Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Apr;22(2):10.1016/j.jcps.2011.09.006.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.09.006.

Brands as Intentional Agents Framework: How Perceived Intentions and Ability Can Map Brand Perception

Affiliations

Brands as Intentional Agents Framework: How Perceived Intentions and Ability Can Map Brand Perception

Nicolas Kervyn et al. J Consum Psychol. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Building on the Stereotype Content Model, this paper introduces and tests the Brands as Intentional Agents Framework. A growing body of research suggests that consumers have relationships with brands that resemble relations between people. We propose that consumers perceive brands in the same way they perceive people. This approach allows us to explore how social perception theories and processes can predict brand purchase interest and loyalty. Brands as Intentional Agents Framework is based on a well-established social perception approach: the Stereotype Content Model. Two studies support the Brands as Intentional Agents Framework prediction that consumers assess a brand's perceived intentions and ability and that these perceptions elicit distinct emotions and drive differential brand behaviors. The research shows that human social interaction relationships translate to consumer-brand interactions in ways that are useful to inform brand positioning and brand communications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of social groups on the competence and warmth dimension in the Stereotype Content Model (Cuddy et al., 2007). NB: Groups labels were provided by pretest participants in another study, the specific labels are not endorsed by the authors.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Brands as Intentional Agents Framework dimensions, clusters and emotions.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Intention and ability scores of the 16 brands, mean intention and ability scores, and cluster groupings (Study 2).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aaker J. Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research. 1997;34(3):347–356.
    1. Aaker JL, Fournier SM, Brasel SA. When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer Research. 2004;31:1–16.
    1. Aaker J, Vohs K, Mogilner C. Non-profits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research. 2010;37:277–291.
    1. Abele A. The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: Findings from a prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2003;85:768–776. - PubMed
    1. Abele AE, Wojciszke B. Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007;93:751–763. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources