Abstract

۱ | INTRODUCTION

۲ | HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT

۳ | METHODS

۴ | RESULTS

۵ | GENERAL DISCUSSION

۶ | IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY

۷ | IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

۸ | LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

۹ | CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

Abstract

Drawing on construal level theory, basic psychological need-candidate theory and gender schema theory, this study aims to develop a multilevel framework that explains how nostalgic brand positioning increases brand equity via nostalgic brand relationship dimensions (i.e., brand passion, brand local iconness and brand authenticity). Moreover, we posit that brand innovativeness and customer gender are important boundary conditions for these indirect effects of nostalgic brand positioning on brand equity through the nostalgic brand relationship dimensions. To this end, a convenience sample of N = 1,171 respondents was used to inspect the hypotheses in settings relating to the fast-moving consumer goods industry. Results show a positive indirect effect of nostalgic brand positioning on brand equity through brand passion, brand local iconness and brand authenticity. Moreover, moderation results reveal that the effect of nostalgic brand positioning on brand passion and brand authenticity was more salient when brand innovativeness was lower; however, for brand authenticity, the effect was more pronounced when brand innovativeness was higher. Similarly, findings relating to the moderation effect of customer gender indicate that nostalgic brand positioning has a greater effect on brand passion and brand authenticity for females than for their male counterparts. Conversely, for brand iconness, the effect was equally important for both males and females. The practical and theoretical implications of these findings are provided and limitations are acknowledged.

۱ | INTRODUCTION

Brand equity is one of the most recognized marketing concepts and an essential component of brand success (Rana & Paul, 2020; Yoon & Oh, 2016). Each year firms allocate a huge budget for building, managing, measuring and defending their brand equity (Ahmad & Guzmán, 2020; Paul, 2019a). In academic literature, brand equity was established in the 1980s; since then, it has been widely investigated from both consumer and company perspectives (Paul, 2019b). Regardless of diverging perspectives, brand equity is defined as the total value created by the brand (Bailey & Ball, 2006). Similarly, the prominent scholar such as Aaker (1991) established and defined the well-recognized conceptualizations of brand equity as ‘a set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name, and symbol that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or that firm’s customers’ (p. 15).