ARTICLES SUMMARY

1

No Title JA Author Year Key construct Hypothesis/RQ Research gap Findings (discussion) Limitation R Column11 2011When does

salespeople’s customer orientation leadto customer loyalty? The differential effects of relationaland functional customer orientation

J. of the Acad. Mark

Christian Homburg & Michael Müller &

Personal selling . Customer orientation .Buyer–seller relationships . Customer loyalty . Multilevelmodeling

ARTICLES SUMMARY

2

No Title JA Author Year Key construct Hypothesis/RQ Research gap Findings (discussion) Limitation R Column12 2014 A

3 2012 A

Psychometric Vs. C-OAR-SE measures of brand love: A reply to Rossiter

Mark Lett

Martin Klarmann

brand love; C-OAR-SE method;construct validity;content validity;prototypes

Rossiter (2012): 2 definitions of romantic love: anxiety & deep affection/passion;

Lack content validity: measuring about affection rather than passion (companionate rather than romantic, love);

Hatfield (2000) disavows Rossiter's characterization, but he cited this as a source of definition of love;

"to the best of our knowledge, there is no precedent in the love literature for either of Rossiter's definition of romantic love, and he provides no evidence to support either of them"

Rossiter:"loving the brand has impressvive behavirol outcomes, no matter what the product category may be" - positive idea building in the future

A new C-OAR-SE-based content-valid and predictively valid measure that distinguishes brand love from brand liking

Mark Lett

John R. Rossiter

brand love, brand liking, C-OAR-SE method, new contrastive measure

study 1& 2 (qualitive): provide the widest possible lens on brand love;study 2: focusing on brand love;study 3 (quantative): examing loved brands in a consumer electronics context

ARTICLES SUMMARY

3

No Title JA Author Year Key construct Hypothesis/RQ Research gap Findings (discussion) Limitation R Column14 JoR 2002

5 2006

John R. Rossiter

Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love

Mark Lett

Barbara A. Carroll · Aaron C. Ahuvia

Satisfaction . Delight . Love . Loyalty . Word-of-mouth . Consumer-brandrelationships

H1: Satisfied consumers who feel greater brand love are more brand loyal.H2: Satisfied consumers who feel greater brand love engage in more +WOM.H3: Hedonic product has a positive effect on brand love.H4: Self-expressive brand has a positive effect on brand loveH5: Hedonic product has a negative effect on brand loyaltyH6: Self-expressive brand has a positive effect on +WOM

(1) to see if brand love could explain manageriallyrelevant differences in these consumers’ loyalty and positive word-of-mouth and(2) to see if brand love could be predicted by perceived characteristics of the brand and itsproduct category

Brand love had positive direct effects on both behavioral endogenous variables, brand loyalty and +WOM (H1 and H2). Both hedonic product and self-expressive brand had positive direct effects on brand love (H3 and H4). Hedonic product had a negative direct effect on brand loyalty (H5), and self-expressive brand had a significant positive direct effect on +WOM (H6)

brand love construct for considering differences in satisfied consumers’ emotional responses to brands

provides a clarification of the relationships among the model’s constructs that marketing managers may find useful in decisions about manipulations of the marketing mix

For marketing academics, introducing a multi-item measure of brand love and refines our understanding of this phenomenon:a positivist investigation replacing interpretive approaches

a simple andempirically validated model that employs brand love as both a predictor variable and anoutcome variable in a population of satisfied consumers.

ARTICLES SUMMARY

4

No Title JA Author Year Key construct Hypothesis/RQ Research gap Findings (discussion) Limitation R Column16 Brand love JM 2012 A*

789

1011121314151617181920

Rajeev Batra, Aaron Ahuvia, & Richard P. Bagozzi

brand management,brand attachment,brand loyalty,brand relationship,brand commitment

To use their ownlove prototype to determine whether various brands or other items are clearly loved, on the borderline between loved and not loved, or clearly not loved and then reporting thecriteria they used to make these classifications. (1,2)Whether some of conceptually and empirically combine into higher -order structures or split up further at lower levels of abstraction.(3)

little agreement exists as to whatbrand love, most studies presenting differing conceptualizations;a lack of exploratory studies: assuming the equivalence of brand love and interpersonallove and the perception of brand love as an emotionrather than a relationship.

Theoretical Contributions:-more-loved brands with which consumers -> more direct, interactions indeed should havestronger (not just more positive) attitudes-beliefs about high quality ofthe brand were a significantly weaker contributor to L/WOM/R for more-loved brands than for less-loved brands -for more-loved brands, aspects of brand love such as self–brand integration and positive emotional connection should have relatively more influenceManagerial Implication-assist managers in showing how more lower level,concrete subcomponents can be targeted—throughproduct and service design and marketing communications—to influence the higher-level and more abstract consumer perceptions that shape a consumer’s feeling of brand love.

willingness to pay higher prices, as an outcome of brandlove, were not effective in Study 3 --> need for better measures.

to broaden the generalizability to other types of consumers and categories, particularly durables and services.

ARTICLES SUMMARY

5

No Title JA Author Year Key construct Hypothesis/RQ Research gap Findings (discussion) Limitation R Column12122232425