Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychographic Traits Influencing Private Label Proneness in the Product’s Life Cycle Growth Stage

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in National Brand and Private Label Marketing

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics ((SPBE))

  • 773 Accesses

Abstract

The share of PL in various markets differs according to PL relative positioning and its stage in the brand life cycle. This research explores factors influencing the proneness of buying a PL product during its growth stage. Marketers in this stage prefer using price and in-store promotion, while neglecting brand advertising. This paper proposes a conceptual framework for PL proneness that integrates psychographic traits—advertising lover, leaner on extrinsic cues, and early adopter, with variables of PL image and familiarity. This model has been empirically tested. Data were collected through a survey of 914 adult grocery store shoppers. The study employs a factor analysis method following path analysis using structural equation modeling (SEM). The results show the significance of creating a strong and sustainable PL brand through advertising. They also indicate the importance of approaching early adopters. Practical implications: Marketers are advised to change their budget and allocate more to advertising their PL brand, along with their in-store promotions. They should also use advanced tools like data mining to identify potential customers according to their psychographic traits.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abril, C., & Martos-Partal, M. (2013). Is product innovation as effective for private labels as it is for national brands? Innovation: Management Policy & Practice, 15(3), 337–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ailawadi, K. L., Neslin, S. A., & Gedenk, K. (2001). Pursuing the value-conscious consumer: Store brands versus national brand promotions. Journal of Marketing, 65(1), 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. T., & Simester, D. (2013). Advertising in a competitive market: The role of product standards, customer learning, and switching costs. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(4), 489–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balachander, S., & Ghose, S. (2003). Reciprocal spillover effects: A strategic benefit of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing, 67(January), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltas, G. (1997). Determinants of store brand choice: A behavioral analysis. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 6(5), 315–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonfrer, A., & Chintagunta, P. K. (2004). Store brands: Who buys them and what happens to retail prices when they are introduced? Review of Industrial Organization, 24(2), 195–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdem, T., & Swait, J. (1998). Brand equity as a signaling phenomenon. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7, 131–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdem, T., Swait, J., & Valenzuela, A. (2006). Brands as signals: A cross-country validation study. Journal of Marketing, 70, 34–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füller, J., Schroll, R., & von Hippel, E. (2013). User generated brands and their contribution to the diffusion of user innovations. Research Policy, 42(6–7), 1197–1209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horvat, S., & Dosen, D. O. (2013). Perceived risk influence on the attitude to private labels in the product’s life cycle growth stage. Economic and Business Review for Central and South-Eastern Europe, 15(4), 267–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin, B., & Suh, Y. G. (2005). Integrating effect of consumer perception factors in predicting private brand purchase in a Korean discount store context. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(2), 62–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, K. L. (2008). Strategic brand management: Building, measuring, and managing brand equity (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, N., & Parker, P. M. (1999). Collusive conduct in private label products. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16(2), 143–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirmani, A. (1990). The effect of perceived advertising costs on brand perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 160–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirmani, A., & Wright, P. (1989). Money talks: Perceived advertising expenditures and expected product quality. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), 344–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschate-Fischer, N., Cramer, J., & Hoyer, W. D. (2014). Moderating effects of the relationship between private label share and store loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 78(2), 69–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamey, L. (2014). Hard economic times: A dream for discounters. European Journal of Marketing, 48(3/4), 641–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamey, L., Deleersnyder, B., Steenkamp J-B, E. M., & Dekimpe, M. G. (2012). The effect of business-cycle fluctuations on private-label share: What has marketing conduct got do with it? Journal of Marketing, 76, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S., & Gendel-Guterman, H. (2012). Does advertising matter to store brand purchase intention? A conceptual framework. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(2), 89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, R. A., Liu, Y., & Zhu, C. (2015). TV advertising spillovers and demand for private labels: The case of carbonated soft drinks. Applied Economics, 47(25), 2563–2576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mieres, C. G., Martín, A. M. D., & Gutiérrez, J. A. T. (2006). Antecedents of the difference in perceived risk between store brands and national brands. European Journal of Marketing, 40(1/2), 61–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1986). Price and advertising signals of product quality. Journal of Political Economy, 94(4), 796–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nenycz-Thiel, M., & Romaniuk, J. (2014). The real difference between consumers’ perceptions of private labels and national brands. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13(4), 262–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • PLMA’s International Private Label Yearbook. (2015). http://www.plmainternational.com/international-private-label-yearbook

  • Richardson, P. S., Dick, A. S., & Jain, A. K. (1994). Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions of private label brand quality. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 28–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, P. S., Jain, A. K., & Dick, A. S. (1996). Household store brand proneness: A framework. Journal of Retailing, 72(2), 159–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethuraman, R., & Gielens, K. (2014). Determinants of store brand share. Journal of Retailing, 90(2), 141–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., Hofstede, T. F., & Wedel, M. (1999). A cross national investigation into the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 55–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudhir, K., & Talukdar, D. (2004). Does store brand patronage improve store patronage? Review of Industrial Organization, 24(2), 143–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TGI, Single sources. ([1999] 2014). info@tgi.co.il

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorell, H. B., Becker, H., & Engledow, J. (1976). The information seekers. The International Executive, 18(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vranešević, T. (2007). Upravljanje markama. Zagreb: Accent.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, L. (1990). The end of the product life cycle? Education says goodbye to an old friend. Journal of Marketing Management, 6(2), 145–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Business Administration, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel

    Hanna Gendel-Guterman

  2. Graduate School of Business Administration, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Shlomo Lampert

Authors
  1. Hanna Gendel-Guterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shlomo Lampert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hanna Gendel-Guterman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Francisco J. Martínez-López

  2. Department of Economics and Business, University of Almería, Almería, Spain

    Juan Carlos Gázquez-Abad

  3. Department of Marketing, Tilberg University, LE Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Els Gijsbrecht

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gendel-Guterman, H., Lampert, S. (2016). Psychographic Traits Influencing Private Label Proneness in the Product’s Life Cycle Growth Stage. In: Martínez-López, F., Gázquez-Abad, J., Gijsbrecht, E. (eds) Advances in National Brand and Private Label Marketing. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39946-1_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation