消费者对领先品牌和模仿者的不同神经活动和态度

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics Pub Date : 2018-09-01 DOI:10.1037/npe0000077
Xuefeng Zhang, F. Guo, Sen Li, Ming-ming Li, Han Chen
{"title":"消费者对领先品牌和模仿者的不同神经活动和态度","authors":"Xuefeng Zhang, F. Guo, Sen Li, Ming-ming Li, Han Chen","doi":"10.1037/npe0000077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Along with the rapidly growing world economy, copycats emerge everywhere. With visual similarity, copycats may mislead consumers to incorrectly link the copycats to familiar and leading brands. Copycat practices are serious challenges for the leading brands, consumers, and even imitators. In this study, the cognitive differences between a leading brand and a copycat brand were investigated subconsciously by using event-related potentials. Using a questionnaire on the leading brand and the copycat brand, consumers’ attitudes to perceived value of the brand, brand attitude, and purchase intentions were also studied. Electroencephalogram and survey results showed significant differences between the two brands. Consumers’ perceived value, brand attitude, and purchase intention of the leading brand were higher than the copycat brand. The copycat brand elicited a higher P160 and N240 at the front-central area and a higher P240 and lower P400 at the central-parietal area. We supposed that the amplitude variation in event-related potentials expressed different neural activity with regard to the target identification, cognitive control, automatic attention, and categorization mechanism between the original and the counterfeit. This study contributes to understanding the consumers’ different neural activity with regard to the original and the counterfeit and provides a feasible neuroscience-based method to perfect present theories and methodologies on issues concerning imitation. Exploration of the differences between the leading and copycat brands can help companies promote their brand and develop more reasonable marketing strategies.","PeriodicalId":45695,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics","volume":"13 1","pages":"166–181"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consumers’ Different Neural Activity and Attitude to the Leading Brand and Imitator\",\"authors\":\"Xuefeng Zhang, F. Guo, Sen Li, Ming-ming Li, Han Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/npe0000077\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Along with the rapidly growing world economy, copycats emerge everywhere. With visual similarity, copycats may mislead consumers to incorrectly link the copycats to familiar and leading brands. Copycat practices are serious challenges for the leading brands, consumers, and even imitators. In this study, the cognitive differences between a leading brand and a copycat brand were investigated subconsciously by using event-related potentials. Using a questionnaire on the leading brand and the copycat brand, consumers’ attitudes to perceived value of the brand, brand attitude, and purchase intentions were also studied. Electroencephalogram and survey results showed significant differences between the two brands. Consumers’ perceived value, brand attitude, and purchase intention of the leading brand were higher than the copycat brand. The copycat brand elicited a higher P160 and N240 at the front-central area and a higher P240 and lower P400 at the central-parietal area. We supposed that the amplitude variation in event-related potentials expressed different neural activity with regard to the target identification, cognitive control, automatic attention, and categorization mechanism between the original and the counterfeit. This study contributes to understanding the consumers’ different neural activity with regard to the original and the counterfeit and provides a feasible neuroscience-based method to perfect present theories and methodologies on issues concerning imitation. Exploration of the differences between the leading and copycat brands can help companies promote their brand and develop more reasonable marketing strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45695,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"166–181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/npe0000077\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/npe0000077","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

随着世界经济的快速增长,模仿者随处可见。由于视觉上的相似性,模仿者可能会误导消费者错误地将模仿者与熟悉的领先品牌联系起来。对领先品牌、消费者甚至模仿者来说,模仿行为都是严峻的挑战。本研究采用事件相关电位的方法,在潜意识中研究了领先品牌和模仿品牌的认知差异。通过对主导品牌和模仿品牌的问卷调查,研究了消费者对品牌感知价值的态度、品牌态度和购买意愿。脑电图和调查结果显示两个品牌之间存在显著差异。消费者对主导品牌的感知价值、品牌态度和购买意愿均高于模仿品牌。仿造品牌在前中央区引起较高的P160和N240,在中顶区引起较高的P240和较低的P400。我们认为,事件相关电位的振幅变化表达了不同的神经活动在目标识别、认知控制、自动注意和真伪分类机制方面的差异。本研究有助于了解消费者对正品和仿冒品的不同神经活动,并为完善现有仿冒问题的理论和方法提供可行的神经科学方法。探索领先品牌和山寨品牌之间的差异,可以帮助企业推广自己的品牌,制定更合理的营销策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Consumers’ Different Neural Activity and Attitude to the Leading Brand and Imitator
Along with the rapidly growing world economy, copycats emerge everywhere. With visual similarity, copycats may mislead consumers to incorrectly link the copycats to familiar and leading brands. Copycat practices are serious challenges for the leading brands, consumers, and even imitators. In this study, the cognitive differences between a leading brand and a copycat brand were investigated subconsciously by using event-related potentials. Using a questionnaire on the leading brand and the copycat brand, consumers’ attitudes to perceived value of the brand, brand attitude, and purchase intentions were also studied. Electroencephalogram and survey results showed significant differences between the two brands. Consumers’ perceived value, brand attitude, and purchase intention of the leading brand were higher than the copycat brand. The copycat brand elicited a higher P160 and N240 at the front-central area and a higher P240 and lower P400 at the central-parietal area. We supposed that the amplitude variation in event-related potentials expressed different neural activity with regard to the target identification, cognitive control, automatic attention, and categorization mechanism between the original and the counterfeit. This study contributes to understanding the consumers’ different neural activity with regard to the original and the counterfeit and provides a feasible neuroscience-based method to perfect present theories and methodologies on issues concerning imitation. Exploration of the differences between the leading and copycat brands can help companies promote their brand and develop more reasonable marketing strategies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
28.60%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Self-reported and electroencephalogram responses to evaluate sponsorship congruence efficacy. Is geographical location really dead in the online world? An event-related potentials study. Motivating risky choices increases risk taking. Supplemental Material for From Genes to Performance: Dopaminergic Modulation of Decision Making in a Stock Market Simulation Supplemental Material for Motivating Risky Choices Increases Risk Taking
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1