Retired

Product and brand familiarity have an important role in consumer choice behaviour and they have been equated with knowledge and experience Consumers having high and low familiarity utilized brand information (an extrinsic cue) in their evaluations, whereas moderately familiar consumers used intrinsic cues (product attributes) in evaluating products. The question of whether familiarity moderates the country-of-origin (COO) effect is a valid one. In this present paper, we attempt to provide additional evidence as to how familiarity with products, brands and countries moderates consumer evaluation of brand/country alliances. Specifically, we concentrate on the brand leveraging process identified by Keller (2003) applied to the effect of familiarity on country/brand alliances.

Preferences for similarly designed consumer products, evaluated blind and branded and also with and without prices, were tested in a consumer setting. The consumer's perceptual experience led to preference of the well-crafted high-priced option. This preference was enhanced by priming consumers with background information about the brand, perhaps causing the subjects to guess which choice was the well-known brand before evaluation. Preferences for that choice increased again when brand names were visible during evaluation. When actual prices were added to the evaluations, preferences for the well-known brand were very robust to high prices, indicating the strength of the brand name. Using the least preferred option and the lowest price as an anchor, the consumers' price threshold to pay for the preferred design and the brand name was computed. Attempts to explain and predict individual differences of choices using measures of inherent design acumen, prior experience, and purchasing behavior were largely unsuccessful.

It is widely accepted that the human brain has limited capacity for perceptual stimuli and consumers' visual attention, when searching for a particular product or brand in a grocery store, should then be limited by the boundaries of their own perceptual capacity. In this exploratory study, we examine the relationship between abundant in-store stimuli and limited human perceptual capacity. Specifically, we test the influence of package design features on visual attention. Data was collected through two eyetracking experiments, one in a grocery store using wireless eye-tracking equipment, and another in a lab setting. Findings show that consumers have fragmented visual attention during grocery shopping, and that their visual attention is simultaneously influenced and disrupted by the shelf display. Physical design features such as shape and contrast dominate the initial phase of searching. Time pressure and familiarity with the grocery store are studied and discussed. (J. Clement), tk.marktg@cbs.dk (T. Kristensen), kjell.gronhaug@nhh.no (K. Grønhaug). 1 Phone: þ 45 3815 2131; fax: þ45 3815 2101. 2 Phone: þ 47 9597 8299; fax: þ47 5595 9460.

It is widely accepted that the human brain has limited capacity for perceptual stimuli and consumers' visual attention, when searching for a particular product or brand in a grocery store, should then be limited by the boundaries of their own perceptual capacity. In this exploratory study, we examine the relationship between abundant in-store stimuli and limited human perceptual capacity. Specifically, we test the influence of package design features on visual attention. Data was collected through two eyetracking experiments, one in a grocery store using wireless eye-tracking equipment, and another in a lab setting. Findings show that consumers have fragmented visual attention during grocery shopping, and that their visual attention is simultaneously influenced and disrupted by the shelf display. Physical design features such as shape and contrast dominate the initial phase of searching. Time pressure and familiarity with the grocery store are studied and discussed. (J. Clement), tk.marktg@cbs.dk (T. Kristensen), kjell.gronhaug@nhh.no (K. Grønhaug). 1 Phone: þ 45 3815 2131; fax: þ45 3815 2101. 2 Phone: þ 47 9597 8299; fax: þ47 5595 9460.

A general view, often presented in a political context, suggests investment in design may create societal benefits, like economic growth, employment, competitiveness, and convenience. Conducted at a general level with aggregate variables, such measurements provide very limited insights and can even be misleading. A different approach takes a particular view of a designed artefact, object, system or service. Addressing the benefactors, users and consumers, we may be able to reach an individual value, which in turn may be aggregated to assess a market, KPI or similar. How does design express value? And how can we measure the value? To design is to create value for somebody. However, the value depends on who judges it and their and their personal values. According to John Heskett; “Design, stripped to its essence, can be defined as the human capacity to shape and make our environment in ways without precedent in nature that serves our needs and gives meaning to our lives”. (Heskett, 20...

The distinctive identity of a brand has enormous commercial importance. When a competitor copies that identity with a cheaper inferior product, it can jeopardize the heavy investment in creating and designing products. The identification of the original versus a plagiarized knockoff is a critical issue in the marketplace. However; even when the identity is clear; a remaining issue is whether consumers are willing to pay a premium price for the original product. We use conjoint analysis to investigate the identification and valuation of an original vs. a copy. The willingness to pay for the original depends on the competence or knowledge of the consumer. We suggest ways of identifying “trade dress” by distinguishing among the utilitarian, systemic or symbolic aspects of a product.

A general view, often presented in a political context, suggests investment in design may create societal benefits, like economic growth, employment, competitiveness, and convenience. Conducted at a general level with aggregate variables, such measurements provide very limited insights and can even be misleading. A different approach takes a particular view of a designed artefact, object, system or service. Addressing the benefactors, users and consumers, we may be able to reach an individual value, which in turn may be aggregated to assess a market, KPI or similar. How does design express value? And how can we measure the value? To design is to create value for somebody. However, the value depends on who judges it and their and their personal values. According to John Heskett; “Design, stripped to its essence, can be defined as the human capacity to shape and make our environment in ways without precedent in nature that serves our needs and gives meaning to our lives”. (Heskett, 20...