See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233924863

Brand Emotional Connection and Loyalty

Article in Journal of Brand Management February 2012

DOI: 10.1057/bm.2012.3

CITATIONS READS

26 593

3 authors:

Sandra Loureiro Hans Ruediger Kaufmann

ISCTE-Instituto Universitrio de Lisboa University of Nicosia
122 PUBLICATIONS 391 CITATIONS 69 PUBLICATIONS 203 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Demetris Vrontis
University of Nicosia
119 PUBLICATIONS 1,013 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Sandra Loureiro
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 04 July 2016

Correspondence:
Vrontis Demetris
School of Business, University of
Nicosia, 46 Makedonitissas Ave.,
PO Box 24005,
1700 Nicosia, Cyprus
E-mails: vrontis.d@unic.ac.cy;
sandra.loureiro@ua.pt
Original Article
Brand emotional connection and
loyalty
Received (in revised form): 4th January 2012
Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro
is Professor of Marketing at the University of Aveiro and a researcher in the GOVCOPP and SOCIUS research center. Her
current research interests include consumer-brand relationship, online environment and purchase, tourism experience,
and corporate social responsibility issues. Her papers were published in a variety of peer reviewed journals and at well
reputed international conferences. She has acted as a reviewer for several international journals and conferences. She has
participated in several research projects funded by the EU and FCT (Foundation for Science and Technology).
Kaufmann Hans Ruediger
worked in various functions for Manchester Metropolitan University and at several European academic institutions
in Budapest and Liechtenstein, after extensive experience in German Bank Management. Since October 2006 he is
Associate Professor at the University of Nicosia, was a launching member and President (20072009) of CIRCLE and
Vice-President of EMBRI, two research networks on Consumer Behavior and Management, respectively. He is Associate
Editor of the World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development.
Vrontis Demetris
is Professor of Marketing and Dean of the School of Business at the University of Nicosia in Cyprus. He is the Editor of the
EuroMed Journal of Business (EMJB) and the President of the EuroMed Research Business Institute (EMRBI). His prime research
interests are on international marketing, marketing planning, branding and marketing communications, areas that he has
widely published in over 70 refereed journal articles, contributed chapters and cases in books and presented papers to global
conferences. Dr Demetris is also the author of 11 books in the areas of international marketing and marketing planning.
ABSTRACT This study, for the first time, aims to integrate brand attachment as an
antecedent of brand love and both, affective commitment and brand trust as
mediators between brand love and loyalty. It is also the first time that differences
between male and female consumers perceptions on this topic have been compared
in literature. On the basis of previous research, a model was developed and validated
using consumers who bought one of three car brands: Toyota, Ford and Renault.
Living in three regions of Portugal, the sample consisted of consumers who bought
a new car 2 years before the research and had declared being satisfied with the
purchase. The model is tested in the context of a non-hedonic product, differing
from the common perspective that focuses on hedonic products. Hypotheses were
tested by employing multi-group structural equation modeling. Findings suggest that
brand attachment is positively related to brand love. Brand love reinforces the trust,
interest in continuing a relationship and faith in the future of the brand. Women
exhibited trust and placed more importance on dyadic relationships than did men.
Men, however, desired to identify socially with the brand.
Journal of Brand Management advance online publication, 24 February 2012;
doi:10.1057/bm.2012.3
Keywords: brand love; brand attachment; loyalty intentions
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management 115
www.palgrave-journals.com/bm/
 Loureiro et al
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, branding theory literature
has focused on the customerbrand rela-
tionship, which is based on a metaphor that
suggests consumers form relationships with
brands in the same way they form relations
in a social context (Fournier, 1998; Parvatiyar
and Sheth, 2001; McAlexander et al, 2002).
The concept is multifaceted in nature and
reflects affective and socio-emotional attach-
ments, behavior ties and supportive cogni-
tive beliefs. Related to this stream of literature,
several relevant concepts have been devel-
oped by relationship marketing research,
such as trust or commitment (for example,
Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Garbarino and
Johnson, 1999; Johnson et al, 2001; Hansen
et al, 2003; Fullerton, 2005). Emotional ties,
connection and attachment characteristics of
the customerbrand relationship together
with providing a positive experience to
customers and creating the possibility for
consumers to have an intense emotional
attachment to loved objects led Carroll and
Ahuvia (2006) to introduce the concept of
brand love.
The purpose of the present study is to
integrate the so far scattered brand attach-
ment, commitment and trust concepts into
Carroll and Ahuvias (2006) model of brand
love. It is the first time that the model is
tested in a context of non-hedonic products.
The second intention is to compare the dif-
ferences between male and female consumer
perceptions; to find if significant differences
exist between the sexes in the context of
Portugal, a Mediterranean country.
The Partial Least Squares (PLS) technique
was used to test the model in the context
of a product category that can be classified
as high involvement but also utilitarian
(auto industry). The new model implies
that emotional identification and attach-
ment improves the relationship between
the consumer and the brand, strengthens
the positive feeling toward a brand, and
leads to passion and love. In this wave, a
2 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management
high perception of brand love reinforces
the faith, the relationship, and the trust
regarding the brand and increases the con-
sumers retention.
The findings will be particularly inter-
esting to researchers and managers in
organizations that are seeking to understand
the relationship between their brands
(corporate or product, hedonic or utili-
tarian) and consumers and the importance
of properly communicating the brand
values and characteristics to create prox-
imity with consumers (self-connection and
attraction), which leads to a strong passion
and a continuous commitment that retain
the consumer and lead him/her to forgive
possible brand (organization) mistakes.
The article begins with the presentation
and discussion of theories and models
that embrace the concept of love in the
consumerbrand relationship. Second, we
propose and empirically test a model that
extends the Carrols and Ahuvias model
(2006) to non-hedonic products and
includes some antecedents (brand attach-
ment) and outcomes (commitment and
trust) of brand love. Finally, we discuss the
results, point out limitations, and provide
implications for brand managers and further
research opportunities.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND
HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
In the field of the dyadic relationship
between brand and consumer, extant studies
use a relationship metaphor from interper-
sonal relationship theory. According to
Fourniers (1998) brand relationship quality
model, there are six dimensions including
attachment (love/passion and self-connec-
tion), behavioral ties (interdependence and
commitment) and supportive cognitive
beliefs (intimacy and brand partner quality).
These dimensions are based on theories
such as interdependence theory and theo-
ries of attraction (Kelley and Thibaut, 1978;
Hinde, 1979; Kelley, 1979; Rusbult and
115

Van Lange, 2003). However, love and
passion are the essential concepts in the
attachment theory (Bowlby, 1979).
Attachment theory is based on studies of
parentchild relationships (Bowlby, 1979)
and continues through adulthood to romantic
relationships (Hazan and Shaver, 1994), kin-
ships and friendships (Weiss, 1988; Trinke
and Bartholomew, 1997). Several studies
suggest that emotional attachment is formed
between human beings and animals, places,
destinations, special objects, brands (for example
Richins, 1994; Schouten and McAlexander,
1995; Price et al, 2000; Yuksel et al, 2010),
and even human brands or celebrities
(Thomson, 2006). In consumer research,
Thomson et al (2005) identified a higher-
order emotional attachment construct con-
sisting of three factors: affection, passion and
connection. Thus, attachment reflects an
emotional bond similar to love.
The interpersonal triangular theory of
love (Sternberg, 1986) adapted to the con-
sumption context is closely related to the
emotional attachment construct; it con-
siders that brand love is made up of dimen-
sions such as: passion, intimacy and
commitment (Kamat and Parulekar, 2007;
Keh et al, 2007). Ahuvia (1993) suggests
that consumers can have real feelings of
love toward an object and conceptualizes
the love as having two dimensions: real and
desired integration. Batra et al (2008) pro-
pose that love is made up of seven dimen-
sions: perceived functional quality,
self-related cognitions, positive affect, neg-
ative affect, satisfaction, attitude strength
and loyalty.
Given the complexity of the construct,
interpersonal love theory alone does not
allow for the discovery of specific dimen-
sions of love. On the basis of the brand
consumer relationship paradigm, Carroll
and Ahuvia (2006) suggest that brand love
is composed of five dimensions: passion,
attachment, positive evaluation of the
brand, positive emotions in response to the
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX
Brand emotional connection and loyalty
brand and declaration of love for the brand.
More recently, Albert et al (2008, 2009)
propose two main components of brand
love: six first-order dimensions (idealiza-
tion, intimacy, pleasure, dream, memories
and uniqueness) and two second-order
dimensions (passion and affection).
Regarding models that integrate the
brand love concept, we can find three: the
holistic approach proposed by Fournier
(1998), the causal approach of Carroll and
Ahuvia (2006), and the systemic approach
of Batra et al (2008). As mentioned above,
Fournier (1998) suggests six strong relation-
ships and is interested in the different rela-
tionships a consumer may have with a
brand. Batra et al (2008) integrate various
constructs like brand loyalty, satisfaction
and attitude strength into a model of brand
love relationship; however, they do not dif-
ferentiate between antecedents and out-
comes of the consumers love for a brand
and do not explicitly use the construct of
love. Reversely, Carrol and Ahuvia (2006)
model the relationships between brand love
and both its antecedents and consequences.
They propose that brand love is influenced
by a hedonic product and self-expressive
brand and has a positive effect on brand
loyalty and positive word-of-mouth.
Carroll and Ahuvia (2006) highlight that
brand love includes a willingness to declare
love (as if the brand were a person) and
involves integration of the brand into a
consumers identity. A consumers love
toward a brand is greater for brands that
play a significant role in shaping the con-
sumers identity. Therefore, a self-expres-
sive brand is the consumers perception of
the degree to which the specific brand
enhances ones social self and/or reflects
ones inner self (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006,
p. 82); it includes two dimensions: inner
self and social self. Consumers satisfied and
in love with a brand are more willing to
repurchase and to recommend it to others.
On the basis of the above considerations,
Journal of Brand Management 115 3
 Loureiro et al
Connection
Self-
expressive
brand
Brand
Attachment
Figure 1: Proposed conceptual model.
this research proposes a model shown in
Figure 1 that links brand attachment, com-
mitment and trust to Carrol and Ahuvias
model (2006).
The proposed model presents brand love
feelings as a central construct. In this study
we conceptualize the brand love feelings as
the passion, positive evaluation of the
brand, positive emotions in response to the
brand and declaration of love for the brand,
as proposed by Carroll and Ahuvia (2006)
for love brand; however, we do not include
the attachment component. In the Chang
and Chieng (2006) study based on con-
sumerbrand relationship quality of Fournier
(1998), love and attachment are regarded
as separate dimensions. In this perspective,
our study points out brand love feelings and
brand attachment as two variables.
Serving as antecedents are self-expressive
brand and brand attachment; both compose
the connection to the brand representing
the factor known as Consumers Emotional
Brand Attachments proposed by Thomson
et al (2005). Hazan and Shaver (1990) the-
orize that love is fundamentally an attach-
ment process through which attachment
bonds are formed. The attachment process
and the fear to lose the partner should
increase the passionate love (Hatfield and
Rapson, 1993).To love a brand, consumers
need to be attached to it, that is feel that
4 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management
Commitment
H3 H4
H2
H7
H5
Brand love f. Loyalty I.
H1 H8
H6 Brand
trust
the brand is irreplaceable and miss it when
they do not have the brand.
As we stated previously, Carroll and
Ahuvia (2006) suggest that consumer love
is greater for brands that reflect their inner
self and/or their social self. Thus, self-
expressive brand concerns the fit between
the brand and the person (Power et al,
2008; Vlachos et al, 2010). Given this con-
ceptualization, the following hypotheses are
proposed:
Hypothesis 1: Brand attachment has a
positive impact on brand love feeling.
Hypothesis 2: Self-expressive brand has a
positive impact on brand love feeling.
Regarding the consequence of brand
love, Assael (1987) defines brand loyalty as
commitment to a certain brand with com-
mitment being defined as an enduring
desire to maintain a valued relationship
(Moorman et al, 1992, p. 316). In later
research, brand commitment was consid-
ered a relational dimension of loyalty
and as a variable at the core of the con-
sumerbrand relationships (Fournier, 1998;
Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001).
Commitment is different from brand
love; Fehr (1988) demonstrates that they are
two distinct constructs. In consumerbrand
115

relationship, quality love/passion and
commitment are two different dimensions
(Fournier, 1998) and Chang and Chieng
(2006) also formulate love and commit-
ment as two relationship dimensions. A
loyal consumer can be regarded as a com-
mitted consumer (Oliver, 1999), suggesting
that a consumer with faith in his/her future
with a brand wants to continue the rela-
tionship with a brand (being committed),
and is more willing to buy the same brand
in the future and to recommend it to others
(being loyal).
Brand love is an antecedent of loyalty and
word-of-mouth (Thomson et al, 2005;
Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006). Similarly, Johnson
et al (2006) demonstrated that commitment
(the affective component, as we mention in
this study) has a direct and positive effect on
loyalty intentions (intention to re-purchase
and word-of-mouth). Consequently, the
following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 3: Brand love feeling has a
positive impact on commitment.
Hypothesis 4: Commitment has a posi-
tive impact on loyalty intentions.
Hypothesis 5: Brand love feeling has a
positive impact on loyalty intentions.
Trust is another construct regarded in
this study as a consequent of love, passion,
and positive evaluation and emotions of the
brand. Moorman et al (1992, p. 82) define
trust as a willingness to rely on an exchange
partner in whom one has confidence.
More specifically, Morgan and Hunt (1994,
p. 23) define trust as the perception of con-
fidence in the exchange partners reliability
and integrity. These definitions highlight
the importance of confidence and reliability
in the conception of trust. Trust exists
between the two love partners (Regan et al,
1998) implying that trust is a consequence
of having feelings of love for a brand.
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX
Brand emotional connection and loyalty
Moreover, trust has been considered an
important determinant of commitment
(Achrol, 1991; Morgan and Hunt, 1994;
Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Chaudhuri
and Holbrook, 2001; Kingshott and
Pecotich, 2007). Theories of trust and com-
mitment also propose that both constructs
are influential in future loyalty intentions of
an exchange partner (Morgan and Hunt,
1994; Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Dagger
and OBrien, 2010). Satisfied consumers
who also express brand love are more con-
fident in their relationship with the brand;
they consider that the brand is reliable.
Therefore, the following hypotheses are
proposed.
Hypothesis 6: Brand love feeling has a
positive impact on brand trust.
Hypothesis 7: Brand trust has a positive
impact on commitment.
Hypothesis 8: Brand trust has a positive
impact on loyalty intentions.
Several theories offer evidence to explain
different perceptions and behaviors of men
and women. Cross and Madson (1997) sug-
gested that women are more interdependent
whereas men are more independent. How-
ever, self-construal theory (Baumeister and
Sommer, 1997) suggests that a fundamental
difference between men and women lies in
duality relational versus collective interde-
pendence. Seeley et al (2003) examined
whether gender differences in interdepend-
ence were due to differences in attachment
to groups rather than differences in the type
of group (relational or collective). Women
are more likely to establish and maintain
relationship with friends, family and social
contexts, and focus on dyadic bonds
more than men do (Gardner et al, 2002;
Markovits et al, 2006). Men focus more on
a group that includes identification with a
social category such as college student,
Journal of Brand Management 115 5
 Loureiro et al
hometown or gender group (Sedikides and
Brewer, 2001).
Hence, women may place greater value in
attachment to individual members of a group
(relational attachment) whereas men may
place greater value in attachment to the group
identity (collective attachment). These find-
ings have implications on how people per-
ceive information. Schema theory construes
perception as a constructive process wherein
what is perceived is a product of the interac-
tion between the incoming information and
the perceivers pre-existing schema (Bem,
1981, p. 355). Consequently, people tend to
process information based on the sex-linked
associations that constitute gender schema, that
is gender roles. Men are guided by self, agentic
goals while women pursue communal con-
cerns (Meyers-Levy, 1988). According to He
et al (2008), men are sensitive to achievement
due to agentic orientation whereas women
are sensitive to the prevention of losses.
METHODS
Sample and data collection
The questionnaire that captured both latent
and demographic variables was pre-tested
using six car owners personally interviewed
in three car dealers (car stands that sell cars
and perform car maintenance). Then, 374
car owners who lived in three regions of
Portugal (Oporto, Baixo Vouga and
Tmega) were contacted through the car
brand dealers. The car owners purchased a
new car 2 years prior and in surveys car-
ried out by the car manufacturers declared
being satisfied with their purchase. The
2-year delay between the purchase and the
study was necessary to ensure that the sub-
jects gained sufficient experience with the
car and the services subsequently provided.
As Evard and Aurier (1996) point out,
truthful and strong relationships between a
consumer and a company or between the
brand and the consumer do not occur in a
single encounter; they result from accumu-
6 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management
lation of consumption experience. Three
hundred and twenty-nine car users were
willing to fill in the questionnaire and did
so between May 2009 and September of
2009 (response rate of 88 per cent). The
brands selected for this study were chosen
because they are car brands that sold the
most during 2007 and 2008 (ACP, 2009)
and because they originate from three dif-
ferent countries. The reason for that lies in
findings from Zeugner-Routh et al (2008)
arguing that mere product association with
a particular country significantly impacts
consumers perceived quality, loyalty and
awareness/associations of such products.
Therefore, in this research we tried to con-
trol such an effect.
Over 50 per cent of the sample fell into
the age group 3150 years. About 20 per
cent of respondents were under 31 years
and approximately the same percent of
respondents were over 50 (Table 1). The
car owners of the three brands were split:
35.0 per cent Renault, 33.4 per cent Ford
and 31.6 per cent Toyota.
Measurement
The constructs under study were measured by
means of multi-item scales adapted from the
existing literature. The items in the question-
naire were first written in English, translated
into Portuguese, and then back translated to
English. Back translation was used to ensure
that the items in Portuguese communicated
similar information as those in English (Brislin,
1970; Sekaran, 1983) meaning that conceptual
equivalence was assured.
Table 1: Demographic characteristic of car users and
number of respondents by region
Gender (%) Age (%) Region (%)
Male: 59.6 1820: 2.4 OPorto: 30.4
Female: 40.4 2130: 31.0 Baixo Vouga: 48.6
3140: 27.4 Tmega: 21.0
4150: 24.0
5160: 11.2
> 60: 4.0
115

As suggested by Carroll and Ahuvia (2006),
the pre-test is also used to adapt the constructs
to the European context and non-hedonic
products. Especially, in the case of brand
love feeling, our intention was to capture
the essence of feelings of love with a brand,
and so, items with neutral feelings or not
directly related to love feelings were not
used. As to what concerns to commitment,
the study intends to analyze the more
affective components and not the calculative
components of commitment, as do Chang
and Chieng (2006) and Thomson et al
(2005).
In this vein, self-expressive brand was
measured using six items (see items in
Table 2), and brand love feeling with five
items (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006; Vlachos
et al, 2010). Attachment to brand was meas-
ured with three items based on Fournier
(1998), Chang and Chieng (2006), and
Thomson et al (2005). Commitment and
brand trust were measured with two items
each (Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Fournier,
1998; Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Johnson
et al, 2006). Finally, loyalty intentions were
assessed with five items adapted from scales
previously developed and used to measure
loyalty intentions (Zeithaml et al, 1996;
Johnson et al, 2006). Respondents rated all
measures on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 1 (Completely Disagree) to 5 (Com-
pletely Agree).
Data analysis
A structural equation model approach using
PLS (Ringle et al, 2005) was employed to
test the hypotheses of this study. PLS is based
on an iterative combination of principal
components analysis and regression; it aims
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX
Brand emotional connection and loyalty
to explain the variance of the constructs in
the model (Chin, 1998). In terms of analysis
advantages, PLS simultaneously estimates
path coefficients and individual item load-
ings in the context of a specified model. As
a result, it enables researchers to avoid biased
and inconsistent parameter estimates. On
the basis of recent developments (Chin et al,
2003), PLS has been found to be an effective
analytical tool to test interactions by reducing
Type II errors. By creating a latent construct
that represents an interaction term, a PLS
approach significantly reduces this problem
by accounting for error related to the meas-
ures (Echambadi et al, 2006).
Tenenhaus et al (2005) propose the geo-
metric mean of the average communality
(outer mode) and the average R2 (inner
model) that is varied between the values of
0 and 1 to be used in calculation of the overall
goodness-of-fit (GoF) measure for PLS (cross
validated PLS GoF). The relationship between
these measures is given as:
GoF = communality .R 2 (1)
Finally, the differences between male and
female are compared by splitting the full
sample by sex and using a t-test (where
m = male subsample size and n = female sub-
sample size), according to the equation 2.
This test uses the path coefficients and the
standard errors of the structural paths cal-
culated by PLS with the two subsamples.
( b Male 1 b Female 2 )
t=
1 1
Sp +
m n
(m 1)2 (n 1)2
Sp = SE Male
2
+ SE Female
2
2 ( 2)
(m + n 2) (m + n 2)
1
Owing the small sample size of each
subsample and the exploratory nature of
the research, the PLS approach becomes
the most adequate technique (Chin et al,
2003).
Journal of Brand Management 115 7
 Loureiro et al

Table 2: Measurement results

Construct Mean LV index Item Composite AVEa

(Standard values loading reliability
deviation)

Brand loveb 2.6 0.929 0.723

This is a wonderful brand. 2.8 0.863
(1.13)
This brand makes me feel good. 2.8 0.834
(1.11)
This brand makes me very happy. 2.6 0.863
(1.09)
This brand is a delight. 2.6 0.856
(1.10)
I am passionate about this brand. 2.4 0.846
(1.17)

Self-expressive brandb 2.2 0.957 0.787

This brand symbolizes the kind of person I really. 2.1 0.924
am inside (1.12)
This brand reflects my personality. 2.1 0.940
(1.16)
This brand is an extension of my inner self. 2.1 0.932
(1.11)
This brand mirrors the real me. 2.0 0.926
(1.14)
This brand contributes to my image. 2.4 0.816
(1.14)
This brand has a positive impact on what others 2.4 0.770
think of me. (1.16)

Brand attachmentb 2.4 0.854 0.670

No other brand can take the place of this brand. 2.2
(1.19) 0.722
I feel missing if I havent this car brand. 2.6
(1.20) 0.833
Im very attached to this brand. 2.5
(1.25) 0.860

Commitmentb 3.0 0.919 0.850

I have a lot of faith in my future with this brand. 2.9
(1.20) 0.918
I want to continue my relationship with this brand. 3.1
(1.14) 0.926

Brand trustb 3.6 0.848 0.736

This brand is reliable and dependable. 3.4
(1.10) 0.857
This brand is trustworthy. 3.7
(0.93) 0.859
The price of my car is more than fair for the. 3.4
performance I receive (0.95) 0.798

Loyalty I.b 3.1 0.901 0.647

Next time I will definitely buy the same car. 3.0
(or its successor) again (1.19) 0.820
If I have a problem with my car (eg, stolen) . 2.7
I will definitely buy it again (1.20) 0.809

8 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management 115


Table 2 continued
Construct
If I got any car for free. I would choose my car.
I recommend my car to other people.
I talk to other people about my car.
a
AVE Average Variance Extracted.
b
The items of these constructs were evaluated with 5 point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree. 5=strongly agree).
RESULTS
A PLS model should be analyzed and inter-
preted in two stages. First, the adequacy of
the measures (see Tables 2 and 3) is assessed
by evaluating the reliability of the indi-
vidual measures and the discriminant
validity of the constructs (Hulland, 1999).
Then, the structural model is evaluated.
Item reliability is assessed by examining the
loadings of the measures on their corre-
sponding construct. Each item loading of
scales measuring respective constructs
should approach or exceed 0.707, which
indicates that over 50 per cent of the var-
iance in the observed variable is explained
by the construct (Carmines and Zeller,
1979). Table 2 shows that the lowest
value of item loading is 0.722. Thus, all
individual measures are reliable as all item
loadings exceed the value of 0.707.
Composite reliability was used to analyze
the internal consistency of the constructs as
this method is considered a more exact
measure than Cronbachs  (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981). Table 2 shows that all con-
structs are reliable as the composite relia-
bility values exceed the threshold of 0.7
and exceed even the stricter threshold of
0.8 (Nunnally, 1978). In fact, the lowest
value of composite reliability is 0.848 (see
Table 2).
The measures also demonstrate that the
convergent validity as the average variance
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX
Brand emotional connection and loyalty
Mean LV index Item Composite AVEa
(Standard values loading reliability
deviation)
3.0
(1.36) 0.795
3.4
(1.09) 0.861
3.4
(1.05) 0.741
of manifest variables extracted by constructs
(AVE) was at least 0.5; this indicates that
more variance was explained rather than
unexplained in the variables associated
with a given construct. Table 2 shows that
the lowest value of AVE is 0.647, higher
than the minimum value of 0.5.
Finally, to assess discriminant validity,
the square root of AVE should be greater
than the correlation between the construct
and other constructs in the model (Fornell
and Larcker, 1981). Table 3 shows that this
criterion has been met.
The full structural results are presented
in Figure 2. In this study, a non-parametric
approach called Bootstrapping was used to
assess the precision of the PLS estimates
and support the hypotheses. Five-hundred
samples sets were created to obtain 500
estimates for each parameter in the PLS
model. Each new sample was obtained
by a resample process and replacement of
the original data set (Fornell and Larcker,
1981; Chin, 1998). Path coefficients,
interpreted similar to standardized betas,
indicate the strength of the direct rela-
tionship between constructs. All path
coefficients were found to be significant
at the 0.001 (Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6)
or 0.05 (Hypotheses 5 and 7) levels
except for the relationship between brand
trust and loyalty intentions. Consequently,
all hypotheses were supported except
Journal of Brand Management 115 9
 Loureiro et al

Table 3: Discriminant validity analysis: Square root of AVE and correlations of constructs

Construct Commitment Brand love F. Loyalty I. Brand Self-expressive Brand trust

attachment brand

AVE 0.92 0.85 0.80 0.82 0.89 0.86

Commitment 1.00 0.54 0.63 0.64 0.57 0.41
Brand love F. 0.54 1.00 0.57 0.76 0.77 0.41
Loyalty I. 0.63 0.57 1.00 0.58 0.52 0.46
Brand attachment 0.64 0.76 0.58 1.00 0.80 0.37
Self-expressive brand 0.57 0.77 0.52 0.80 1.00 0.25
Brand trust 0.41 0.41 0.46 0.37 0.25 1.00

Connection
Commitment
0.450*** R2= 33.4%
Self- 0.401***
0.399*** 24.3% Q2= 0.1
expressive 25.1%
30.2%
brand
0.224* 0.278*
Brand love f. 9.1% Loyalty I.
15.8%
R2= 64.7% R2= 49.3%
Q2= 0.4 Q2= 0.1

0.449*** 0.183 NS
Brand Brand trust
34.5% 0.406***
Attachment R2= 16.5% 8.4%
16.5% Q2= 0.1
GoF = 0.55

Figure 2: Structural results.

Source: *** P<0.001; *P<0.05; NS not significant.

Hypothesis 8. In addition, all the signs were
in the expected direction.
The Q2 statistic is used to evaluate the
predictive relevance of the model. As all
Q2 are positive (Fornell and Cha, 1994) in
the model (see Figure 2), the relations in
the model have predictive relevance. The
model also demonstrates predictive power
(R2) as the modeled constructs explained
64.7 per cent of the variance in brand love
feeling and 49.3 per cent of the variance in
loyalty intentions. As the objective of PLS
is prediction in a regression sense, there is
no overall GoF indices. However, the
overall GoF (Gof = 0.55 for this study) pro-
posed by Tenenhaus et al (2005) reveals
good fit (Figure 2).
The multiplications between Pearsons
correlation value and path coefficient value
of each of the two constructs reveal that
34.5 per cent of variability of brand love
feeling is explained by brand attachment
and 25.1 per cent of variability of loyalty
intentions is explained by commitment.
Correspondingly, the strength of the direct
relationship between commitment and loy-
alty intentions were found to be higher
than that of the relationship between brand
trust and brand love feeling and loyalty
intentions. Considering the determinants of
brand love feeling, self-expressive brand
and brand attachment have nearly the same
impact.
Globally, the results are consistent with
the literature review but reflect the impor-
tance of commitment as to intentions to
buy again or to recommend to others.
Thus, commitment reflects a greater degree
of faith and desire to continue with the
brand than trust, and when trust reinforces

10 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management 115

 Brand emotional connection and loyalty

the strength of commitment, the effect on
loyalty intention is stronger than the direct
effect of trust on loyalty intentions. Besides,
most of the empirical studies analyzed do
not employ the two constructs together
whereas the findings of Dagger and OBrien
(2010) are in line with the results of this
article.
Finally, the differences between male
and female are shown in Table 4. The t-test
results suggest that there are significant
differences (critical t-value = |1.960|) in
the causal order relationships brand
love feeling;commitment and brand
trust;commitment.
For the female subsample, all path coe-
fficients were found to be significant at the
0.001 (Hypotheses 1, 4, 6, 7 and 8) or 0.05
(Hypotheses 2, 3 and 5) levels. Conse-
quently, all hypotheses were supported.
However, for the male subsample, all path
coefficients were found to be significant at
the 0.001 (Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6)
or 0.05 (Hypothesis 5) levels except for
the relationship between brand trust and
commitment and for the relationship
between brand trust and loyalty intentions.
Therefore, all hypotheses were supported
except Hypotheses 7 and 8.
In this way, the results reflect what we
expected from literature review. For
women, brand attachment has a stronger
effect on love for the brand than the self-
expressive brand. Trust in the brand and
considering it reliable and trustworthy is
particularly important for women, as trust
strongly impacts on commitment. Women,
more than man, need to trust the brand to
be committed.
These results are in accordance with the
theory of self-construal, as men are more
guided by self (inner and social) and focus
on group identification with a social cate-
gory. Their identification refers to their
social group such as a sport club members,
college student, hometown or gender
group. This identification is very important
to drive the passion for the car brand and
leads to commitment. For females, trust is
very important to be committed to the car
brand because they need to ensure that the
car is safe for themselves and their family.

Table 4: Multi-group analysis

Structural paths Male Female Standard Standard Sp1 t-test

error male error female

Commitment - > Loyalty I. 0.420*** 0.371*** 0.112 0.105 1.432 0.306 NS

Brand attachment - > Brand 0.330*** 0.504*** 0.104 0.125 1.454 1.066 NS
love F.
Brand love F.- > Commitment 0.609*** 0.219* 0.088 0.100 1.202 2.893*
Brand love F. - > Loyalty. I. 0.286* 0.255* 0.124 0.106 1.551 0.180 NS
Brand love F.- > Brand trust 0.410*** 0.398*** 0.095 0.091 1.228 0.086 NS
Self-expressive brand- > Brand 0.560*** 0.283* 0.097 0.140 1.470 1.681NS
love F.
Brand trust- > Commitment 0.096 NS 0.398*** 0.099 0.095 1.277 2.105*
Brand trust- > Loyalty I. 0.149 NS 0.252* 0.092 0.101 1.241 0.739 NS
R2 B. Love F. 0.723 0.553
R2 Commitment 0.429 0.726
R2 B. Trust 0.168 0.158
R2 Loyalty I. 0.516 0.480
GoF 0.58 0.52

1
Unbiased estimator of average error standard variance ***P < 0.001; *P < 0.05;
NS=Not significant.

2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management 115 11

 Loureiro et al
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Following the model proposed by Carroll
and Ahuvia (2006), this research examines
the construct attachment to brand as an
antecedent to brand love feeling and inte-
grates commitment and brand trust as
mediators between brand love feeling and
loyalty intentions. The model was tested
contextually with a group of satisfied car
owners of three different brands with each
brand originating from different countries.
The product category can be classified as
high involvement as a big economic or
psychological loss is at stake. It should be
noted that even for utilitarian car, car taxes
are exorbitant in Portugal. The car owners
who bought cars from these three brands
feel satisfied with them and all the cars are
utilitarian, meaning they are used daily to
go to work, to go to the supermarket, to
take children to school and other daily
activities.
The major findings of this study are as
follows. Brand attachment has a significant
positive effect on brand love feeling. The
feeling of love toward a brand can reinforce
trust, the interest in continuing the rela-
tionship and faith in the future regarding
the brand. Brand love feeling is influenced
nearly equally by self-expressive brand
and brand attachment. Finally, loyalty
intentions are less influenced by brand
trust than by commitment or brand love
feeling.
These results corroborate the findings
of Carroll and Ahuvia (2006) because self-
expressive brand is an important antecedent
to brand love feeling with loyalty inten-
tions an outcome. Carroll and Ahuvia
(2006, p. 87) suggest that more hedonic
products and/or self-expressive brands tend
to be more loved; managers may find that
enhancing these aspects of their offerings
increases this intense emotional response in
consumers. Nevertheless, this study sug-
gests that even brands associated with util-
itarian cars with high involvement build a
12 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management
relationship with customers and create an
identity that leads them to self-identifica-
tion and social-identification with the
brands. The results also highlight the signi-
ficant and positive causal order between
trust and commitment (Morgan and Hunt,
1994; Garbarino and Johnson, 1999).
With regard to gender differences, the
results suggest that female brand attachment
has a stronger effect on love for the brand
than the self-expressive brand. Trust in the
brand and considering it reliable and trust-
worthy is particularly important for women.
Thus, the commitment of women to the
brand is heavily influenced by trust. For
men, it is especially important that inner
and social identification with the brand is
established to increase passion and love for
the brand, ultimately leading to commit-
ment. These results are in agreement with
the theory of self-construal.
Managerial implications
The considerations discussed above lead to
some important managerial recommenda-
tions. Corporate and local managers should
always be aware of opportunities to build
and to consistently re-build brand identity
and communicate a message to consumers
that leads present and future customers to
feel identification with the brand. Cus-
tomers need to feel that the brand symbol-
izes what they are; this contributes to the
customers image and helps to develop a
sense of belonging. Identification with the
brand coupled with good experiences with
the brand work to strengthen the attraction,
passion and love for the brand. Proximity
between the brand and the customers is a
continuous process. Passion leads customers
to be more open to a stronger relationship,
which leads to more confidence in the
brand. This way, customers will be more
likely to re-buy products of the same brand,
to recommend it to others, to choose the
brand over another and even to depreciate
a problem if it occurs.
115

Manager should also be aware that
women tend to value the dyadic relation-
ship between the individual and the brand
to build confidence and commitment.
Managers should plan personalized com-
munication and maintain close contact with
these consumers. Men need to feel that
they are connected to the brand and that
they have made the right choice; they truly
want to identify to the brand. The brand,
both product and company, must be con-
sistent with this sense of belonging. Thus,
communication should reflect a lifestyle, a
way to be in accordance with the inner and
social self of the men who buy the brand.
Limitations and future research
This research did not consider variables
such as brand hate or others that express
neutral or negative affect about the brand
to define brand love. The model presented
in this study was applied in an innovative
manner, in the context of non-hedonic
products, yet the results are associated with
a product category and cannot be appro-
priately generalized to other.
In future research, some other moder-
ating variables should be considered such
as socio-demographic (for example,
incomes). Other antecedents and conse-
quents of brand love should be tested such
as brand personality, credibility and con-
sumers willingness to sacrifice. In addition,
different product categories, brands and dif-
ferent levels of involvement should be a
part of the research context. When enough
information is gathered on the subject of
brand love, a typology of the different types
of brand love may be possible.
REFERENCES
Achrol, R. (1991) Evolution of the marketing organi-
zation: New forms for turbulent environments.
Journal of Marketing 55(4): 7793.
ACP Automvel Clube de Portugal. (2009)
http://www.acp.pt/index.php?template_id=6165,
accessed 2 March 2009.
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX
Brand emotional connection and loyalty
Ahuvia, A.C. (1993) I love it! Towards an unifying theory
of love across divers love objects. Ph. Dissertation,
Northwestern University, Evanston/Chicago, IL.
Albert, N., Merunka, D. and Valette-Florence, P.
(2008) When consumers love their brands:
Exploring the concept and its dimensions. Journal
of Business Research 61(10): 10621075.
Albert, N., Merunka, D. and Valette-Florence, P.
(2009) The feeling of love toward a brand: Concept
and measurement. In: A.L. McGill and S. Shavitt,
(eds.), Proceedings of the Advances in Consumer
Research. October, Duluth, MN: Association for
Consumer Research, Vol. 36, pp. 300307.
Assael, H. (1987) Consumer Behavior and Marketing
Action, 3rd edn. Boston, MA: PWS-Kent.
Batra, R., Ahuvia, A.C. and Bagozzi, R. (2008) Brand
Love: Its Nature and Consequences. Michigan Dear-
born University: Ann Arbor, MI. Working paper.
Baumeister, R.F. and Sommer, K.L. (1997) What do
men want? Gender differences and two spheres of
belongingness: Comment on Cross and Madson.
Psychological Bulletin 122( 1): 3844.
Bem, S.L. (1981) Gender schema theory: A cognitive
account of sex typing. Psychological Review 88(4):
354364.
Bowlby, J. (1979) The Making and Breaking of Affectional
Bonds. London: Tavistock.
Brislin, R.W. (1970) Back-translation for cross-cultural
research. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology 1(3):
185216.
Carmines, E.G. and Zeller, R.A. (eds.) (1979) Reliability
and Validity Assessment. London: Sage Publications.
Carroll, B.A. and Ahuvia, A.C. (2006) Some anteced-
ents and outcomes of brand love. Marketing Letters
17(2): 7989.
Chang, P.-L. and Chieng, M.-H. (2006) Building con-
sumer-brand relationship: A cross-cultural experiential
view. Psychology and Marketing 23(11): 927959.
Chaudhuri, A. and Holbrook, M.B. (2001) The chain
effects of brand trust and brand affect to brand
performance: The role of brand loyalty. Journal of
Marketing 65(2): 8193.
Chin, W.W. (1998) The partial least squares approach
to structural equation modeling. In: G.A. Marcoulides
(ed.) Modern Methods for Business Research. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher,
pp. 295336.
Chin, W.W., Marcolin, B.L. and Newsted, P.R. (2003)
A partial least squares latent variable modelling
approach for measuring interaction effects: Results
from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an
electronic mail emotion/ adoption study. Informa-
tion Systems Research 14(2): 189217.
Cross, S.E. and Madson, L. (1997) Models of the self:
Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin
122(1): 537.
Dagger, T.S. and OBrien, T.K. (2010) Does experi-
ence matter? Differences in relationship benefits,
satisfaction, trust, commitment and loyalty for
novice and experienced service users. European
Journal of Marketing 44(9/10): 15281552.
Journal of Brand Management 115 13
 Loureiro et al
Echambadi, R., Campbell, B. and Agarwal, R. (2006)
Encouraging best practice in quantitative manage-
ment research: An incomplete list of opportunities.
Journal of Management Studies 43(8): 18011820.
Evard, Y. and Aurier, P. (1996) Identification and
validation of the components of the person
object relationship. Journal of Business Research 37(2):
127134.
Fehr, B. (1988) Prototype analysis of the concepts of
love and commitment. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 55(4): 557579.
Fornell, C. and Cha, J. (1994) Partial least squares. In:
R.P. Bagozzi (ed.) Advanced Methods of Marketing
Research. United Kingdom: Blackwell, Cambridge,
pp. 5278.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981) Evaluating struc-
tural models with unobservables variables and
measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research
18(1): 3950.
Fournier, S.M. (1998) Consumers and their brands:
Developing relationship theory in consumer
research. Journal of Consumer Research 24(4):
343373.
Fullerton, G. (2005) The impact of brand loyalty
commitment on loyalty to retail service brands.
Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 22(2):
97110.
Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M.S. (1999) The differen-
tial roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in
customer relationships. Journal of Marketing 63(2):
7087.
Gardner, W.L., Gabriel, S. and Hochschild, L.
(2002) When you and I are We, You are not
threatening: The role of self-expansion in social-
comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology 82(2): 239251.
Hansen, H., Sandvik, K. and Selnes, F. (2003) Direct
and indirect effects of commitment to a service
employee on the intention to stay. Journal of Service
Research 5(4): 356368.
Hatfield, E. and Rapson, R.L. (1993) Love and attach-
ment processes. In: M. Lewis and J.M. Haviland
(eds.) Handbook of Emotions. New York: Guilford
Press, pp. 595604.
Hazan, C. and Shaver, P.R. (1990) Love and work:
An attachment theoretical perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 59(2): 270280.
Hazan, C. and Shaver, P.R. (1994) Attachment as
an organizational framework for research on close
relationships. Psychological Inquiry 5(1): 122.
He, X., Inman, J.J. and Mittal, V. (2008) Gender jeop-
ardy in financial risk taking. Journal of Marketing
Research 45(4): 414424.
Hinde, R.A. (1979) Towards Understanding Relationships.
London: Academic Press.
Hulland, J. (1999) Use of partial least squares (PLS) in
strategic management research: A review of four
recent studies. Strategic Management Journal 20(2):
195204.
Johnson, M.D., Gustafsson, A., Andreassen, T.W.,
Lervik, L. and Cha, J. (2001) The evolution and
14 2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management
future of national customer satisfaction index models.
Journal of Economic Psychology 22(April): 217245.
Johnson, M.D., Herrmann, A. and Huber, F. (2006)
The evolution of loyalty intentions. Journal of
Marketing 70(2): 122132.
Kamat, V. and Parulekar, A. (2007) Brand love The
precursor to loyalty. In: J.R. Priester, D.J. MacInnis
and C.W. Park (eds.) New Frontiers in Branding;
Attitudes, Attachments, Relationships. Advertising and
Consumer 2007 Psychology Proceedings. 79 June,
Santa Monica, CA, pp. 9498.
Keh, H.T., Pang, J. and Peng, S. (2007) Understanding
and measuring brand love. In: J.R. Priester, D.J.
MacInnis and C.W. Park (eds.). New Frontiers in
Branding; Attitudes, Attachments, Relationships. Adver-
tising and Consumer 2007 Psychology Proceedings, 79
June, Santa Monica, CA, pp. 8488.
Kelley, H.H.(1979) Personal Relationships: Their Struc-
tures and Processes. Erlbaum, NJ: Hillsdale.
Kelley, H.H. and Thibaut, J.W. (1978) Interpersonal Rela-
tions: A Theory of Interdependence. New York: Wiley.
Kingshott, R.P.J. and Pecotich, A. (2007) The impact
of psychological contracts on trust and commitment
in supplier-distributor relationships. European Journal
of Marketing 41(9/10): 10531072.
Markovits, H., Benenson, J. and White, S. (2006) Gender
and priming differences in speed of processing of
information relating to social structure. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology 42(5): 662667.
McAlexander, J.H., Schouten, J.W. and Koenig, H.F.
(2002) Building brand community. Journal of
Marketing 66( 1): 3854.
Meyers-Levy, J. (1988) Influence of sex roles on judg-
ment. Journal of Consumer Research 14(4): 522530.
Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994) The commit-
menttrust theory of relationship marketing. Journal
of Marketing 58( 3): 2038.
Moorman, C., Gerald, Z. and Rohit, D. (1992)
Relationships between providers and users of
market research: The dynamic of trust within and
between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research
29(3): 314328.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978) Psychometric Theory, 2nd edn.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, R.L. (1999) Whence consumer loyalty? Journal
of Marketing 63: 3344.
Parvatiyar, A. and Sheth, J.S. (2001) Customer relation-
ship management: Emerging practice, process, and
discipline. Journal of Economic and Social Research 3(2):
134.
Power, J., Whelan, S. and Davies, G. (2008) The attrac-
tiveness and connectedness of ruthless brands: The
role of trust. European Journal of Marketing 42(5/6):
586602.
Price, L.L., Arnould, E.J. and Curasi, C.F. (2000) Older
consumers disposition of special possessions. Journal
of Consumer Research 27(2): 179201.
Regan, P.C., Kocan, E.R. and Whitlock, T. (1998)
Ain love grand! A prototype analysis of the concept
of romantic love. Journal of Social and Personal Rela-
tionships 15(3): 411420.
115

Richins, M.L. (1994) Special possessions and the
expression of material values. Journal of Consumer
Research 21(3): 522533.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2005) SmartPLS
2.0 (beta), www.smartpls.de, Hamburg, accessed
2 August 2010.
Rusbult, C.E. and Van Lange, A.M.(2003) Interde-
pendence, interatction and relationships. Annual
Review of Psychology 54(February): 351375.
Schouten, J.W. and McAlexander, J.H. (1995) Subcul-
tures of consumption: An ethnography of the new
bikers. Journal of Consumer Research 22(1): 4361.
Sedikides, C. and Brewer, M.B. (2001) Individual self,
relational self, and collective self. In: C. Sedikides
and M.B. Brewer (eds.) Individual Self, Relational
Self, Collective Self. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology
Press, pp. 14.
Seeley, E.A., Gardner, W.L., Pennington, G. and
Gabriel, S. (2003) Circle of friends or members of
a group? Sex differences in relational and collective
attachment to groups. Group Processes and Intergroup
Relations 6(3): 251263.
Sekaran, U. (1983) Methodological and theoretical
issues and advancements in cross-cultural research.
Journal of International Business Studies 14(2): 6173.
Sternberg, R.J. (1986) A triangular theory of love.
Psychologist Review 93(2): 119135.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V.E., Chatelin, Y.-M. and
Lauro, C. (2005) PLS path modeling. Computational
Statistics & Data Analysis 48(1): 159205.
2012 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management
Brand emotional connection and loyalty
Trinke, S.J. and Bartholomew, K. (1997) Hierarchies
of attachment relationships in young adulthood.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 15(5):
603625.
Thomson, M. (2006) Human brands: Investigating
antecedents to consumers strong attachments to
celebrities. Journal of Marketing 70(3): 104119.
Thomson, M., MacInnis, D.J. and Park, C.W.
(2005) The ties that bind: Measuring the strength
of consumers emotional attachment to brands.
Journal of Consumer Psychology 15(1): 7791.
Vlachos, P.A., Theotokis, A., Pramatari, K. and
Vrechopoulos, A. (2010) Consumer-retailer
emotional attachment: Some antecedents and the
moderating role of attachment anxiety. European
Journal of Marketing 44(9/10): 14781499.
Weiss, R.S. (1988) Loss and recovery. Journal of Social
Issues 44(3): 3752.
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F. and Bilim, Y. (2010) Destination
attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and
cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism
Management 31(2): 274284.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996)
The behavioral consequences of service loyalty.
Journal of Marketing 60(2): 3146.
Zeugner-Routh, K.P., Diamantopoulos, A. and Mon-
tesinos, M.A. (2008) Home country image, country
brands equity, and consumers product preferences:
An empirical study. Management International Review
48(5): 577602.
115 15