ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
Neural Bases of Brand Reputation Effect on Extension Evaluation: An ERPs Study.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of smoking social cues on brand perception and smoking: an event-related potential study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Is Distant Extension Always Upset? Neural Evidence of Empathy and Brand Association Affect Distant Extension Evaluation.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brand extension, as a marketing strategy, is frequently utilized by enterprises to produce new products. There exist several critical factors determining its success, such as brand reputation and perceived fit. The present study adopts the event-related potentials (ERPs) method to explore the underlying neural mechanism of the joint influence of the two factors on consumers' evaluation of brand extension. Specifically, consumers were presented with a brand with corporate social responsibility (CSR) or corporate ability (CA) reputation, following attached to an extension product (high fit vs. low fit). And then, they were given a 5-point scale to report their acceptance intention (AI) toward the brand extension. Behavioral data showed a higher AI and a shorter reaction time for high fit in contrast to low fit conditions. For low fit conditions, consumers were more inclined to accept the extension product with a brand with CSR than CA reputation. Neurophysiologically, CSR reputation evoked a larger P2 amplitude and LPP amplitude than CA reputation. Moreover, the low fit conditions elicited a more positive LPP amplitude than the high fit conditions in the context of a brand with a CSR reputation. Yet, for a brand with a CA reputation, the effect of perceived fit was not found. These results may reflect early attention resources engagement and altruistic motivation at the late stage during brand extension evaluation. The findings provided neurological evidence for which of the two types of brand reputation (CSR vs. CA) have a more positive effect on brand extension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.