This research aims to examine how credence, search and experience attributes compete with suggestive brand names that are incongruent with the attributes they cue (e.g. expensive EconoLodge Motel, short-lasting Duracell battery and joint-stiffening JointFlex pill).
This study relies on experimental studies, together with analyses of variance, t-tests and logistic regressions.
Incongruent suggestive brand names can distort product evaluations and alter perceptions of product performance in joint product judgments involving contradictory credence attributes; they can misdirect product evaluations even if the search attributes conflict with competitor brands. Furthermore, they are more likely to backfire if contradictory experience attributes are readily available to consumers.
This test of the role of incongruence between suggestive brand names and actual product features includes key concepts that can inform continued studies, such as search attributes that consumers can readily observe, experience attributes that can be observed only after product use and credence attributes that might not be observed even after use.
This study provides applicable guidelines for managers, consumers and policymakers.
The findings expand beyond prior literature that focuses on memory-based, separate evaluations of advertised benefits and inferences or expectations of unavailable attributes. Specifically, this study details the implications of congruence between the suggestive brand names and different types of attributes observable at different consumption stages.
