical support. H8. Brand commitment relates positively to willingness to pay more for the brand. H9. Brand commitment relates positively to word of mouth. Bauer et al. (2007) study brand characteristics as antecedents of brand passion, and Matzler et al. (2007) focus on consumer characteristics. The proposed model instead concentrates on brand relationship antecedents and consequences of brand passion to extend existing knowledge of and understanding about brand passion.
H2. Brand identiﬁcation relates positively to brand commitment. In an interpersonal context, trust associates closely with affection (Fehr, 1988). Because brand trust has a positive inﬂuence on affective constructs such as brand affect (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001) and brand love (Albert et al., 2010), with brand passion conceptualized as a component of brand love (Thomson et al., 2005), this study extends the potential inﬂuence of brand trust to brand passion and proposes: H3. Brand trust relates positively to brand passion. Trust is an important antecedent of commitment in relational marketing because trust is involved in highly valued relationships (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Both trust and commitment increase the value of relationships for consumers. Because commitment represents a potential sacriﬁce and vulnerability on the part of the consumer, he or she may need to trust the brand before being committed (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999). H4. Brand trust has a positive inﬂuence on brand commitment. From a conceptual standpoint, a consumer who idealizes and feels excitement about or infatuation for a brand should prefer to maintain the relationship. Dick and Basu (1994) indicate that the consumer's emotional state in relation to the brand inﬂuences loyalty, and several studies demonstrate the inﬂuence of brand love or brand affect on brand loyalty (Carroll & Ahuvia, 2006; Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001; Thomson et al., 2005). Because commitment is an attitudinal component of brand loyalty (Oliver, 1999), brand passion likely inﬂuences brand commitment. H5. Brand passion relates positively to brand commitment. Regarding the consequences of brand passion, robust ﬁndings indicate that the more a consumer values a brand, the more willing he or she is to accept a price increase (Aaker, 1991). Brand passion similarly inﬂuences consumers' acceptance of a high price (Bauer et al., 2007; Thomson et al., 2005). H6. Brand passion relates positively to willingness to pay more for the brand. Consumers may become important spokespersons for brands (Dick & Basu, 1994; Fullerton, 2005; Harrison-Walker, 2001), especially those who value and develop positive affect for the brand, prompting positive WOM (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 2003). From a conceptual standpoint, a consumer's infatuation with or excitement about a brand leads to speaking about experiences with the brand (Bauer et al., 2007; Matzler et al., 2007).
4. Methodology and results The data collection relied on an online panel in France. Of the 1505 consumers who participated in the survey (mean age = 36 years), 79.2% had active employment, 8.7% were students, and 12.1% were unemployed. Participants indicated a favored brand, of their own choice, and responded to the survey relative to that brand. The measurement scales came from prior research: brand passion (Albert et al., 2008), brand identiﬁcation (Escalas & Bettman, 2003; Salerno, 2002), brand trust (Chow & O, 2006; Gurviez & Korchia, 2002), brand commitment (Fullerton, 2005), word of mouth, and willingness to pay a higher price (Carroll & Ahuvia, 2006; Cristau, 2006). All scales either were developed in or translated to French (translation/back-translation procedure). Table 1 presents the scales' reliability test results. The check for discriminant validity between the latent variables relied on a more formal test, based on covariance structure analysis. For each of the four concepts (trust, commitment, passion and identiﬁcation), sequential tests either allowed the correlation between concepts to be freely estimated or constrained the correlation to equal 1. As Table 2 shows, the best ﬁt systematically emerged for the model with freed correlations between latent variables. These tests conﬁrm that the concepts differ. Finally, we tested the ﬁt of the measurement and structural models separately through structural equation modeling (SEM) (Gerbing & Anderson, 1988). All ﬁt indexes are satisfactory both for the measurement and structural models (Table 3). The estimates of the model parameters used partial least square path modeling (PLS) because PLS is a distribution free analysis whereas SEM requires a multinomial distribution of data which was not fully respected here. The data ﬁt the model well; the relative goodness-of-ﬁt index (GoF; Tenenhaus, Esposito Vinzi, & Amato, 2004; Wetzels, Odekerken-Schröder, & van Hopper, 2009) equals .59. Wetzels et al. (2009) recently proposed that a GoF greater than .35 in the social science ﬁeld indicates very good ﬁt.
Table 1 Scale reliability. Scale
Reliability (Joreskog's Rho)
Trust Identiﬁcation Passion Commitment WOM Willingness to pay more
.921 .928 .908 .858 .872 .925
N. Albert et al. / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 904–909
Table 2 Discriminant validities. Latent variables
χ2 free model (ddf = 344)
χ2 constrained model (ddf = 345)
(Identiﬁcation)–(trust) (Commitment)–(trust) (Passion)–(trust) (Commitment)–(identiﬁcation) (Passion)–(identiﬁcation) (Passion)–(commitment)
.560 .768 .593 .884 .804 .810
4731 4731 4731 4731 4731 4731
7112 5216 6343 4909 5367 4831
2381 485 1612 177 636 100
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Brand commitment features three antecedents (adjusted R²= .756). The results reveal inﬂuences of passion (β = .361), trust (β = .304), and identiﬁcation (β = .341) in support of H5, H4, and H2, respectively. This study therefore indicates the inﬂuence of brand passion on the attitudinal component of brand loyalty (commitment). This result is managerially important, because passion inﬂuences consumers' willingness to maintain a long-term relationship with the brand. Furthermore, the inﬂuence of brand passion on brand commitment has a similar magnitude to that of brand identiﬁcation and brand trust. This ﬁnding demonstrates the importance of this new construct in the consumer–brand relationship literature.
passion and brand commitment). Not surprisingly, the direct link becomes signiﬁcant (β = .097, p b .05). Therefore, brand commitment fully mediates the relationship between brand passion and willingness to pay a higher price for that brand, in support of H8. The two WOM antecedents explain approximately 50% of its variance (adjusted R² = .498). Passion (β = .340) and commitment (β = .408) both inﬂuence positive WOM, in support of H7 and H9. The former path is consistent with previous results (Bauer et al., 2007; Matzler et al., 2007) and conﬁrms the managerial importance of brand passion. Fig. 2 displays these results graphically. Finally, a test of the stability of the model estimated the moderating effects of two consumer characteristics: extraversion (low/high) and gender. Both variables inﬂuence passion, in line with social psychology and marketing literature. First, extraversion inﬂuences passion for a partner (Davies, 2001; White, Hendrick, & Hendrick, 2004), because the attributes of an extraverted person (e.g., positive affect, sociability, self-disclosure) encourage such attitudes. In a marketing context, Matzler et al. (2007) similarly demonstrate a signiﬁcant impact of extraversion on brand passion. Second, gender has an impact, in that men tend to be more passionate, whereas women are more affectionate in their relationships (Davies, 2001; Traupmann & Hatﬁeld, 1981). A multi-group analysis, conducted to test the moderating effects of both gender and extraversion on the structural relationships, reveals the absence of signiﬁcant moderating effects for either variable. This absence suggests the model's stability across conditions (i.e., women or men, extraverts or introverts).
4.3. Behavioral outcomes
5. Discussion and conclusion
Brand passion does not directly inﬂuence consumers' acceptance of a higher price (path coefﬁcient = .054, non signiﬁcant) which does not support H6. The absence of a signiﬁcant link between brand passion and the price premium is surprising, because previous studies ﬁnd a signiﬁcant relationship (Bauer et al., 2007; Thomson et al., 2005). In this study, brand commitment encourages higher price acceptance. Therefore, brand passion appears to inﬂuence consumers' acceptance of a higher price, through the mediation of brand commitment (indirect effect = .36 × .57 = .21). To test the full mediation of brand commitment between brand passion and willingness to pay a higher price, another analysis considers the direct effect of brand passion on willingness to pay (in the absence of a link between brand
Research on brand passion is recent, offering limited insights into the antecedents and consequences of this construct. Whereas previous research focused on consumer and brand characteristics as drivers of brand passion (Bauer et al., 2007; Matzler et al., 2007), the proposed model establishes and tests a nomological network that features well-established consumer–brand relationship constructs, including both antecedents and consequences of brand passion. Brand passion depends on brand identiﬁcation and, to a lesser degree, on brand trust. This result seems surprising in light of social psychology research that tends to associate trust with affection more than passion (Hatﬁeld, 1988). By nature, trust requires time, interaction, and
4.1. Antecedents of brand passion Brand identiﬁcation and brand trust explain approximately 60% of consumers' passion for a brand (adjusted R² = .594). Brand identiﬁcation has the greatest inﬂuence (β = .640), followed by brand trust (β = .207), in support of H1 and H3. Although the inﬂuence of brand trust is signiﬁcant, this antecedent is three times less important than brand identiﬁcation. The congruence between the brand and a consumer's personality or values seems crucial for the creation of brand passion. However, the inﬂuence of brand trust on brand passion is a new result that implies trust might be important for passion to develop. 4.2. Antecedents of brand commitment
Table 3 Fit indexes of the structural and measurement models. Fit indexes
RMSEA NCI McDonald GFI AGFI NFI Bentler–Bonett NNFI Bentler–Bonett Rho Bollen Delta Bollen Chi-Square ddf p value
.071 .827 .952 .923 .955 .945 .936 .961 4691.0 349.0 0.000
.073 .807 .946 .919 .950 .943 .935 .957 4731.00 344.0 0.000
Word of Mouth
0.341 Brand Trust
Fig. 2. Results (path coefﬁcients).
Willingness to Pay More
N. Albert et al. / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 904–909
deep knowledge of the partner; passion usually corresponds to a phase in a love relationship when partners have limited knowledge of each other. This newly revealed relationship between brand trust and brand passion may reﬂect the speciﬁc nature of passion in the context of brand relationships though. Whereas interpersonal relationships are bidirectional, brand–consumer relationships tend to be more unidirectional (Fournier, 1998). Consumers do not expect a brand to reject or betray them (Ahuvia, 2005b) and can therefore build trust in the brand more quickly. Whereas many interactions must take place before a person can trust a romantic partner, a few interactions may be sufﬁcient to develop trust in a brand. Therefore, trust may develop early in a brand relationship context and inﬂuence the consumer's passion for the brand. This study conﬁrms the importance of brand identiﬁcation in terms of the inﬂuence on brand passion. This sense of identiﬁcation, from the consumer toward the brand, appears to be critical for establishing a passionate feeling for the brand. In a consumption context, previous research has underlined the importance of identiﬁcation for the consumer's affect toward a brand (Ahuvia, 2005b; Ahuvia, 1993; Bauer et al., 2007). These results clearly indicate the importance of the brand in terms of reﬂecting, participating in, or creating consumers' identity. Regarding consequences, brand passion inﬂuences brand commitment and positive WOM but does not directly affect willingness to pay. Because brand passion entails idealization and excitement about the brand, a passionate consumer likely wants to share this excitement. Sharing passion for a brand might involve convincing others to feel the same way or justifying a passionate relationship that seems difﬁcult for others to understand. Positive WOM thus emerges because speaking to others about a passion-inducing brand is an important part of the identity construction process of such consumers (Holt, 1997). The impact of brand passion on brand commitment is in line with ﬁndings by Thomson et al. (2005), who establish the impact of passion on a declarative measure of brand loyalty, and Bauer et al. (2007), who ﬁnd an effect of brand passion on declarative measures of repeat purchase. Therefore, passion for a brand leads to a desire to maintain a long-term relationship with that brand. The idealization of the brand and its obsessive presence in the consumer's mind explains why the consumer wants to maintain a relationship. Social psychologists propose that passion links to various intense emotions (Hatﬁeld, 1988); a passionate consumer similarly feels intense emotions for his or her brand (Belk et al., 2003). The emotional beneﬁts of the brand also inﬂuence the desire to maintain the relationship. Finally, the consumer's passion for a brand reﬂects the value he or she obtains from that brand, which limits the number of credible alternatives. The lack of a direct effect of passion on willingness to pay more for the brand may arise because a passionate consumer is not prepared to accept major changes to the brand's characteristics or policies, including prices. From a conceptual standpoint, passion implies that the consumer does not expect any major changes, because his or her passion is for the brand as is. A change in the brand's price, especially if unexpected, may conﬂict with the consumer's idealization. Many examples of such behaviors exist, including the reactions of passionate consumers to the introduction of New Coke or the reactions to the change in the Starbucks logo. From a managerial perspective, this study indicates that communication that highlights the brand's values or personality may offer beneﬁts by inﬂuencing consumers' sense of identiﬁcation. Generally, identiﬁcation generated through multiple paths (e.g., advertising, packaging, brand name, style, retail outlets) creates favorable conditions for passion for the brand. Because brand trust also inﬂuences brand passion, brand managers should ensure the brand's ability to deliver on promises (e.g., quality, service, innovation) and work to develop the brand's images of conﬁdence and benevolence.
The concept of brand passion remains new, and a good understanding of the key determinants and outcomes demands more research. The present research does not test all possible consequences of brand passion. Models of brand passion could integrate other constructs that likely relate to passion, such as impulsive buying or acceptance of congruent brand extensions. Other research could study the consequences of brand passion if the brand were to betray the expectations of the passionate consumer (e.g., unexpected brand extensions, delivery or quality failures). Would brand passion save the relationship, or would unexpected negative events disrupt the passionate relationship? Finally, researchers should investigate potential boundary conditions. Passion for a brand is probably a feeling that few consumers embrace for only a very limited number of brands. Therefore, establishing the conditions for passion (e.g., types of brands, product categories, consumer characteristics) offers an interesting direction for further research.
References Aaker David A. Managing brand equity. New York: The Free Press; 1991. Ahuvia Aaron C. Beyond the extended self: loved objects and consumers' identity narratives. The Journal of Consumer Research 2005a;32(1):171–85. Ahuvia Aaron C. The love prototype revisited: a qualitative exploration of contemporary folk psychology. Working Paper. University of Michigan-Dearborn; 2005b. Ahuvia, Aaron C., I love it! Towards an unifying theory of love across divers love objects, Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, 1993. Albert Noel, Merunka Dwight, Valette-Florence Pierre. The love feeling toward a brand: concept and measurement. Advances in Consumer Research 2008;36:300–7. Albert Noel, Merunka Dwight, Valette-Florence Pierre. Brand love: antecedents and consequences. Proceedings of the Consumer Brand Relationship Colloquium; 2010 [Florida]. Algesheimer René, Dholakia Utopal M, Herrmann Andreas. The social inﬂuence of brand community: evidence from European car clubs. The Journal of Marketing 2005;69(3):19–34. Anderson Erin, Weitz Barton. The use of pledges to build and sustain commitment in distribution channels. Journal of Marketing Research 1992;29(1):18–34. Bauer Hans H, Heinrich Daniel, Marin Isabelle. How to create high emotional consumer-brand relationships? The causalities of brand passion. Proceedings of the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference. University of Otago; 2007. p. 2189–98. Baumeister Roy F, Bratslavsky Ellen. Passion, intimacy and time: passionate love as a function of change in intimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Review 1999;3(1):47–67. Belk Russel W. Possessions and the extended self. The Journal of Consumer Research 1988;15(3):139–61. Belk Russel F, Ger Güliz, Askegaard Soren. The ﬁre of desire: a multiple inquiry into consumer passion. The Journal of Consumer Research 2003;30(3):326–51. Belk Russel W, Tumbat Gülnar. The cult of Macintosh. Consumption, Markets and Culture 2005;8(3):205–17. Carroll Barbara A, Ahuvia Aaron C. Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love. Marketing Letters 2006;17:79–89. Chaudhuri Arjun, Holbrook Morris. The chain effects of brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. The Journal of Marketing 2001;65(2): 81–93. Chow Wing S, O Angie NK. A study of trust in e-shopping before and after ﬁrst-hand experience is gained. The Journal of Computer Information Systems 2006;46(4): 125–30. Cristau Cecile. L'attachement à une marque: conjonction de la dépendance et de l'amitié. Revue française du Marketing 2006;207(2/5):5-24. Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly, Rochberg-Halton Eugene. The meaning of things. London: Cambridge University Press; 1981. Davies Martin F. EPQ correlates of love styles. Personality and Individual Differences 2001;20(2):257–9. Delgado-Ballester Elena, Munuera-Aleman José Luis, Yaguë-Guillén Maria Jésus. Development and validation of a brand trust scale. International Journal of Market Research 2001;45(1):35–53. Dick Alan S, Basu Kunal. Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1994;22(2):99-113. Driscoll Richard, Davies Keith E, Lipetz Milton E. Parental interference and romantic love: the Romeo and Juliette effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1972;24(1):1-10. Escalas Jennifer E, Bettman James R. You are what they eat: the inﬂuence of reference groups on consumers' connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2003;13(3):339–48. Fehr Beverley. Prototype analysis of the concepts of love and commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1988;55(4):557–79. Fournier, Susan. A person-brand relationship framework for strategic brand management, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Miami, Fl, 1994. Fournier Susan. Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research. The Journal of Consumer Research 1998;24(4):343–73.
N. Albert et al. / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 904–909 Fullerton Gordon. The impact of brand loyalty commitment on loyalty to retail service brands. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 2005;22(2):97-110. Ganesan Shankar. Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing 1994;58(2):1-19. Garbarino Ellen, Johnson Mark S. The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. The Journal of Marketing 1999;63(2):70–87. Gerbing David, Anderson James. An update paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research 1988;25(2):186–92. Gurviez Patricia, Korchia Mickael. Proposition d'une echelle de mesure multidimensionnelle de la conﬁance dans la marque. Recherche et Applications en Marketing 2002;17(3):41–62. Harrison-Walker Jean L. The measurement of word-of-mouth communication and an investigation of service quality and customer commitment as potential antecedents. Journal of Service Research 2001;4(1):60–75. Hatﬁeld Elaine C. Passionate and companionate love. In: Sternberg RJ, Barnes ML, editors. The Psychology of Love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1988. p. 191–217. Hatﬁeld E, Walster E. A new look at love. Lantham, MA: University Press of America; 1978. Hess Jeff S. Construction and assessment of a scale to measure consumer trust. Proceedings of the American Marketing Association; 1995. p. 20–5. Holt DB. Post-structuralist lifestyle analysis: conceptualizing the social patterning of consumption in postmodernity. The Journal of Consumer Research 1997;23: 326–50. Keh Hean T, Pang Jun, Peng Siquing. Understanding and measuring brand love. Proceedings of the Association of Consumer Psychology; 2007. Keh Hean T, Xie Yie. Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: the role of trust, identiﬁcation and commitment. Industrial Marketing Management 2009;38(7):732–42. Keller Kevin L. Conceptualizing, measuring and managing customer-based brand equity. The Journal of Marketing 1993;57(1):1-22. Keller Kevin L. Strategic brand management: building, measuring, and managing brand equity. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2003. Kennedy Mary S, Ferrel Linda K, LeClair Debbie T. Consumer's trust of salesperson and manufacturer: an empirical study. Journal of Business Research 2000;51(1): 73–86. Kleine Susan S, Kleine III Robert E, Allen Chris T. How is a possession me or not me? Characterizing types and an antecedent of material possession attachment. The Journal of Consumer Research 1995;22(3):327–43. Kumar Nirmalya, Scheer Lisa, Steenkamp Jan-Benedict. The effects of perceived interdependence on dealer attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research 1995;32(3):348–56.
Matzler Kurt, Pichler Elisabeth A, Hemetsberger Andrea. Who is spreading the word? The positive inﬂuence of extraversion on consumer passion and brand evangelism. Proceedings of the American Marketing Association; 2007. McAlexander J, Schouten W, Koenig H. Building brand community. The Journal of Marketing 2002;66(1):38–54. Moorman Christine, Zaltman Gerald, Deshpande Rohit. Relationships between providers and users of market research: the dynamic of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research 1992;29(3):314–28. Morgan Robert M, Hunt Shelby D. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. The Journal of Marketing 1994;58(3):20–38. Oliver Richard L. Whence consumer loyalty? The Journal of Marketing 1999;63:33–44. Palmatier Robert W, Dant Rajiv P, Grewal Dhruv, Evans Kenneth R. Factors inﬂuencing the effectiveness of a relationship marketing: a meta analysis. The Journal of Marketing 2006;70(4):136–53. Park Whan C, MacInnis Deborah J, Priester Joseph. Beyond attitude: attachment and consumer behavior. Seoul Journal of Business 2006;12(2):3-36. Reichheld Frederik. The loyalty effect. Cambridge: Harvard Business School; 1996. Salerno Annabel. Le rôle de la congruence des valeurs marque-consommateur et des identiﬁcations sociales de clientèle dans l'identiﬁcation de la marque. Proceedings of the Conference of the French Association of Marketing; 2002. p. 399–427. Schouten John W, McAlexander James H. Subcultures of consumption: an ethnography of the new bikers. The Journal of Consumer Research 1995;22(1):43–61. Sirgy Joseph. Self-concept in consumer behavior: a critical review. The Journal of Consumer Research 1982;9(3):287–300. Tenenhaus Michel, Esposito Vinzi V, Amato Silvano. A global goodness-of-ﬁt index for PLS structural equation modelling? Proceedings of Atti dela XLII Riunione Scientiﬁca della Societa Italiana di Statistica; 2004. p. 739–42. Thomson Matthew, MacInnis Deborah J, Park Whan C. The ties that bind: measuring the strength of consumers' emotional attachment to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2005;15(1):77–91. Traupmann Jane, Hatﬁeld Elaine. Love and its effect on mental and physical health. In: Fogel RW, Hattield E, Shanas E, editors. Aging, Stability and Change in the Family. Academic Press; 1981. p. 253–74. Vincent L. Comment devient-on amoureux? Paris: Odile Jacob; 2004. Wallendorf Melanie, Arnould Eric J. My favorite things: a cross-cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness and social linkage. The Journal of Consumer Research 1988;14(4):531–47. Wetzels Martin, Odekerken-Schröder Gaby, van Hopper Claudi. Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly 2009;33(1):177–95. White Jason K, Hendrick Susan S, Hendrick Clyde. Big ﬁve personality variables and relationship construct. Personality and Individual Differences 2004;37(7):1519–30.