服装品牌策略：品牌效应对广告的影响【外文翻译】

外文翻译
原文
Banding Strategies:Influence of Nrand Personality on
Adertising Response
Material Source: Minoo FarhangmehrUniversidade do Minho, Escola de Economia e Gestão, Gualtar, 4710 Braga, Portugal,
Author: António Azevedo, Assistant Professor,
This paper examines the influence of brand personality on advertising response in fashion clothing branding context. Print ad stimuli of 30 fashion clothing brands with different nationalities and different expected personalities were evaluated by young students (16-25 yearsold) in terms of Brand Personality Scale of Aaker (1997). The self -congruence implications arediscussed. From the brand builder perspective, some benchmarks brands were identified. Theresults should help the understanding of antecedents and consequences of brand personalityprocessing.
Keywords: Brand personality, fashion clothing branding, advertising, self -congruence, youthmarket.
Introduction
At the beginning of the third millennium brand differentiation based in tangible attributes is d ifficult to achieve.therefore concepts like “customer-brand relationship”(Blackston 1993),‘brand magic”（Beckman,2002）rise their importance in brand building literature.the key for success seems to be in the emotional and self-expression benefits that brands provide to their customers.In thia context,brand personality and self-concept congruence(shortly designated by self-congruence),has a decisive role in brand adoption and decision-making processes.
In this paper we will first look at literature review of the relevant conpcepts like brand personality and self-congruence in branding advertising precessing context.Then we discuss the results of an experimental atudy that was conducted in order to assess the brand personality profile of 30 fashion clothing brands.the
implications of the validation of the hypotheses that postulate the influence of self-congruence and involvement upon advertising response are also highlighted.
Brand personality
Brand personality is defined as “the set of human characteristics associated with a brand”(Aaker,1997,p347).According to Johar and Sirgy(1991,p23)the brand image building strategy implies the definition of a brand personality(ideal or real)is also an underlying concept of relationship marketing studied by blackstin(1993,1995)and Founmier(1998)which is based on the self-image congruence notion introduced by Dolich(1969)and further studied by Martin and Bellizi(1982)and Sirgy(1982),amongst others.
Brand personality is an important source of imagery a soft attribute of image(Biel 1993,1997).According ti Aaker(1996)brand personality cancreate brand equity according ti three models:self-expression model,relationship basis model and functional benefit representation model.Brand personality is also a differentiation factor that is used as a beuristic cue under low motivation,Which can also bias brand attribute information (Chaiken and Maheswaran,1994)
To measure brand personality,reseachers may use different methods often referred to in the literature:personification thchniques(Lannon,1993),the Zaltman’s Metaphor Elicitation Technique-ZMET(Zaltman and Higie,1993)or the IMPSYS model9HEYLEN,1990,Heylen et al,1995)
Hypotheses
In this study,the researchers wish to confirm the results obtained by Sirgy(1982),Johar et al.(1991),Ericsen and sirgy (1992),Shank and Langmeyer(1994),Hong and Zinkhan(1995),SIRGY ET AL.(1997)and Hogg et al(2000)that supported the image congruence hypothesis,Therefore personality congruence hypothesis was formulated:
H1-Consumers will have a more favourable response (in terms of attiture towards the ad,attitude toward the brand and purchasing intention)toward a print ad of a brand with a personality congruent with their(ideal)self-concept.
Because the moderating influence of involvement is significant as suggested by Andrews et al.(1990),Browne et al.(1997a,1997b),amongst others,a second hypothesis was stated.
H2-Comsumers will have a more favaourabe response (in terma of attitude toward the ad,sttitude toward the brand and purchasing intention)in a higer involvement context.Subject A convenience sample of 156 students of 16-25 yeara
old(66%female),comprised of two groups of 78 subject,groupA,collected from a high school(16-19 years old),and group B,collecyed from a university(20-25years old).
Measures
First,subjects were invited to provide the following data,the ten most important clothes buying decision factors(for example,prise,clothing,quality,brand image,brand personality ,fashion,store image,magazine ads,clothing style,country of origin,use of endorsers in sdvertising,sponsorship,catalogue,clothing physical characteristicsmeasiness to find and fashion shows)and fashion clothing brands usually wom by the subhecy or by the people of this age segment(16-25 years old),which is an insirenct measure of knowledge and spontaneous brand awareness of the brands evaluated in this study.
Using a five-point Likert scale (1= not at all descriptive, 5= extremely descriptive), subjects rated the extent to which the 42 Brand Personality Scale traits (translated and adapted to Portuguese language)described each brand presented. The self-concept and brand personality congruence as measured with an adaptation of the method suggested by Sirgy et al (1997). Article Designation: Scholarly the sample subjects, style (30.8%) which is abrand personality input, quality (25.0%), physical characteristics (16.0%) and price(14.7%) were the top buying decision factors. Hence, in terms of Shim and Bickle(1994) classification of ten psychographic actors, the respondents could be labelled aspractical/conservative users of clothing PCUC) more than symbolic/instrumental sers (SIUC) or apathetic users. Subjects spontaneously cited 178 ifferent clothing brands that they normally wear hich means that this category is veryfragmented in terms of mental brand positioning. Levi’s was the top-of-mind brand31.1%) and also leads the ranking ofbrand awareness (9.6%), followed by Zara.
Sisley, Guess and Zara profiles presents two predominant components and therefore they were designated as Excitement-Sophistication ESo) brands. Following the same criterion. Nike may be classified as Excitement-Competence (EC) while Neilis an Excitement- Ruggedness brand (ER). Calvin Klein, Lanidor, Origem and La Redoute ere included in Sophistication-Excitement (SoE) group while the Competence (C) group comprehend the brands Hugo Boss, Massimo Dutti, Alto Colection and Rosa & Teixeira.The brand personality evaluation of Macmoda showed a Sincerity-Sophistication profile (SiSo). On other hand Coronel Tapiocca was the only brand perceived as Ruggedness (R) while Modelo did not have any
brand personality dimension with mean score above 3 (sincerity is the highest score).
Recommendations and suggestions for future research
Some methodological limitations must be considered: the use of a convenience sample; unknown bias in pictorial stimuli processing or in questionnaire application. On other hand, the Brand Personality Scale may be adapted to European contextas pointed out by the result of the adaptation ade by Koebel and Ladwein (1999) to theFrench market, that suggested a different spectrum of brand personality dimensions. Self-concept and brand personality congruence is moderated by several psychographic variables like self-monitoring(Snyder, 1974; Graeff, 1996; Browne and Kaldenberg, 1997a, 1997b; Hogg et al, 2000), social values (Rose et al, 1994), fashion leadership (Goldsmith, Flynn and Moore, 1996), susceptibility to interpersonal influence (Bearden, Netemeyer and Teel, or shopping orientations (Sproles and Kendal, 1986). The choice of brand and style is also related with external social values like affiliation, conformity or group identification (Rose et al, 1994). Therefore we think that is important to assess these consumer characteristics in order to identify clusters with a very clear profile, as suggested by Shim and Bickle (1994).
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by a doctoral scholarship of Fundação da Ciência e Tecnologia of Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia of Portuguese Government. authors, which aims to study clothing branding strategies moderated by a numbern of relevant demographic, psychographic, and situational variables. From a brand builder perspective, brand personality is animportant input variable, normally considered in branding strategy models (Kapferer, 1991; Keller, 1993; Aaker, 1996).The understanding of branding advertisingAt the beginning of the third millennium,brand differentiation based in tangible attributes is difficult to achieve. Therefore examine the influence of self-concept and brand personality congruence on youth advertising response this paper is part of a doctoral research project,developed by recessing and buying decision-making is essential for the definition of customer oriented branding strategies.
More recently,Aaker(1997)developed a measurement scale-the Brand Personality simensions and 15 faceys,sincerity(reliable,intelligent and successful),and ruggedness(outdoorsy and tough).
The notion of self-image congruence states that c onsumer preferences are
determined by a cognitive matching between consumer self-image and brand image. Johar and Sirgy (1991) suggested two alternative routes to persuasion: a) self-congruity,defined as the match between the product’s value-expressive attributes (product-userimage) and the audience’s self-concept; b)and functional congruity, defined as the match between the beliefs of product tilitarian attributes (performance related)and the audience’s referent attributes. Self-congruence is the main route used inwhat Rossiter and Percy (1987) refer to as“transformational advertising”, in contrast with functional congruity which is often used i n “informational advertising”. Fashion clothing is a product category with higher levels of conspicuousness and product involvement, implying that self-congruence is the dominant persuasion route.
Clothing is a non-verbal communication form of the individual personality and self-image (Thomas et al., 1991). The symbolic,self-expression and socialisation roles of fashion clothing brands (Belleau et al., 1992).
译文
服装品牌策略：品牌效应对广告的影响
资料来源: 中国期刊网作者：安东尼奥•阿泽维多摘要：本文探讨了不同时尚服装品牌的品牌效应对广告的影响力。

由青年学生组成的评审团（16—25岁）对30种不同的流行服装品牌进行了效应评比，从而以条文形式得出阿克量表（1997）。

其中还进行了自我影响一致性的讨论。

从品牌建设者的角度来看，一些品牌已经被确定基准。

这个结论可以很好的解释品牌效应建设进程中的前因后果。

关键词：品牌效应时尚服装品牌广告自我一致时尚市场
简介
第三个千禧年伊始，有形的品牌差异属性是很难实现的，因此像“客户品牌关系”（Blackston，1993），品牌魔术“（比尔，1997）或”lovemark“（贝克曼，2002）这些概念在品牌建设文献中具有很大的重要性。

成功的秘诀似乎是品牌建设者提供给各户的情感和自我表达的一致性。

在这片文章中，品牌个性和自我概念的一致性（短期内暂指自我一致性），在品牌建设和决策过程中具有决定性作用。

本文的研究目的是评估服装的品牌效应，并解释自我观念和品牌效应的一
致对时尚广告的影响。

本文是博士后研究项目的一个组成部分，其目的是研究一个有关人口、心理和情景因素的服装品牌战略的建设。

从品牌建设者的角度，品牌个性是一个重要的输入变量，经常会被考虑进品牌战略模式中（Kapferer，1991;凯勒，1993年;阿克，1996）。

对品牌广告的进程和消费者购买选择的理解对品牌战略过程中客户的定义分类是十分必要的。

在本文中我们将先回顾文献中的相关概念，比如在制作广告的过程中品牌效应和自我一致性的处理。

然后我们通过对30种时尚服装品牌的品牌效应进行评估，通过这项实验的进行来验证我们所讨论的结果。

我们对实验进行了审定假设，假设自我一致性和广告效应的重点因素没有对实验产生影响。

品牌个性
品牌个性被定义为“消费者特征和品牌的集合”（阿克尔，1997，p.347）。

根据哈尔和Sirgy（1991年，第23页）对品牌形象建设战略研究，品牌形象的战略意味着对品牌的定义和对消费者的定义。

品牌个性和消费者的个性（理想或真实）的匹配也是营销关系研究中的一个基本概念（Blackston 1993年，1995年）和福涅尔（1998）。

他们的研究是以自我形象一致性观念(Dolich 1969）和对其有进一步研究的Martin and Bellizi (1982) and Sirgy (1982)的文献为基础的。

品牌个性是产品形象化的一个重要资源，是产品形象的一个代表。

（比尔1993年，1997年）。

阿克（1996）利用三种模式说明品牌个性可以创造品牌资产：自我表现模型，关系模型和基础功能效益表示模型。

品牌个性作为一个不同因素，在低动机的情况下，也经常被用作一个探索性的提示。

有时候也会偏离品牌个性的真正含义。

(Chaik and Maheswaran, 1994). 衡量品牌个性，研究人员可以使用很多不同的方法，这些方法在一些文献被提及。

比如人格化技术（兰顿，1993年），Zaltman的隐喻抽取技术 - 隐喻抽取技术（Zaltman和Higie，1993）或IMPSYS模型（Heylen，1990年; Heylen等人，1995年）。

最近，阿克（1997年）制定了测定品牌个性的计量称。

她确定了品牌个性的五个定义和15个方面：真诚（要脚踏实地，诚实，健康，快乐）、激情（大胆，活泼，富有想象力和坚持不懈）; 能力（可靠，机智成功）；复杂（高贵迷人）和耐用性（户外活动和坚韧）。

自我意识和品牌个性的一致性
自我意识一致性的概念显示，各国消费者偏好由消费者对自我形象和品牌形象的匹配关系的认知程度而定。

乔哈尔和Sirgy（1991）提出了两个备选：A：自我一致性的定义：产品价值体现属性和客户自我价值体现的匹配。

B：功能一致性定义：产品效用的带给消费者的好处和消费者认知对象属性的匹配。

解释自我一致性的主要理论依据是“转型广告”，罗斯特和珀西（1987年），
相反功能一致性则常常用于信息广告。

时尚服装品牌往往具有较高的关注度和较高的产品类别水平。

这意味着自我一致性是主要的劝说路线。

服装是个人特点和自我形象之间非语言沟通的桥梁（Thomas等人。

，1991）。

时尚服装品牌体现了一个人的自我表达和一个人的社会地位。

（贝罗等人，1992年。

埃利奥特，1994;，苏梅，1997）也通过相关研究强调自我形象一致性对消费者品牌选择的影响。

在这个文献中，用品牌个性来取代品牌/产品形象的概念，表明品牌个性是品牌识别的组成部分。

广告反响
从顾客的角度看，一个新的品牌被接受是广告作用的结果。

（梅塔，1994年，1997年;柯布沃尔格伦等，1995;。

Meenaghan，1995年）。

本研究理论框架是以广告和顾客之间的关系为基础的。

对广告的态度、对品牌的态度、采购意向）。

由麦肯齐等人提出的。

（1986年）。

这个理论模型表明消费者对广告的认知和对品牌的认知的双重影响。

这个理所当然会影响到购买意愿。

这个理论被一些研究所证实。

（Biehal等，1992,）布朗和斯台曼，1992年）。