harisportal.hanken.fi · web viewthis is the post-print version (author’s manuscript as accepted...

Short Brand Stories on Packaging: An Examination of Consumer Responses

This is the post-print version (author’s manuscript as accepted for publishing after the review process but prior to final layout and copyediting) of the article.Solja E., Liljander V., & Söderlund M. (2018) Short brand stories on packaging: An examination of consumer responses. Psychology and Marketing 35:294–306. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21087Readers are kindly asked to use the official publication in references. This version is stored in the Institutional Repository of the Hanken School of Economics, DHanken.

Short Brand Stories on Packaging: An Examination of

Consumer Responses

AUTHOR DETAILS

Author 1, Corresponding AuthorName: Eeva SoljaDepartment: Department of Marketing, CERSUniversity: Hanken School of EconomicsCity, country: Helsinki, FinlandTel.: +358 50 5020 501E-mail: [email protected]

Author 2 Name: Veronica LiljanderDepartment: Department of Marketing, CERSUniversity: Hanken School of EconomicsCity, country: Helsinki, FinlandTel.: +358 40 352 1288E-mail: [email protected]

Author 3 Name: Magnus SöderlundDepartment: Center for Consumer MarketingUniversity: Stockholm School EconomicsCity, country: Stockholm, SwedenDepartment: Department of Marketing, CERSUniversity: Hanken School of EconomicsCity, country: Helsinki, FinlandTel.: +46 8 736 9541E-mail: [email protected]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors acknowledge with thanks the two companies (that wish to stay anonymous) for their

1

mailto:[email protected]




cooperation in terms of granting access to their packaging material. They also thank the P&M

editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions on previous versions of the article.

2


Short Brand Stories on Packaging: An Examination of Consumer

Responses

ABSTRACT

The persuasiveness of stories and their influence on consumers have been acknowledged in

marketing, particularly within the advertising field. In marketing practice, brand stories are

increasingly also appearing on product packages. However, packages differ from ads in

significant ways as communication channels; for example, the space for messages on a package is

limited by the size of the package. This study reports findings from two experiments comparing

consumer responses to fast-moving consumer good (FMCG) packages with and without short

brand stories. The findings show that even a short brand story included on FMCG packaging has

a positive impact on consumers’ affective, attitudinal, product value, and behavioral intention

responses to the brand.

Keywords: Brand Story, Packaging, FMCG, Experiment, Consumer Brand Responses

3


INTRODUCTION

Stories are ubiquitous. They are embedded in consumers’ social and cultural environment and

have been told throughout civilizations (Barthes, 1975). Consumers think in terms of stories

(Bruner, 1986; Schank, 1990) and communicate everyday events in a story-like manner, giving

them a beginning, a climax, a low point, and an ending (Gergen & Gergen, 1988). In fact, stories

reflect the fundamental structure by which consumers make sense of and organize their

experiences (Bruner, 1986; Egan, 1989; Polkinghorne, 1988; Sax, 2006; Shankar, Elliott, &

Goulding, 2001).

Several authors have stressed the persuasive potential of stories in marketing (e.g., Busselle

& Bilandzic, 2008; McGregor & Holmes, 1999; McKee, 2003; Woodside, 2010). Consumers are

known to construct stories in relation to brands (Megehee & Woodside, 2010; Woodside, Sood,

& Miller, 2008) and to react positively to brand stories (Chiu, Hsieh, & Kuo, 2012; Escalas,

2004b; Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013). Thus it is not surprising that firms

increasingly seek to persuade consumers with stories. The use of brand stories on product

packaging, in particular, is a rapidly expanding practice in contemporary brand-building.

However, packages bring challenges to storytelling that have not hitherto been studied.

Packages differ from other storytelling media in four respects. First, the space for messages

on a package is limited by the size of the package. This means that the story has to be short. In

comparison to TV commercials and printed ads, which also generally require short stories

(Brechman & Purvis, 2015; Söderlund & Dahlén, 2010), FMCG packages have to include

information required by laws and regulations (e.g., nutrition labels). This reduces the potential

length of the story. Second, the presence of additional information may have an impact on how

consumers attend to and process the story. Third, given that the typical place for the consumer’s

4


exposure to packages is in the store, the time and space between exposure to a message and an

actual purchase is much shorter for packages. Fourth, many packages offer more contact points

than ads vis-à-vis the consumer, particularly with respect to packages that are stored in

consumers’ homes and are subject to repeated use in households.

Existing studies have not examined how consumers respond to very short stories, and

especially stories on packages, where the story competes with other product information. The

particular characteristics of the package as a vehicle for story transmission mean that previous

findings regarding stories for commercial purposes may not apply to a packaging setting.

Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate, in a FMCG setting, how consumers’

affective, attitudinal, product value, and behavioral intention responses to the brand are affected

by packages with short brand stories. Two experimental studies were carried out to assess these

aspects.

An examination of this type offers several contributions. First, the study provides

knowledge of consumer responses to short brand stories on packaging. Hitherto no studies have

examined the effects of stories on packaging, which differs significantly from traditional means

of communication in the ways outlined above. That is to say, in marketing-related research,

product packages have received little attention as story transmitters, because most existing

empirical studies have been conducted in an advertising context (e.g., Phillips & McGuarrie,

2010; Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007; Söderlund & Dahlén, 2010; Wentzel, Tomczak, &

Herrmann, 2010). However, packaging is an influential marketing vehicle (Underwood &

Ozanne, 1998). Packaging design is recognized as an important way to capture consumers’

attention, and it directly influences both their purchase intentions (Schoormans & Robben, 1997;

Underwood, 1999; Underwood, 2003) and buying decisions (e.g., Little & Orth, 2013; Raghubir

& Greenleaf, 2006; Silayoi & Speece, 2007). Packaging is particularly important for FMCGs due

5


to its ability to effectively differentiate one product from another (Simms & Trott, 2014). This

suggests that packaging is a powerful means of communication with the potential to convey

stories to consumers.

Second, the present study, in contrast to previous studies, deals with the effects of short

brand stories (shorter than 100 words). A main assumption is that the absorbing potential of

stories makes it likely that even a short brand story included in FMCG packaging can have a

positive impact on consumers’ responses. Previous findings on consumer responses to stories in

other contexts have been based on longer stories, ranging from 121 words to one page of text

(e.g., Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007; Peracchio & Meyers-Levy, 1997.

Finally, the present study widens the application context of previous findings by examining

FMCGs from the low-involvement product category. Previous empirical studies on storytelling

conducted in an advertising context have mainly focused on high-involvement goods, such as

fashion or cosmetics products (Ching, Tong, Chen, & Chen, 2013; Escalas, 2007; Phillips &

McGuarrie, 2010), sports accessories (Escalas, 2004a; Escalas, 2007), glasses and contact lenses

(Chang C. , 2009; Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007), and electronics items (Ching, Tong, Chen, &

Chen, 2013; Escalas, 2004b; Lien & Chen, 2013; Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007). Thus there is a

paucity of studies on low-involvement and fast-moving goods (Lien & Chen, 2013).

CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES

“Growing up, my mom taught me the importance of eating organic and understanding food

labels. She was very sick, and doing both restored her health. To cheer us up, my dad brought

home a rabbit. Soon, we had 18 rabbits hopping around. As a mom today, those memories

inspire the wholesome recipes I create in my kitchen for you.

Alison”

6


The story above, a text on an 18 Rabbits Granola bar wrap, is a representative example of a short

brand story on a package. Marketers communicate such brand stories on packages to an

increasing extent. Yet, their effects of on consumers’ responses have been neglected by extant

research.

What is a Brand Story?

Here, a brand story is defined based on elements used by past advertising studies that examine

consumer responses to brand stories: a brand story conveys information about the brand through

a plot consisting of events that are carried out by actors and arranged based on theme, causality,

and temporality (Adaval & Wyer, 1998; Escalas, 2004a; Padgett & Allen, 1997; Polyorat, Alden,

& Kim, 2007; Wentzel, Tomczak, & Herrmann, 2010). A brand story might for instance convey

information about the brand’s creator and evolution (Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007) or it might

include characters that interact with the brand, consume it, or enjoy the consequences of its use

(Boller & Olson, 1991).

In a story, the characters are the main agents of activity in terms of doing, feeling, and

thinking (Adaval & Wyer, 1998; Escalas, 2004a; Padgett & Allen, 1997; Polyorat, Alden, &

Kim, 2007; Wentzel, Tomczak, & Herrmann, 2010). Their actions are motivated by goals, lead to

outcomes, and occur in settings that have “physical, social, and temporal components” (Padgett

& Allen, 1997, p. 53). Causal links are thereby built between events. Given that the events in a

story are ordered in a temporal dimension, the story has a beginning, a middle, and an end

(Gergen & Gergen, 1988; Shankar, Elliott, & Goulding, 2001). However, a temporal ordering of

the events does not necessarily involve a chronological order (Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007).

A brand story should further express values of the brand that resonate with a target

audience (Fog, Budtz, Munch, & Blanchette, 2010; Jensen, 1999) in order to build a strong link

7


to the brand’s core business objective and strategy. For the story to touch consumers, the values

should be important to them.

Taken together, then, a brand story is a company-designed story about the brand and

consists of a plot, actors, causality, and temporality.

The Short Brand Story

How short can a story be before it ceases to be a story? Consider this story, allegedly the shortest

story in the world, by Honduran writer Augusto Monterroso: “Upon awakening, the dinosaur was

still there.” If a story can comprise only one sentence, there should obviously be room for

storytelling on FMCG packages.

Existing stories on packages are indeed short. The present authors examined 13 packages

from two FMCG product categories (beer and ice cream) with story content, and the result was an

average story length of 43 words. The shortest brand story had a length of 12 words, and the

longest had 73 words. The stories on FMCG packaging typically describe the invention of the

brand, the founder, the history of the company, or the craftsmanship with which the products are

made as well as the origin of the ingredients. It should be noted that academic research on the

effects of stories in advertising settings does not always report exact story lengths. The studies

that do so have studied stories with lengths from 121 (Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007) to 319

words (Chang, 2009) or longer, for instance, a full page of written text (Peracchio & Meyers‐Levy, 1997). In any event, in the present study, a brand story of any length is defined as a brand

story as long as it consists of a plot, actors, causality, and temporality.

Some authors have argued that short stories are unlikely to be able to transport the

consumer into a fully absorbed state of mind – something considered to be a requirement if

stories are to have maximal persuasive potential (Busselle & Bilandzic, 2008). However, it can be

8


argued that all humans have story schemas (Mandler, 1978). That is to say, we possess “abstract

knowledge about the structure of stories” (Escalas, 1998, p. 273), which we can use to make

assumptions about how a story unfolds, even based on limited clues (Stern, 1994). This means

that not all story elements (plot, actors, causality, and temporality) need to be explicitly present in

the story in order to be defined and processed as a story. That is to say, a missing element may be

implied by the story’s structure. Given such story schemas, and given also the strong position of

the story as a natural mode for information processing (Woodside, Sood, & Miller, 2008), it is

assumed here that even a short story is likely to induce a degree of narrative transportation

(which is assumed to be the point of departure for effects on subsequent consumer responses).

Consequences of Short Brand Stories: Hypotheses

A central tenet in the present study is that the form used to structure information about a product

or a brand has an impact on how consumers process and evaluate that information (Adval &

Wyer, 1998). When information takes the form of a story, the consumer is prone to process the

information in a narrative manner (Bruner, 1986). However, when the same information is

presented, for instance, as a list of attributes, other processing forms are more likely to be

triggered. Given that the information is indeed presented in terms of a story, it is expected that the

first response is narrative processing, which is followed by several other responses. These

responses are discussed below, and the specific hypotheses to be tested in the subsequent

empirical studies are presented.

Narrative transportation. A first response assumption is that a brand story on a FMCG

packaging has the ability to elicit narrative transportation through narrative processing. In

narrative processing, the consumer arranges the information in the story narratively based on

temporality and causality (Escalas, 1998). This style of processing is congruent with consumers’

9


natural way of thinking and storing information (Bruner, 1986; Schank, 1990). Information

processed in a narrative manner is more easily assimilated and accepted by a consumer (Bruner,

1986; Schank & Abelson, 1995). The narrative mode of thought can lead to absorption, a state

characterized by focused immersion, involvement, and dissociation from the surrounding

environment (Söderlund & Sagfossen, 2015). Transportation is an intensive form of absorption

and is defined as a distinct mental process where the consumer is carried away by the story to the

degree that she or he is “lost” in it (Green & Brock, 2000, p. 701).

Green and Brock (2000) argue that transportation is particularly likely to occur when the

purpose of story consumption is enjoyment. Nevertheless, transportation has been used as a point

of departure in several studies examining how consumers process advertising stories, and

occurrences of transportation have been shown in this setting (e.g., Brechman & Purvis, 2015;

Chang, 2009; Ching, Tong, Chen, & Chen, 2013; Escalas, 2004b). Transportation among

consumers has also been observed as a result of salespeople’s storytelling in face-to-face

encounters (Gilliam & Flaherty, 2015). The message form, rather than the aim of the story

consumption, thus seems to be the key element in inducing transportation. It therefore seems

likely that consumers can be transported by messages (a) presented in the form of stories in a

packaging context with (b) the intention to persuade. Based on this, the following is

hypothesized:

H1a: A short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of narrative

transportation as opposed to the absence of a story.

Critical thoughts. Argument-based processing is considered to be the opposite of narrative

processing (Escalas, 2004a). Argument-based processing is more analytical, logical, and

pragmatic than narrative processing (Green & Brock, 2000) and may be triggered by arguments

or fact-based messages (Deighton, Romer, & Mcqueen, 1989). In an advertising context, story

10


effects have been examined by contrasting advertisements in story form to advertisements based

on arguments or facts about product features. Fact-based ads are assumed to trigger an argument-

based processing style (Brecheman & Purvis, 2015; Chang, 2009; Deighton, Romer, & Mcqueen,

1989). These types of ads have also been referred to as informational ads (Boller, 1990; Puto &

Wells, 1984), expository ads (Wentzel, Tomczak, & Herrmann, 2010), factual ads (Peracchio &

Meyers‐Levy, 1997; Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007), or list-based ads (Adaval & Wyer, 1998) in

previous research. In the present study, a package including a short brand story is contrasted both

with a package with a list-formed message (Study 1) and a package without a story (Study 2).

The key distinction between a story form and a list form in the present study is that a list is not

narrated or based on temporality, nor does it have a plot or characters.

When argument-based processing is triggered, the consumer is prone to consider the

strength of the arguments in an objective manner (Adaval & Wyer, 1998). This process increases

the likelihood of creating counterarguments (Escalas, 2004a). Yet this effect is inverted in the

case of narrative transportation, because transportation has been shown to reduce critical thoughts

(Brechman & Purvis, 2015; Escalas, 2004a; Gilliam & Flaherty, 2015). Presumably, one factor

contributing to this is the fact that transportation is typically a positively valenced state of mind

that consumers enjoy experiencing (Söderlund & Sagfossen, 2015), and critical thinking may

offset the transportation into the story. Given a higher level of transportation in the presence of a

story, then, the following can be expected:

H1b: A short brand story on a product package produces a lower level of critical

thoughts as opposed to the absence of a story.

H1a and H1b can be seen in the light of two classical routes to persuasion, namely the

central and the peripheral route (Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983). In a marketing message

context, the central route comprises contemplative consideration of arguments and attributes

11


related to the object of the message, whereas the peripheral route entails a simpler process

involving positive and negative cues to the object of the message (Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann,

1983). Narrative processing may be considered as an extension of the peripheral route to

persuasion, while argument-based processing can be seen as an extension of the central route to

persuasion.

Affective, attitudinal, and product value responses. Building further on the assumption

that a brand story has the ability to elicit a narrative mode of thought, and thereby narrative

transportation, several affective and attitudinal responses are likely to follow. Given that the story

message is positively charged, previous studies indicate that an ad message presented in the form

of a story enhances positive affect, such as upbeat and warm feelings (Escalas, 1998; Escalas &

Stern, 2003; Escalas, 2004a). This may be attributed to the story form’s use of characters (i.e.,

humans), because humans seem to be hardwired to react positively to the presence of other

humans (Sears, 1983). In addition, consumers who are exposed to a story are, as a result of

transportation, inclined to experience positive emotions (Green & Brock, 2000; Green, Brock, &

Kaufman, 2004). Hence the following is hypothesized:

H2: A short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of positive

affect as opposed to the absence of a story.

Previous studies indicate that brand stories may have a positive effect on brand attitude (e.g.,

Brechman & Purvis, 2015; Chiu, Hsieh, & Kuo, 2012; Escalas, 2004a and 2004b; Lundqvist,

Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013). This might stem from the fact that stories are perceived

as an interesting, entertaining, and enjoyable form of communication (Busselle & Bilandzic,

2008; Green, Brock, & Kaufman, 2004; Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013), and

these perceptions are likely to have a positive influence on consumers’ attitudes toward the brand

(Escalas, 1998). Other story-related factors have also been proposed to influence brand attitudes

12


favorably. First, transported consumers show more story-consistent and less critical beliefs as

opposed to their less-transported counterparts (Escalas, 1998; Escalas, 2004a). These responses

indicated a direct positive influence on brand attitude (Escalas, 2004a). Second, the positive

emotions elicited by narrative transportation are likely to spill over to brand attitude in

accordance with the affect infusion model (Forgas, 1994 and 1995). This implies that narrative

transportation and positive affect may further enhance the development of a positive brand

attitude. The following is therefore hypothesized:

H3: A short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of brand

attitude as opposed to the absence of a story.

Moreover, stories have been shown to have (1) a positive impact on consumers’ willingness

to pay for the brand (Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013) and (2) a potential to

attenuate price sensitivity (Chiu, Hsieh, & Kuo, 2012). These variables are conceptually linked to

perceived value (Netemeyer, et al., 2004). It may be assumed, then, that a story can have a

positive impact on product perceived value. This effect may be partly attributed to the same

antecedents as those of brand attitude. In any event, it is expected that stories in a packaging

context can have an impact on consumers’ perceived value with regard to the packaged product:

H4: A short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of perceived

value as opposed to the absence of a story.

Behavioral intention responses. Brand stories have been shown to elicit a higher likelihood

of purchase than other forms of communication (Brechman & Purvis, 2015; Escalas, Moore, &

Britton, 2004; Escalas, 2004b; Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013). This may

stem from the way in which the information in a story is judged. Given that knowledge is stored

in a narrative form in memory, new story-based information is matched with existing knowledge.

It makes the consumer prone to consider the information in the story as a whole (through

13


narrative processing) instead of fragmenting it into detached pieces of information to be judged

separately (Pennington & Hastie, 1992; Schank & Abelson, 1995). When information on a

product or brand is considered and subsequently judged as a whole, the information becomes

easy to grasp and hence appears instinctively correct and coherent (Pennington & Hastie, 1992).

Stories may, through this mechanism, have a positive effect on consumers’ purchasing decisions

(Adaval & Wyer, 1998). In addition, several studies show that brand attitude (cf. H3) is

positively associated with purchase intentions in a communication context (e.g., Spears & Singh,

2004). Therefore, the following is expected:

H5a: A short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of purchase

intentions as opposed to the absence of a story.

Given that positive judgments affect purchase intentions positively, it might be assumed

that such judgments also have an impact on other consumption-related behavioral intentions. One

intention type that occurs with particularly high frequency in the consumer-related literature is

word-of-mouth intentions, and it has been suggested that stories are likely to positively impact

such intentions (Gilliam & Flaherty, 2015). The following is thus hypothesized:

H5b: A short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of word-of-

mouth intentions as opposed to the absence of a story.

Two empirical studies were conducted to test the hypotheses. Both comprised an

experimental design in which a package with a short brand story and a package without such a

story served as stimuli.

STUDY 1

Study 1 was designed to address hypotheses H1-H5 by exposing participants to either a package

including a short brand story or a package with the same content presented in a list format.

14


Research Method

A between-subjects experimental design was used. The participants were randomly allocated to

the story condition (short brand story) and the list condition. The responses were measured with

questionnaire items.

The packaged product in Study 1 was a muesli product produced and sold within one

particular country. The main share of the brand’s turnover comes from muesli products, but the

range also includes ecological grain products produced for the national grocery market. The

muesli package had a story printed on the back. At the time when Study 1 was conducted, a

handful of other muesli brands in the focal market also used stories on their packaging.

Stimulus Development

In Study 1, the authentic package including a brand story was used as the stimulus for the story

condition. This brand story is consistent with the definition of a brand story and hence consists of

a plot, actors, causality, and temporality.

The story recounts when the company was founded and points out its family business

background. The ecological and environmentally friendly production methods, as well as the

taste of the product, are also mentioned (see Appendix 1). As indicated above, the authors of the

present study collected and analyzed stories on packages to assess existing practice in using

stories on packages, and found that existing stories typically describe the invention of the brand,

the founder, or the history of the company. Typically, such stories lack a strong emotional

element and mainly address consumers’ functional needs. To empirically examine the emotional

charge of the story used in Study 1, pre-test participants (n = 22) were exposed to the story and

were asked “How emotional was the story?” (van Stegeren, Everaerd, Cahill, McGaugh, &

15


Gooren, 1998). This item was rated on a scale ranging from 1 (low) to 10 (high). The result was

that the story was perceived to have a relatively low emotional content (M = 4.50, SD = 2.36).

The list-based package stimulus was developed using the authentic brand story as a starting

point. The content of the story was then converted into separate statements, and these statements

were organized in a list format (see Appendix 1). Both stimuli thus included the same

information. They were also comparable in terms of length: the story consisted of 34 words and

the list of 33 words. Hence, the only difference between the two stimuli was the way in which

information was presented.

In the next step, two versions of a photo of the muesli package were created. The photos

featured the front, back, and sides of the package. The first version showed the list on the back of

the package, whereas the second version showed the story in place of the list. In addition to this,

both versions included the regular packaging text consisting of, for example, nutritional

information, ecological considerations, and country of origin.

Procedure and Participants

Study 1 comprised an online setting. The participants were randomly allocated to view a photo of

either the story version or the list version of the package. The participants could, if needed, make

the photo visible again at any time during the study by clicking an icon. In the following step, the

participants’ responses were collected with an online questionnaire.

The participants (n = 215; Mage = 46; 102 female, 113 male) were recruited from a

consumer web panel maintained by YouGov, a market research firm specializing in panel data

and online methods. The participants consisted of a nationally representative sample in terms of

demographics such as age, gender, education, and income level. One hundred and seven

participants (50%) were exposed to the story condition, while 108 participants (50%) were

16


exposed to the list condition. The muesli brand was familiar to 16 participants (8%) and

unfamiliar to 196 (91%). Three participants did not report their familiarity with the brand. A chi-

square test revealed that neither gender (p = 0.84) nor brand familiarity (p = 0.58) were subject to

differences between the two groups.

Measures

The measures are presented in full in Appendix 2. Narrative transportation was measured with

five items such as “While reading the text on the package I could easily picture the described

events taking place” and “I could picture myself in the scene described in the text on the

package” (Green & Brock, 2000; Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). Critical thoughts were measured

by asking the participants to indicate how much they agreed with four claims about the product.

Two of the claims were subjective (“The muesli is delicious” and “The muesli is of high quality”)

and the two others were based on company-generated statements included in the packaging text

(“The muesli is environmentally friendly” and “The muesli is locally produced”). The scale for

critical thoughts was reverse coded before analysis. As a result, lower values correspond to lower

levels of critical thoughts (greater agreement with the statements on the original scale) whereas

higher values correspond to higher levels of critical thoughts (less agreement with the statements

on the original scale). Positive affect was measured with two items adapted from Berg,

Söderlund, and Lindström (2015): “I feel joyful” and “I am in a good mood.”

Brand attitude was measured with five adjective pair items, such as bad-good and

unpleasant-pleasant (Chang, 2010; Das, Duiven, Arendsen, & Vermeulen, 2014; Yi & Yoo,

2011). Perceived value was measured with four items adapted from Netemeyer et al. (2004), for

example, “What I get from ____ is worth the cost,” and “____is good value for money.”

Perceived value is typically measured in comparison with other brands (Lassar, Mittal, &

17


Sharma, 1995), and in our case the participants were provided with the recommended retail price

for the focal product as well as the retail price for a corresponding private label product. Purchase

intentions were measured with three adjective pairs such as unlikely-likely and probable-

improbable (Faircloth, Capella, & Alford, 2001; Loebnitz, Schuitema, & Grunert, 2015; Tangari

& Smith, 2012). Word-of-mouth intentions was measured with the item “I intend to talk about

____ to others.” A scale ranging from 1 (low) to 10 (high) for all items was used. Cronbach’s

alpha was calculated for all variables measured with multi-item scales and ranged between 0.932

and 0.988 (see Appendix 2). The means of the items for each variable were used in the

hypotheses tests.

The manipulation was checked by asking the participants to evaluate the degree to which

they perceived the text on the package as a story. Their responses were captured on a ten-point

disagree-agree scale.

The questionnaire also contained some filler items regarding the package design

(attractiveness, color, font, etc.). Background information was collected in the end of the

questionnaire with questions about the participants’ current buying and usage habits for muesli,

brand familiarity, and demographic information. An open-ended question in the end showed that

none of the participants correctly guessed the purpose of the study (i.e., to assess the effects of a

story on brand responses).

Results

Manipulation check. The aim of the manipulation check question (“To what degree would you

define the information given on the package as a story?”) was to examine the perceived story

content. The responses to this question revealed that the perceived story content was higher for

the participants in the story condition (M = 6.43, SD = 2.13) than for the participants in the list

18


condition (M = 5.80, SD = 2.51). This difference was significant (t = -1.959, p < 0.10). Thus, the

manipulation behaved as intended.

Testing the hypotheses. To test the hypotheses, the mean responses in the two groups were

computed and the differences were assessed with independent samples t tests. The effect size was

estimated with Cohen’s d. The group means for the response variables are presented in Table 1.

Insert Table 1 about here

H1a, which stated that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of

narrative transportation as opposed to the absence of a story, was supported. The level of

narrative transportation was significantly (p < 0.05; d = 0.31) higher for the participants exposed

to the short brand story (M = 5.99, SD = 2.24) than for those exposed to the list (M = 5.31, SD =

2.16).

H1b stated that a short brand story on a product package produces a lower level of critical

thoughts as opposed to the absence of a story. The level of critical thoughts was significantly (p <

0.05; d = 0.29) lower for the participants exposed to the brand story (M = 3.18, SD = 1.69) than

for those exposed to the list (M = 3.74, SD = 2.08). The hypothesis was thus supported.

H2 proposed that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of

positive affect as opposed to the absence of a story. The level of positive affect was significantly

(p < 0.05; d = 0.34) higher (M = 6.93, SD = 1.91) in the story group as opposed to the list group

(M = 6.21, SD = 2.33). H2 was therefore confirmed.

H3, which proposed that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level

of brand attitude as opposed to the absence of a story, was supported (p < 0.01; d = 0.38). The

level of brand attitude was higher for the participants exposed to the brand story (M = 7.43, SD =

1.88) than for those exposed to the list (M = 6.67, SD = 2.17).

19


H4 proposed that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of

perceived value as opposed to the absence of a story. The participants exposed to the brand story

showed a significantly (p < 0.05; d = 0.35) higher level of perceived value (M = 6.66, SD = 2.45)

compared to those who were exposed to the list (M = 5.79, SD = 2.57).

H5a and H5b pertained to behavioral intention responses. The participants exposed to a

short brand story showed a higher level of purchase intentions (M = 6.09, SD = 3.09) and word-

of-mouth intentions (M = 4.73, SD = 2.86) as opposed to the participants exposed to the list (M =

5.56, SD = 3.00 and M = 3.84, SD = 2.76, respectively). The difference in purchase intentions,

however, was not significant (p > 0.10; d = 0.17), thus H5a was not supported. The difference in

word-of-mouth intentions was significant (p < 0.05; d = 0.32), which provides support for H5b.

Discussion

The package with a short brand story produced higher levels of narrative transportation, critical

thoughts, positive affect, brand attitude, perceived value, and word-of-mouth intentions than the

package with the same information presented in a list format. Thus, even though the package

story was short, was received in a setting involving other competing text, and had a relatively low

emotional charge, the story was able to enhance several consumer responses.

Study 1, however, had some limitations. First, Study 1 comprised only one particular

FMCG brand. Previous research, however, indicates that consumers’ in-store decision processes

vary across product categories (Hoyer, 1984), thus stressing the need to examine products from

different categories. Therefore, in Study 2, a brand from another FMCG category (laundry

detergent) was chosen. Study 2 should therefore be seen as an attempt to replicate the findings

from Study 1 under different conditions.

20


Second, Study 1 compared a short story with a list condition, because some previous

studies have assessed the potential of stories in relation to such lists. Another alternative,

however, is to compare the story condition with a no-story condition (i.e., an identical package

without a story). This type of comparison was conducted in Study 2.

STUDY 2

Study 2 was designed to address hypotheses H3, H4, H5a, and H5b by comparing responses to a

package with a short story to responses to a package without a story.

Research Method

A between-subjects experiment was used to test the hypotheses. Brand story content (present vs.

absent) on a FMCG package was manipulated, and the participants’ responses were measured

with questionnaire items.

The packaged product was a liquid laundry detergent that is produced and sold within one

particular country. The visual appearance of this brand had recently been redesigned and all

packaging materials had been updated simultaneously. The brand had a strong awareness rate and

a market share of around 6% at the time when the study was conducted. In the focal national

market, no laundry care products, including the object of the study, had a story printed on the

packaging. For the purpose of this study, a package story was created for the brand. The story had

not been used previously in marketing materials.

Stimulus Development

The development of the story used as a stimulus was guided by three concerns. First, as in Study

1, the story needed to conform to the definition of a brand story. That is, it needed to include a

plot, actors, causality, and temporality. Second, the story was designed to simulate the kind of

21


stories that can be found on FMCG product packages in practice. Third, because a successful

company-created brand story should transmit the values of the brand (Fog, Budtz, Munch, &

Blanchette, 2010; Jensen, 1999), the story was to be built around the focal brand’s values. With

these requirements in mind, a story about the founder of the brand was created. The story

describes how the founder was inspired to develop the first product and presents the brand as

domestic and environmentally friendly (see Appendix 1). In line with many other packaging

stories on the local market, the story lacks a strong emotional element and speaks mainly to

consumers’ functional needs.

In the next step, two versions of a photo of the laundry detergent package were created. The

photos featured the front, back, and sides of the package. The first version corresponded to the

actual product package planned for the market and had no story. However, it did contain text. The

packaging text contained information on, for example, suitability for different textiles,

environmental friendliness, country of origin, and production aspects. The second version

included the same text as the first version as well as the story that was created in the previous

step. To aid the participants, each photo was accompanied by a transcript of the packaging text

with large letters.

Procedure and Participants

All participants were given the same verbal introduction; they were told that the aim of the study

was to evaluate the redesigned packaging of a laundry brand. After this introduction, the

participants were given one of the package photos and a questionnaire with items to measure the

response variables. The two versions were distributed randomly to the participants. After

completing the questionnaire, the participants were debriefed about the purpose of the study.

22


The participants were recruited from courses in business administration at a business school

(n = 98; Mage = 24; 57 female, 36 male, 5 did not report gender). Business students were deemed

appropriate for the study, because they use and buy detergents. Forty-six participants (47%) were

exposed to the story version, while fifty-two participants (53%) were exposed to the version

without a story. The focal brand was familiar to 27 participants (29%) and unfamiliar to 65

(71%). Five participants did not report their familiarity with the brand. A chi-square test revealed

that neither gender (p = 0.20) nor brand familiarity (p = 0.25) were subject to differences between

the two groups.

Measures

The measures are presented in full in Appendix 2. Brand attitude, perceived value, purchase

intentions, and word-of-mouth intentions were measured with the same items used in Study 1.

However, in Study 2 a scale ranging from 1 (low) to 7 (high) for all items was used (as opposed

to a ten-point scale in Study 1) in order to examine if the Study 1 results would be replicated with

a different response format. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for all variables measured with

multi-item scales and ranged between 0.902 and 0.933 (see Appendix 2). The summary means of

the items for each variable were used in the hypotheses tests.

Moreover, given that there are many different types of stories and many different ways to

tell a story, some measures related to the participants’ perceptions of the story per se were

included (these measures were used only for those participants who received the story version).

More specifically, story interest was measured with four items such as “I would like to know

more about ____’s story” (Machleit, Madden, & Allen, 1990 and 1993), and story entertainment

was measured with the items “entertaining,” “surprising,” and “likable” (Brewer & Lichtenstein,

1982).

23


The manipulation was checked with the same question as in Study 1. That is, the

participants were asked to assess the degree to which they perceived the text on the package as a

story. In addition to this, as an instructional manipulation check (Goodman, Cryder & Cheema,

2013), the participants were asked if the packaging contained information about the founder of

the brand or not. This information was given only in the story; thus it was not available for the

participants who received the no-story treatment.

The questionnaire also contained similar filler items and background questions to those

used in Study 1. An open-ended item at the end showed that only one of the participants correctly

guessed the purpose of the study (i.e., the effect of a short story on brand responses). This

participant was excluded from further analysis.

Results

Manipulation check. The aim of the first manipulation check question (“To what degree would

you define the information given on the package as a story?”) was to examine the perceived story

content. An examination of the responses to this question showed that the perceived story content

was higher for the participants who received the story version (M = 5.11, SD = 1.25) than for the

participants who received the no-story version (M = 2.96, SD = 1.46). This difference was

significant (t = 7.78, p < 0.01). In response to the instructional manipulation check question (“Did

the packaging contain information about the founder of the brand?”), 90.1 % of the participants

exposed the story condition correctly gave an affirmative reply. The five participants who were

unable to answer correctly were excluded from further analysis.

Characteristics of the stimulus story. An analysis of the responses to the story interest and story

entertainment measures resulted in relatively low response levels; the story was only mildly

interesting (M = 3.32, SD = 1.68) and not very entertaining (M = 4.23, SD = 1.36).

24


Testing the hypotheses. To test hypotheses H3-H5, the mean responses in the two groups were

computed and the differences were assessed with independent samples t tests. The effect size was

estimated with Cohen’s d. The group means for the response variables are presented in Table 2.

Insert Table 2 about here

H3, which stated that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of

brand attitude as opposed to the absence of a story, was supported. The brand attitude was

significantly (p < 0.01) higher for those exposed to the short brand story (M = 5.47, SD = 0.85)

than for those not exposed to the story (M = 4.67, SD = 0.89). A large effect size (d = 0.91) was

apparent.

H4 stated that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level of perceived

value as opposed to the absence of a story. Perceived value was higher for the story group (M =

4.61, SD = 1.15) than for the group without the story (M = 4.02, SD = 1.28), and this difference

was significant (p < 0.05, d = 0.51). H4 was thus supported.

Regarding H5a, stating that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher

level of purchase intention as opposed to the absence of a story, the purchase intentions were

higher for the group exposed to the short brand story (M = 5.12, SD = 1.17) than for the group not

exposed to the story (M = 4.51, SD = 1.27). This difference was significant (p < 0.05, d = 0.50).

H5a was therefore supported.

For H5b, which stated that a short brand story on a product package produces a higher level

of word-of-mouth intentions as opposed to the absence of a story, the results were higher for the

story group (M = 2.76, SD = 1.66) than for the group without the story (M = 1.94, SD = 1.14,

respectively), and this difference was significant (p < 0.01, d = 0.58). H5b was thus supported.

25


Discussion

The package with a short brand story produced a higher level of brand attitude, perceived value,

purchase intentions, and word-of-mouth intentions than the package without a story. Thus,

despite the fact that the story was (a) short and (b) presented together with other information, it

had a positive impact on the response variables. In this sense, Study 2 produced the same pattern

as Study 1. Moreover, the story was (c) perceived to be only mildly interesting and entertaining.

In contrast to what has been suggested in previous research (Busselle and Bilandzic, 2008; Green,

Brock, & Kaufman, 2004; Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013), this means that

these two story characteristics may not be of defining importance in enhancing responses to

stories in a commercial context. This may be ascribed to the packaging context, which might

trigger consumers’ interest in facts about the product, its characteristics, and its origin instead of

in entertaining content. In any event, given a setting that is likely to attenuate the potential for a

story to have an impact on receivers, the story did have an impact. This finding is in line with

previous authors who have stressed the general persuasiveness of stories (Green & Brock, 2000;

McKee, 2003). It should be noted that the studied brand had not communicated with brand stories

before the present study was conducted, and no other brand from the same product category

(detergents) had used stories on the packaging. Study 2 therefore contributes to the branding

literature and brand-building practice by showing that a company-created brand story can be

successfully introduced late in an existing brand’s life. This is, in fact, what many brands do at

the moment. The results of Study 2 thus support such activities.

26


GENERAL DISCUSSION

Summary of Main Results

The main finding of the two studies was that a short story on a FMCG package produced a higher

level of several consumer responses – such as narrative transportation, positive affect, brand

attitude, perceived value, and intentions – as opposed to the absence of a story. These results are

perhaps not surprising, given the generally strong potential of stories to impact receivers.

However, what makes the present results interesting and novel is the fact that they were obtained

with very short stories, which appeared in a context comprising also other product-related

information.

In addition, the stimulus stories were seen by the participants as only mildly interesting and

entertaining (Study 2), and as having a low emotional charge (Study 1), yet the stories did have

an impact. This should be seen in the light of authors who have emphasized the importance of

creating interesting, entertaining and emotionally appealing stories (Guber, 2007; McKee, 2003;

Twitchell, 2004). Some authors have suggested that compelling stories should involve “the

struggle between expectation and reality in all its nastiness” (Woodside, 2010, p. 535), which

may include elements such as disaster or chaos that “throws life out of balance” (Woodside,

2010, p. 535). However, few firms, it may be assumed, would be willing to tell brand stories with

such negatively charged elements. Given that the stories in the present study were able to have an

impact without such elements from the dark side of life indicates that these may not be needed in

a brand-building context. Thus, the present findings indicate that the story format per se may be

more essential than story content in producing positive consumer responses in a marketing

context. This may be encouraging for marketers who are not seasoned storytellers.

27


Moreover, previous studies on story effects in commercial settings have mainly used high-

involvement products as objects. For such products, text-based messages may have a stronger

potential to impact consumer responses, because consumers make decisions for high-involvement

products more carefully in terms of information processing (Hoyer, 1984; Zaichkowsky, 1985)

and they may therefore be more receptive to a story. The present studies comprised low-

involvement products and thus showed that consumers were susceptible to the impact of a story

also in this setting.

Theoretical Implications

The present study offers three main contributions. First, it provides new knowledge regarding

consumer responses to brand stories on packaging. Previous studies in advertising have shown

that consumers respond positively to narratives as opposed to list- or fact-based ads (e.g., Chang,

2009; Escalas, 2004b; Lien & Chen, 2013; Mattila, 2010; Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007), and the

present study extends these findings to packaging. Furthermore, the present study went beyond

past research by not comparing a list-only with a story-only condition. Instead, it examined a

real-world situation in which a story was added to existing information on a package. By law,

packaging has to include information on the content of the product, which is often excluded from

ads. Thus, consumers are typically confronted with more information on the packaging than in an

ad, and this extra information may not be inherently interesting from the consumer’s point of

view. These circumstances could reduce the impact of the story. However, the present study

shows that even in a relatively cluttered message environment alongside mandatory information,

the presence of a story has a positive impact on several consumer responses. The present study

therefore contributes to packaging research by demonstrating that stories of the type that many

companies are currently placing on their packages may enhance consumers’ brand-related

responses.

28


Second, previous studies on brand storytelling have examined relatively long stories. This

study, in contrast, provides evidence explicitly covering the effects of short stories. It is indeed

impressive that a story with as few as 34 words (Study 1) can cause consumers to feel transported

and lead to several subsequent positive responses.

Third, the study contributes to brand management literature by demonstrating that stories

can be effective branding tools for FMCGs. These are often low-involvement products, and such

products have been neglected in past research on brand stories.

Managerial Implications

The results from the present study offer several managerial implications. First, they encourage the

use of short stories on packaging. Given the effects produced by the relatively mundane and

unexciting stories in the present study, the results also imply that firms do not need to engage in

the development of advanced stories in order to benefit from the presence of a story. However,

some caution is required, because many brands (e.g., beer and ice cream brands), are already

using stories on packages. If this increases further, consumers may become accustomed to stories,

and their novelty value may wear off. Therefore, in the near future, the form and content of the

story – rather than the mere presence of a story – may become more important in drawing

attention to the story and the brand. This would in turn seem to call for more sophisticated

storytelling. However, a well-crafted story may make the consumer more mindful of being

subject to storytelling, which could result in the consumer viewing the situation in terms of

persuasion tactics. This could backfire with respect to the intended impact of the story (Gilliam &

Flaherty, 2015).

Second, it should be noted that the present study used photos of packages as the stimulus

material. Such photos are often used in printed ads, meaning that ads represent an additional way

to expose consumers to packaging stories (i.e., in addition to the shelves of the store). To benefit

29


from the story contribution in this case, however, it is of course imperative that the packages are

depicted in such a way that package stories are readable.

Third, the results from Study 1, which indicate that purchase intentions were not enhanced

by the presence of a story, imply that there are limits to the effects a short story can produce. This

suggests that managers interested in storytelling need to consider how to boost the impact of

stories in a packaging context. For example, the impact of messages embedded in stories may be

increased if stories are integrated with other communication activities. Moreover, it may be

advisable to integrate packages with other media as story vehicles, so that the same story can be

told (or allowed to continue) across different modes of communication. This is indeed what is

increasingly happening when the story itself is the main product (e.g., a novel or a movie), as

many stories today are subject to transmedia storytelling (Ryan, 2005).

Finally, managers need to be mindful about the space available for stories on packaging.

This space is already limited, and yet new demands are introduced continually. For example, the

European Union has introduced a new regulation for the font size of nutrition information on

food packaging, which took effect in December 2014. Therefore, an important issue for managers

(and for researchers), as indicated above, is how short a story can be before it ceases to be story.

Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research

A potential limitation of the present study is that the participants were exposed to photos of

packages (from all angles) rather than real packages. This creates some differences from a

situation in which a customer is examining a package on the floor of the store. Further research

should therefore attempt to use 3-D packages and employ field experiments. However, since the

present study has shown that stories on photos of packages do have an impact, and given the

frequent appearance of product packaging in ads, further research may also offer contributions by

examining various ways of depicting packages with stories in ads.

30


Another limitation relates to the scope of the present study, which examined the impact of

short brand stories for two brands from two different low-involvement FMCG product categories.

Further studies should attempt to assess the use of stories for other brands capable of evoking

different levels of involvement.

Moreover, the present study examined stories that mirrored the kind of stories often found

on FMCG product packages in practice. Such stories are typically positively charged and lack a

strong emotional element. Nevertheless, there are many different stories and many different ways

of telling stories. Further studies should therefore examine the impact of other types of stories

than those in the present study. Another factor calling for attention is the origin of the story,

because the present study dealt only with company-originated stories. Previous research shows

that both customer-originated and company-originated storytelling about a brand can have

positive outcomes (Escalas, 2004b; Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus, & van Riel, 2013; Solnet &

Kandampully, 2008; West, Huber, & Min, 2004), but to date no studies seem to have assessed the

relative impact of stories with these types of origin.

It should also be observed that the present study examined the impact of a short text-based

story on consumers’ brand responses. Evidence shows, however, that a picture adds to the impact

of the content (Schroeder & Borgerson, 2005). Some scholars also contend that oral storytelling

(Sametz & Maydoney, 2003) and the combination of a motion picture and soundtrack (Escalas,

2004b) are more efficient ways to communicate a story than the written form. Such studies,

however, were conducted before smartphones and tablets became a part of everyday life,

suggesting that there is still much to examine in terms of how a brand story is transferred to a

receiver.

Finally, the present study focused on the effects of a short brand story on consumers’ brand

responses. However, these responses might be influenced by a number of mediating factors, such

31


as the level of empathy evoked by the story, the relevance of the story for the receiver, and the

receiver’s level of motivation to process information about the brand. Future studies may

therefore consider addressing the mediating impact of such factors.

32


REFERENCES

Adaval, R., & Wyer, R. S. (1998). The role of narratives in consumer information processing.

Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(3), 207–245.

Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you're having fun: Cognitive absorption

and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665-694.

Barthes, R. (1975). An introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. New Literary History,

6(2), 237-272.

Berg, H., Söderlund, M., & Lindström, A. (2015). Spreading joy: Examining the effects of

smiling models on consumer joy and attitudes. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32(6),

459 - 469.

Boller, G. W. (1990). The Vicissitudes of Product Experience: 'Songs of Our Consuming Selves'

in Drama Ads. i M. E. Goldberg, G. Gorn, & R. W. Pollay (Red.), NA - Advances in

Consumer Research. 17, ss. 621-626. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.

Boller, G. W., & Olson, J. (1991). Experiencing Ad Meaning: Crucial Aspects of

Narrative/Drama Processing. i R. H. Holman, & M. R. Solomon (Red.), NA - Advances in

Consumer Research. 18, ss. 172–175. Solomon, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer

Research.

Brechman, J., & Purvis, S. (2015). Narrative, transportation and advertising. International

Journal of Advertising: The Review of Marketing Communications, 34(2), 1-16.

Brewer, W. F., & Lichtenstein, E. H. (1982). Stories are to entertain: A structural-affect theory of

stories. Journal of Pragmatics, 6(5-6), 473–486.

Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: University Press.

Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories:

A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 18(2),

255–280.

Chang, C. (2009). Being hooked by editorial content: The implications for processing narrative

advertising. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 21-33.

Ching, R., Tong, P., Chen, J.-S., & Chen, H.-Y. (2013). Narrative online advertising:

Identification and its effects on attitude toward a product. Internet Research, 23(4), 414 –

438.

33


Chiu, H.-C., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Kuo, Y.-C. (2012). How to align your brand stories with your

products. Journal of Retailing, 88 (2), 262–275.

Das, E., Duiven, R., Arendsen, J., & Vermeulen, I. (2014). Exploring killer ads: A terror

management account of death in advertisements. Psychology & Marketing, 31(10), 828-

842.

Deighton, J., Romer, D., & Mcqueen, J. (1989). Using drama to persuade. Journal Of Consumer

Research, 16(3), 335-343.

Egan, K. (1989). Teaching as storytelling: An alternative approach to teaching and curriculum

in the elementary school. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

Escalas, J. (1998). Advertising narratives: What are they and how do they work? In B. Stern,

Representing consumers: voices, views, and visions (1 ed., pp. 267-289). New York, NY:

Routledge.

Escalas, J. (2004a). Imagine yourself in the product: Mental simulation, narrative transportation,

and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 37–48.

Escalas, J. (2004b). Narrative processing: Building consumer connections to brands. Journal of

Consumer Psychology, 14(1&2), 168-80.

Escalas, J. (2007). Self-referencing and persuasion: Narrative transportation versus analytical

elaboration. Journal Of Consumer Research, 33(4), 421-429.

Escalas, J., & Stern, B. B. (2003). Sympathy and empathy: Emotional responses to advertising

dramas. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 566-578.

Escalas, J., Moore, M. C., & Britton, E. J. (2004). Fishing for feelings: Hooking viewers helps!

Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1), 105-114.

Faircloth, J. B., Capella, L. M., & Alford, B. L. (2001). The effect of brand attitude and brand

image on brand equity. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9(3), 61-75.

Feldman, J.M. and Lynch, J.G. (1988), “Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement

on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(1), 421-

435.

Fog, K., Budtz, C., Munch, P., & Blanchette, S. (2010). Storytelling: Branding in practice.

Heidelberg: Springer.

Forgas, J. P. (1994). The role of emotion in social judgments: An introductory review and an

affect infusion model (AIM). European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(1), 1-24.

34


Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological

Bulletin, 117(1), 39-66.

Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1988). Narrative and the self as relationship. Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 17-56.

Gilliam, D., & Flaherty, K. (2015). Storytelling by the sales force and its effects on buyer-seller

exchange. Industrial Marketing Management, 46, 132-142.

Goodman, J.K., Cryder, C.E. & Cheema, A. (2013). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths

and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(3),

213-224.

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public

narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721.

Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: the role

of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311-327.

Guber, P. (2007). The four truths of the storyteller. Harvard Business Review, 85(12), 52-59.

Hoyer, W. D. (1984). An examination of consumer decision making for a common repeat

purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), 822-829.

Jensen, R. (1999). The dream society: How the coming shift from information to imagination will

transform your business. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Lassar, W., Mittal, B., & Sharma, A. (1995). Measuring customer-based brand equity. Journal of

Consumer Marketing, 12(4), 11-19.

Lien, N.-H., & Chen, Y.-L. (2013). Narrative ads: The effect of argument strength and story

format. Journal of Business Research, 66(4), 516–522.

Little, S., & Orth, U. R. (2013). Effects of package visuals and haptics on brand evaluations.

European Journal of Marketing, 47(1-2), 198-217.

Loebnitz, N., Schuitema, G., & Grunert, K. (2015). Who buys oddly shaped food and why?

Impacts of food shape abnormality and organic labeling on purchase intentions.

Psychology & Marketing, 32(4), 408-421.

Lundqvist, A., Liljander, V., Gummerus, J., & van Riel, A. (2013). The impact of storytelling on

the consumer brand experience: The case of a firm-originated story. Journal of Brand

Management, 20 No. 4, pp(4), 283–297.

35


Machleit, K. A., Madden, T. J., & Allen, C. T. (1990). Measuring and modeling brand interest as

an alternative Aad effect with familiar brands. In M. E. Goldberg, G. Gorn, & R. W.

Pollay, Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 17, pp. 223-230). Provo, UT: Association

for Consumer Research.

Machleit, K. A., Madden, T. J., & Allen, C. T. (1993). The mature brand and brand interest: An

alternative consequence of ad-evoked affect. Journal of Marketing, 57(4), 72-82.

Mandler, J. M. (1978). A code in the node: The use of a story schema in retrieval. Discourse

Processes, 1(1), 14-35.

Mattila, A. S. (2000). The role of narratives in the advertising of experiential services. Journal of

Service Research, 3(1), 35–45.

McGregor, I., & Holmes, J. G. (1999). How storytelling shapes memory and impressions of

relationship events over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 403-

419.

McKee, R. (2003). Storytelling that moves people: a conversation with screenwriting coach,

Robert McKee. Harvard Business Review, 81(6), 51–55.

Megehee, C. M., & Woodside, A. G. (2010). Creating visual narrative art for decoding stories

that consumers and brands tell. Psychology & Marketing, 27(6), 603-622.

Netemeyer, R. G., Krishnan, B., Pullig, C., Wang, G., Yagci, M., Dean, D., . . . Wirth, F. (2004).

Developing and validating measures of facets of customer-based brand equity. Journal of

Business Research, 57(2), 209– 224.

Padgett, D., & Allen, D. (1997). Communicating experiences: A narrative approach to creating

service brand image. Journal of Advertising, 26(4), 49-62.

Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror

decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 189-206.

Peracchio, L. A., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1997). Evaluating persuasion-enhancing techniques from a

resource-matching perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 178-191.

Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and Peripheral Routes to

Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer

Research, 10(2), 135-146.

Phillips, B. J., & McGuarrie, E. F. (2010). Narrative and persuasion in fashion advertising.

Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 368-392.

36


Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany, NY: State

University of New York.

Polyorat, K., Alden, D., & Kim, E. (2007). Impact of narrative versus factual print ad copy on

product evaluation: The mediating role of ad message involvement. Psychology &

Marketing, 24(6), 539–554.

Puto, C. P., & Wells, W. D. (1984). Informational and Transformational Advertising: the

Differential Effects of Time. i T. C. Kinnear (Red.), NA - Advances in Consumer

Research (ss. 638-643). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.

Raghubir, P., & Greenleaf, E. A. (2006). Ratios in proportion: What should the shape of the

package be? Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 95-107.

Ryan, M.-L. (2005). On the theoretical foundations of transmedial narratology. In J. C. Meister,

Narratology beyond literary criticism (pp. 1-23). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Sametz, R., & Maydoney, A. (2003). Storytelling through design. Design Management Review,

14(4), 18-34.

Sax, B. (2006). Storytelling and the "information overload". On the Horizon, 14(4), 165-170.

Schank, R. C. (1990). Tell me a Story: Narrative and Intelligence. Evanston, IL: Northwestern

University Press.

Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1995). Knowledge and memory: The real story. In R. S. Wyer,

Knowledge and memory: The real story (pp. 1-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Schoormans, J. P., & Robben, H. S. (1997). The effect of new package design on product

attention, categorization and evaluation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18(2-3), 271–

287.

Schroeder, J., & Borgerson, J. (2005). An ethics of representation for international marketing

communication. International Marketing Review, 22(5), 578-599.

Sears, D. (1983). The person-positivity bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

44(2), 233-250.

Shankar, A., Elliott, R., & Goulding, C. (2001). Understanding consumption: Contributions from

a narrative perspective. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(3/4), 429-453.

Silayoi, P., & Speece, M. (2007). The importance of packaging attributes: A conjoint analysis

approach. European Journal of Marketing, 41(11/12), 1495-1517.

37


Simms, C. D., & Trott, P. (2014). Barriers to the upgrade cycle in a commodity process industry:

Evidence from the UK packaging industry. R&D Management, 44(2), 152-170.

Solnet, D., & Kandampully, J. (2008). How some service firms have become part of "service

excellence" folklore. An exploratory study. Managing Service Quality, 18(2), 179-193.

Spears, N., & Singh, S. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions.

Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53-66.

Stern, B. B. (1994). Classical and vignette television advertising dramas: Structural models,

formal analysis, and consumer effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 601-615.

Söderlund, M., & Dahlén, M. (2010). The ‘killer’ ad: An assessment of advertising violence.

European Journal of Marketing, 44(11), 1811–1838.

Söderlund, M., & Sagfossen, S. (2015). The consumer experience and the absorbing story.

Nordic Journal of Business, 64(2), 103-118.

Tangari, A., & Smith, R. (2012). How the temporal framing of energy savings influences

consumer product evaluations and choice 29, 4. Psychology & Marketing, 29(4), 198-208.

Twitchell, J. B. (2004). An English teacher looks at branding. Journal of Consumer Research,

31(2), 484-489.

Underwood, R. L. (1999). Construction of brand identity through packaging: A qualitative

inquiry. In A. Manon, & A. Sharma, Marketing theory and applications (Vol. 10, pp. 147-

148). Chicago, Illinois: American Marketing Association.

Underwood, R. L. (2003). The communicative power of product packaging: Creating brand

identity via lived and mediated experience. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice,

11(1), 62-76.

Underwood, R. L., & Ozanne, J. L. (1998). Is your package an effective communicator? A

normative framework for increasing the communicative competence of packaging.

Journal of Marketing Communications, 4(4), 207–220.

van Stegeren, A. H., Everaerd, W., Cahill, L., McGaugh, J. L., & Gooren, L. J. (1998). Memory

for emotional events: Differential effects of centrally versus peripherally acting β-

blocking agents. Psychopharmacology, 138(3), 305–310.

Wentzel, D., Tomczak, T., & Herrmann, A. (2010). The moderating effect of manipulative intent

and cognitive resources on the evaluation of narrative ads. Psychology & Marketing,

27(5), 510-530.

38


West, P. M., Huber, J., & Min, K. S. (2004). Altering experienced utility: The impact of story

writing and self-referencing on preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 623-

630.

Woodside, A. G. (2010). Brand–consumer storytelling theory and research: Introduction to a

psychology & marketing special issue. Psychology & Marketing, 27(6), 531–540.

Woodside, A. G., Sood, S., & Miller, K. E. (2008). When consumers and brand talk: Storytelling

theory and research in psychology & marketing. Psychology & Marketing, 25(2), 97–145.

Yi, Y., & Yoo, J. (2011). The long-term effects of sales promotions on brand attitude across

monetary and non-monetary promotions. Psychology & Marketing, 28(9), 879-896.

Zaichkowski, J. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research,

12(3), 341-352.

39


Table 1. Group means for the dependent variables in Study 1 (10-point scale)

Variable Short brand story List p-value t-value Hypothesis

Narrative transportation 5.99 5.31 0.030 -2.184 H1a supportedCritical thoughts 3.18 3.74 0.042 -2.047 H1b supportedPositive affect 6.93 6.21 0.017 -2.399 H2 supportedBrand attitude 7.43 6.67 0.008 -2.693 H3 supportedPerceived value 6.66 5.79 0.020 -2.351 H4 supportedPurchase intentions 6.09 5.56 0.219 -1.232 H5a not supportedWord-of-mouth intentions 4.73 3.84 0.031 -2.169 H5b supported

Table 2. Group means for the dependent variables in Study 2 (7-point scale)

Variable Short brand story No story p-value t-value Hypothesis

Brand attitude 5.47 4.67 0.000 4.477 H3 supportedPerceived value 4.61 4.02 0.019 2.377 H4 supportedPurchase intentions 5.12 4.51 0.015 2.474 H5a supportedWord-of-mouth intentions 2.76 1.94 0.006 2.866 H5b supported

40


Appendix 1: The Short Brand Story

Treatments Study 1

Short brand story condition.

[Muesli brand] was founded in 1999 on our farm. We produce delicious and environmentally

friendly organic products using domestic grain. The excellent quality of our products is important

to our family business now and in the coming years.

Enjoyable organic moments!

[Farmer name], organic farmer and muesli producer

Length in original language: 34 words.

List condition.

[Muesli brand]

- delicious and environmentally friendly products

- family business operating from the farm

- products produced using domestic grain

- founded in 1999

- organic production methods

- excellent quality is important


Treatment Study 2

Short brand story condition.

Domestic freshness for over 50 years

In the 1950s, laundry machines facilitated housework. [Entrepreneur] identified a big problem:

all laundry detergents were foreign made and hence not suitable for local water conditions or

local consumers’ scent preferences. [Entrepreneur] wanted to make a change. He developed a

range of laundry detergents and started to manufacture them in his hometown of [Town] in the

early 1960s. As a result, [Brand] was launched.

[Brand] is still the only domestic laundry detergent manufacturer. All products are designed

and produced locally in [Town], considering our needs, preferences, and the local environment.

[Brand] – fresh and natural, with nothing artificial.


41


Appendix 2: The Measures of the Dependent Variables Variable and α Items measuring the variable Source

Narrative TransportationStudy 1 α = 0.948

While reading the text on the package, I could easily picture the described events taking place.

Adapted from Green & Brock, 2000

I was mentally involved in the content of the text on the package while reading it.


I could picture myself in the scene described in the text on the package.


The text on the package affected me emotionally. Adapted from Green & Brock, 2000While reading the text on the package, my attention was focused on the content of the message.

Adapted from Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000

Critical ThoughtsStudy 1 α = 0.932

The muesli is delicious. The muesli is of high quality. The muesli is environmentally friendly. The muesli is locally produced.

Positive AffectStudy 1 α = 0.970

How do you feel now, after seeing this package? Adapted from Berg, Söderlund, & Lindström, 2015

I feel joyful.I am in a good mood.

Brand AttitudeStudy 1 α = 0.950Study 2 α = 0.902

dislike/like Yi & Yoo, 2011bad/good Chang, 2010low quality/high quality Chang, 2010

unpleasant/pleasant Chang, 2010; Das, Duiven, Arendsen, & Vermeulen, 2014

negative/positive Chang, 2010Perceived ValueStudy 1 α = 0.961Study 2 α = 0.933

What I get from [Brand] is worth the cost. Adapted from Netemeyer et al., 2004[Brand] is a good buy.

[Brand] is good value for money.I am willing to pay this price for [Brand].

Purchase IntentionsStudy 1 α = 0.988Study 2 α = 0.920

unlikely/likely Tangari & Smith, 2012; Loebnitz, Schuitema, & Grunert, 2015

improbable/probable Tangari & Smith, 2012impossible/possible Faircloth, Capella, & Alford, 2001

Word-of-mouth Intentions

I intend to talk about [Brand] to others.

All items were measured on a scale from 1 to 10 in Study 1 and on a scale ranging from 1 to 7 in Study 2.The focal brand's name has been replaced with [Brand].

42

harisportal.hanken.fi · web viewthis is the post-print version (author’s manuscript as accepted...

Documents