Journal of Foodservice Business Research

ISSN: 1537-8020 (Print) 1537-8039 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wfbr20

Effects of the Big Five Brand Personality

Dimensions on Repurchase Intentions: Using
Branded Coffee Chains as Examples

Yi-Chin Lin & Pei-Wen Huang

To cite this article: Yi-Chin Lin & Pei-Wen Huang (2012) Effects of the Big Five Brand Personality
Dimensions on Repurchase Intentions: Using Branded Coffee Chains as Examples, Journal of
Foodservice Business Research, 15:1, 1-18, DOI: 10.1080/15378020.2012.650509

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2012.650509

Published online: 07 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1056

View related articles

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wfbr20

Download by: [Charles Sturt University] Date: 16 December 2017, At: 00:59
 Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 15:118, 2012
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1537-8020 print/1537-8039 online
DOI: 10.1080/15378020.2012.650509

Effects of the Big Five Brand Personality

Dimensions on Repurchase Intentions: Using
Branded Coffee Chains as Examples

YI-CHIN LIN
Graduate Institute of Hospitality Management, National Kaohsiung University
of Hospitality and Tourism, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

PEI-WEN HUANG
Kai-Ping Culinary School, Taipei City, Taiwan

This study explored brand personality dimensions and examined

the effects of brand personality on repurchase intentions. Starbucks
and 85 Degrees, the two largest branded coffee chains in the
Taiwanese hospitality market, were taken as examples. The results
indicated the existence of a five-factor model of brand personal-
ity for both Starbucks and 85 Degrees. Starbucks was perceived
as being exciting, sophisticated, and sincere; 85 Degrees was
perceived as being exciting. More importantly, the perceived per-
sonality traits of Starbucks and 85 Degrees can positively influence
repurchase intentions. Finally, this study provides specific sug-
gestions for practitioners in developing appropriate strategies for
hospitality brands.

KEYWORDS coffee chains, brand personality, repurchase

intentions

INTRODUCTION

Brand personality has gained increasing attention from researchers over

the last decade and has been identified as an influential factor affecting
consumers perceptions and usage of a specific brand (J. L. Aaker, 1997;

Address correspondence to Yi-Chin Lin, Graduate Institute of Hospitality Management,

National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism, 1 Sung-Ho RD. Hsiao-Kang District,
Kaohsiung City, Taiwan. E-mail: yclin@mail.nkuht.edu.tw

1
 2 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

Freling & Forbes, 2005). In a competitive market, if there is not much differ-
entiation in products or services offered by firms, consumers may generally
view brands as being the same. It appears that the abstract meanings of a
brand are more important than its functional attributes in attaining an edge
over other brands (Ang & Lim, 2006). By creating a strong personality, the
brand is given symbolic values, which are difficult to imitate and which
may create a basis for differentiation (D. A. Aaker, 1996; Ang & Lim, 2006;
Murase & Bojanic, 2004). Additionally, a positive brand personality could
lead to a relatively higher product evaluation when compared with a product
that merely focuses on physical features and functional benefits (Haigood,
1999). Thus, it is essential for a brand to build a bond with its customers by
creating a distinctive brand personality (Plummer, 1985; Sung & Tinkham,
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

2005). By doing so, it will increase the levels of customer preference and
usage (Sirgy, 1982), as well as trust and loyalty (Fournier, 1998) in regard to
a given brand.
Many industries, including the hospitality industry, have attempted to
develop brands with desirable and distinctive brand personalities in order to
gain competitive advantage in the marketplace. Within the hospitality sector,
the global branded coffee chain market has been expanding rapidly over the
last decade. This trend is expected to continue worldwide, not only in the
number of coffee shops but also in regard to coffee consumption. Evidence
of this is the success of Starbucks, the largest globally branded coffee chain
in this market. After Starbucks brought its business to Taiwan in the late
1990s, coffee drinking became popular among the Taiwanese (Su, Chiou,
& Chang, 2006). Currently, Starbucks has opened more than 220 shops in
Taiwan (Starbucks, 2010). Because of the success of Starbucks, many locally
branded coffee chains and independent coffee shops have emerged through-
out Taiwan. 85 Degrees, a Taiwanese coffee chain, was established in 2004.
It specializes in coffee, tea-based drinks, cakes, and breads. 85 Degrees beat
Starbucks and became Taiwans largest coffee chain in 2005. Within five
years, 85 Degrees has expanded to around 400 shops all over the world,
with about 300 shops in Taiwan, more than 90 stores in China, four in
Australia, and one in the United States (85 Degrees, 2010). Presumably, these
two branded coffee chains possess unique brand characteristics that attract
consumers and influence their purchasing behavior.
Brand personality studies in the field of hospitality management mainly
focus on restaurant segments, such as quick-service restaurants and casual-
dining restaurants, and on the application of the brand personality structures
(e.g., Murase & Bojanic, 2004; Musante, Bojanic, & Zhang, 2008; Siguaw,
Mattila, & Austin, 1999). However, the coffee-shop sector should not be
overlooked, since it is one of the fastest growing markets in the hospital-
ity industry. In the hospitality context, only a little research has empirically
tested the relationship between brand personality and consumer behavior,
especially in relation to repurchasing behavior (Lee, Back, & Kim, 2009).
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 3

To improve the understanding of brand personality effects, the brand per-

sonalities of Starbucks and 85 Degrees were examined and compared. Then,
the impact of brand personality on repurchase intentions was tested.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Brand Personality
Brand personality can be regarded as the inner characteristics of a brand
(Aaker & Fournier, 1995) and can be considered as a means of evaluat-
ing a given brand based on a set of personality traits (Batra, Lehmann, &
Singh, 1993). D. A. Aaker (1996) indicated that brand personality can result
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

from product-related (e.g., price, color, packaging, etc.) and nonproduct-

related attributes (e.g., imagery in advertising, symbols). More specifically,
human personality traits can be associated with a brand in two main ways
(J. L. Aaker, 1997). First, personality traits of people, such as brand users,
company employees, or brand endorsers, can be related to certain charac-
teristics of a specific brand. In addition, personality traits can be linked to
a brand through brand-related associations and attributes. Examples would
be brand names, logos, and distribution channels. J. L. Aaker (1997) further
defined brand personality as the set of human characteristics associated
with a brand (p. 347).
On the other hand, according to Keller (1993), brand personality mainly
consists of symbolic values rather than a utilitarian function. The symbolic
meanings or value-expressive attributes provided by a brand can reflect an
individuals needs and self-views (Aaker, Benet-Martinez, & Garolera, 2001).
In addition, perceived brand personality can be created and shaped by con-
sumer experiences with the brand (Plummer, 1985; Shank & Langmeyer,
1994). Usually, consumers choose a brand that is similar to their own per-
sonalities or select a brand with personality traits that they hope to achieve
(Helgeson & Supphellen, 2004; Sirgy, 1982). Therefore, by assessing brand
personality, brand managers can gain a better understanding as to how con-
sumers might evaluate their brand and its characteristics compared to those
of other brands.
In order to measure the personality traits of a given brand, the brand
personality scale (BPS) was developed (J. L. Aaker, 1997), based on the Big
Five personality dimensions (J. L. Aaker, 1997): sincerity, excitement, com-
petence, sophistication, and ruggedness. Since its introduction, numerous
studies have attempted to validate and refine the BPS for use on product
categories across a range of contexts and different cultures. Aaker et al.
(2001) then conducted cross-cultural studies and argued that the mean-
ings embedded in brands can reflect the values and beliefs of a culture.
Those authors revealed a set of brand personality dimensions that shared
similar meanings in the United States, Japan, and Spain. These dimensions
 4 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

are sincerity, excitement, and sophistication. However, they also found that
some of the brand personality dimensions carried different cultural mean-
ings: Japan (peacefulness), Spain (passion), and America (competence and
ruggedness).
Ferrandi, Falcy, Kreziak, and Valette-Florence (1999) developed a
French translation of the BPS and reduced the original 42 items to 33 items
in a 5-factor model: sincerity, excitement, sophistication, robustness, etc.
Ferrandi, Merunka, Valette-Florence, and De Barnier (2002) conducted
another study, based on Sauciers (1994) 40 human personality traits, and
identified 5 brand personality dimensions: introversion, agreeableness, con-
scientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. Supphellen and Grnhaug (2003)
examined the BPS in Russia and found five very different dimensions
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

of brand personality: successful and contemporary, excitement, rugged-

ness, sincerity, and sophistication. Overall, previous findings provided
evidence that brand personality dimensions are largely dependent on cul-
ture. In other words, cultural differences may influence evaluations of
personality dimensions of brands (Sung & Tinkham, 2005).

Brand Personality and its Application to the Hospitality Industry

In regard to research on brand personality for the hospitality industry,
Siguaw et al. (1999) analyzed consumer perceptions of the brand person-
alities of three restaurant segments: quick-service (McDonalds, Burger King,
and Wendys), casual (Chili, Fridays, and Applebees), and upscale din-
ing restaurants (John Thomas Steakhouse, Dao on Cayuga, and Renees
American Bistro) using the BPS. Comparisons were made of the five brand
personality dimensions within the restaurant segments and of the segments.
The results indicated that upscale restaurants were perceived to be signifi-
cantly more sophisticated than casual restaurants, but they were perceived
to be relatively less sincere. Quick-service restaurants were perceived to be
less exciting and less rugged in comparison to the other two segments.
Murase and Bojanic (2004) used the BPS to examine the differences
in perceptions of brand personalities of three quick-service restaurants
McDonalds, Wendys, and KFCacross two cultures, American and
Japanese. The results indicated that the Japanese generally rated these
restaurants as more sophisticated and more rugged than the Americans did.
Overall, these fast-food restaurant brands were perceived as being sincere,
exciting, and competent. Opoku, Abratt, Bendixen, and Pitt (2007) studied
how small- and medium-sized food enterprises (SMEs) communicate their
brand personalities on their websites by using content analysis. The results
illustrated that different types of food SMEs are associated with different
brand personality characteristics. For example, Caf Rouge, a French-themed
restaurant chain, was associated with sophistication; Jollibee, a fast-food
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 5

franchise, was associated with competence; Blenz, a coffee chain, was asso-
ciated with excitement; and Nando, a fast food franchise, was associated
with sincerity.
Musante et al. (2008) modified the original BPS (4 dimensions with
18 items) to examine six branded restaurants in areas ranging from quick-
service to casual-dining segments. Findings illustrated that casual-dining
restaurants were evaluated as having more sincerity, excitement, and sophis-
tication than quick-service restaurants did. Among four brand personality
dimensions, the competence dimension was the highest rated, and sophis-
tication the lowest rated in two types of restaurants. Furthermore, Lee et al.
(2009) examined the brand personality of a family-type restaurant chain and
confirmed five brand personality dimensions. However, the components of
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

the restaurant brand personality differed from those of J. L. Aakers (1997)

brand personality. Thus, based on the above discussion, the following is
hypothesized.

Hypothesis 1: There are significant differences in the perceptions of

brand personalities of coffee chains.

Effects of Brand Personality on Consumer Behavior

The BPS has been widely used to examine the relationship between brands
and consumers across different product categories and varied contexts
(Hayes, Capella, & Alford, 2001). It is recommended that brand managers
focus on building a desirable brand personality to communicate with their
customers (D. A. Aaker, 1996; Batra et al., 1993; Plummer, 1985). The for-
mation of brand personality should be considered an important part of a
firms overall marketing strategy (Musante et al., 2008), as it will contribute
to the success of the brand. In this regard, various consumer studies have
demonstrated a significant causal relationship between brand personality
dimensions and consumer behavior.
OCass and Lim (2002) examined the effects of brand personality dimen-
sions on brand preferences and purchase intentions toward different brands
of fashion apparel. Their findings showed that brand personality can signifi-
cantly influence brand preference and purchase intentions. However, among
all five brand personality dimensions, only the excitement dimension had a
positive impact on purchase intention. Fennis, Pruyn, and Maasland (2005)
studied brands from four product categoriessoft drinks, magazines, auto-
mobiles, and clothingand found that brand personality traits can affect
consumers self-perceptions. For example, the brand personality dimension
of sincerity can affect agreeableness, and the brand personality dimension
of competence can affect sophistication. Kumar, Luthra, and Datta (2006)
explored the relationship between brand personality and brand loyalty using
 6 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

durable goods (automobiles) and consumer goods (toothpastes). Findings

indicated that brand personality could affect brand loyalty toward consumer
goods. Carlson, Donavan, and Cumiskey (2009) investigated the relationship
between brand personality and identification with a sports team. The results
showed that brand personality dimensions of wholesomeness and success
influenced team prestige, while imaginativeness and toughness positively
affected identification with the team. However, the brand personality of suc-
cessfulness had a negative effect on identification with the team. Evidently,
specified brand personality dimensions can have positive or negative effects
on consumer behavior.
Ramaseshan and Tsao (2007) studied the relationship between brand
personality and perceived quality in the hospitality industry. They found
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

that the excitement and sophistication dimensions were important factors

affecting the perceived quality of those brands; examples are Singapore
Airlines and the Shangri-La Hotel. However, for brands with functional sig-
nificance, the effects of brand personality on perceived quality were not
consistently significant. Boudreaux and Palmer (2007) examined the impact
of brand personality on purchase intent toward wine. Participants evaluated
brand personalities and rated their purchase intentions for 90 experimen-
tal wine labels. Results indicated that specific brand personality dimensions,
including successful, charming, spirited, and up-to-date, strongly correlated
with purchase intent. Lee et al. (2009) examined the effect of restau-
rant brand personality on customers emotions and satisfaction as well as
brand loyalty. The results showed that brand personality has a signifi-
cant impact on an individuals emotions and further influences customer
consumption behavior.
In conclusion, a given brand with clear and positive brand personality
traits can influence consumer brand preferences and choices (Batra et al.,
1993; Lee et al., 2009; OCass & Lim, 2002; Wang & Yang, 2008). Moreover,
a strong and favorable brand personality can positively affect consumer per-
ceptions of a given brand (J. L. Aaker, 1999), evoke emotional attachment
(Biel, 1993), increase levels of trust and loyalty (Fournier, 1998), and provide
a basis for product differentiation (D. A. Aaker, 1996; Aaker & Fournier, 1995;
Haigood, 1999; Freling & Forbes, 2005). Also, a positive brand personality
can create a set of positive associations in consumers memories, influenc-
ing their attitudes toward a brand and brand choice (Johnson, Soutar, &
Sweeney, 2000; Keller, 1993; Phau & Lau, 2000). The strength of a brand per-
sonality is positively related to brand loyalty in terms of repurchase intention
(Lee et al., 2009). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed.

Hypothesis 2: The higher the consumers evaluations of a brands

personality dimensions, the higher the repurchase intentions they
will have.
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 7

METHODOLOGY
Data Collection
A survey was conducted in November of 2008 in Taipei, Taiwan, and a
convenience sampling method was used. The sample for this study was
students, their parents, teachers, and staff members of a community col-
lege. Participants were requested to fill in a self-administered survey. A total
of 600 questionnaires were distributed, and 448 valid questionnaires were
obtained for a response rate of 75%. In order to compare respondents per-
ceptions and evaluations of Starbucks and 85 Degrees, only respondents
who had purchased both Starbucks and 85 Degrees coffee in the past were
included in data analyses. As a result, 380 responses were selected and used
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

in the following analyses.

Measurement
The questionnaire used in this study was composed of two parts. The first
part included brand personality and purchase intentions. Brand personality
of a given coffee chain was measured by the modified BPS (Aaker et al.,
2001), which consists of 5 dimensions with 36 items. The five dimensions
are: sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, and peacefulness. The
modified BPS (Aaker et al., 2001) was selected and used in this study for two
reasons. First, researchers have suggested that western and east Asian cul-
tures may have different values and that these differences may be evidenced
in brand personality dimensions (Murase & Bojanic, 2004; Sung & Tinkham,
2005). Second, the modified BPS has been examined in the Japanese con-
text. It is acknowledged that Taiwanese and Japanese are characterized as
collectivistic with fairly similar cultural values (Hofstede, 1984).
Participants were instructed to imagine each brand as possessing human
personality traits and were asked to indicate the extent of his/her agreement
or disagreement with each personality trait for a coffee brand. Purchase
intention was examined with responses to the following statements:

I would buy the same coffee brand again;

I am likely to buy this specific coffee brand rather than other brands;
I am likely to buy this specific coffee brand in the future.

All of the items of brand personality perceptions and purchase inten-

tions were measured using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree;
5 = strongly agree).
The second part of the questionnaire primarily concerned demographic
characteristics of the respondents: gender, age, marital status, personal
 8 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

monthly income, educational degrees, occupation, and average frequency

of purchasing Starbucks and 85 Degrees products.

Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using the statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(SPSS), Version 14.0 for Windows. Descriptive statistics were first used
to profile the characteristics of the respondents. Principal axis factoring
with varimax rotation was computed to identify the dimensions underly-
ing the brand personality construct. A factor was retained if it carried an
eigenvalue greater than one. Each items factor loading was higher than
0.60 and not cross-loaded on more than one factor. Reliability tests, which
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

yielded Cronbach alpha values, were performed on all dimensions to test

their respective internal consistency. Regression analyses were performed to
examine the relationship between the dimensions of brand personality and
purchase intention. Additionally, paired sample t-tests were used to examine
the differences in brand personality perceptions and purchasing intentions
between Starbucks and 85 Degrees.

RESULTS
Characteristics of Respondents
Table 1 illustrates the demographic information from the sample. Of the
respondents, 41.3% were male and 58.7% were female. The majority of
respondents were unmarried (67.6%), about three-fourths of them (73.1%)
had at least a bachelors degree, and two-thirds of them (67.4%) had a
monthly income of US$600 or more. In addition, about 34.0% were sales
workers and technicians, 27.4% were students, and 16.1% were officers and
educators. About 18.9% of the participants had purchased coffee at Starbucks
at least once per week, and 23.4% of them had purchased coffee from
85 Degrees. Overall, approximately 60% of respondents had purchased cof-
fee at Starbucks and 85 Degrees at least once a month. In terms of purchase
frequency, 31.8% of participants indicated that they usually purchased coffee
at 85 Degrees, and 23.7% of participants indicated that they often purchased
coffee at Starbucks.

Brand Personality Dimensions by Coffee Chain

Table 2 deals with Starbucks. Using principal axis factoring with a vari-
max rotation, 20 items were retained after deleting cross-loaded items and
item factor loadings less than 0.50. Bartletts test of sphericity was found
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 9

TABLE 1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (N = 380)

Variables Percentage (%) Variables Percentage (%)

Gender Occupation
Male 41.3 Manufacturing 3.2
Female 58.7 Farming 0.5
Age Sales/Technical 34.0
1824 35.8 Professional/managerial 6.1
2534 35.3 Officer/educator 16.1
3544 14.7 Self-employed 5.8
4554 10.0 Student 27.4
55 and above 1.3 Homemaker 2.1
Education Other 4.7
Less than high school 1.8 Monthly income
High school graduate 23.9 Under $600 32.6
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

Bachelor degree 61.8 $601$1,200 35.3

Master degree 11.3 $1,201$1,800 18.4
Other 0.5 $1,801$2,400 5.0
Marital status $2,401$3,000 2.4
Single 31.6 Above $3,000 4.2
Married 67.6
Other 0.5

TABLE 2 Factors of Brand Personality for Starbucks

Factor Variance
loading Eigenvalue explained Cronbachs Mean

Factor 1: Excitement 3.05 15.25% 0.84 3.61

Energetic 0.79 3.72
Spirited 0.74 3.74
Optimistic 0.64 3.57
Youthful 0.63 3.55
Positive 0.58 3.76
Funny 0.57 3.32
Factor 2: Sophistication 2.65 13.27% 0.83 3.92
Sophisticated 0.79 4.02
Extravagant 0.70 3.95
Romantic 0.63 3.75
Elegant 0.62 4.04
Stylish 0.59 3.86
Factor 3: Naivety 2.01 10.05% 0.77 2.53
Dependent 0.72 2.53
Childlike 0.68 2.33
Nave 0.65 2.82
Shy 0.60 2.43
Factor 4: Sincerity 1.75 8.73% 0.84 3.66
Thoughtful 0.79 3.70
Kind 0.75 3.58
Warm 0.75 3.70
Factor 5: Resolution 1.40 7.00% 0.79 3.24
Tenacious 0.72 3.25
Masculine 0.72 3.23
Total variance explained 54.29%
 10 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

to be significant ( 2 = 3,264.38, p < 0.01). The value of the Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.84, indicating adequacy
in using the factor-analytic procedure. A total of 5 factors were extracted
from the remaining 20 items, which explained 54.29% of the total variance:
excitement, sophistication, naivety, sincerity, and resolution. Cronbachs
alpha values of these dimensions ranged from 0.77 to 0.84. According to
the results, the highest rated brand personality trait was sophistication
(M = 3.92). The brand personality traits excitement (M = 3.61) and sin-
cerity (M = 3.66) were also favorable for Starbucks. However, respondents
perceptions for resolution (M = 3.24) were not high, and for naivety
(M = 2.53) they were unfavorable.
Table 3 deals with 85 Degrees. For this business, 22 items were retained
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

after factor analyses, and 5 dimensions were identified. The results of

Bartletts test of sphericity were found to be significant ( 2 = 3,854.90,
p < 0.01), and the value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling ade-
quacy was 0.89. The five resulting factors were excitement, sophistication,

TABLE 3 Factors of Brand Personality for 85 Degrees

Factor Variance
Variable loading Eigenvalue explained Cronbachs Mean

Factor 1: Excitement 4.75 21.61% 0.90 3.66

Energetic 0.77 3.75
Youthful 0.72 3.92
Happy 0.70 3.69
Friendly 0.70 3.73
Spirited 0.70 3.71
Optimistic 0.64 3.57
Free 0.64 3.82
Positive 0.58 3.56
Funny 0.56 3.31
Likeable 0.56 3.50
Factor 2: Sophistication 2.64 12.00% 0.84 2.96
Sophisticated 0.74 3.08
Extravagant 0.68 2.69
Romantic 0.64 3.19
Elegant 0.60 2.90
Stylish 0.59 2.95
Factor 3: Naivety 1.85 8.42% 0.80 2.95
Childlike 0.82 2.95
Dependent 0.65 2.83
Nave 0.65 3.07
Factor 4: Mildness 1.42 6.47% 0.81 3.25
Peaceful 0.74 3.24
Mild mannered 0.72 3.25
Factor 5: Resolution 1.28 5.83% 0.74 2.93
Masculine 0.74 2.93
Tenacious 0.67 2.98
Total variance explained 54.33%
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 11

naivety, mildness, and resolution. All of these dimensions explained about

54.33% of variance. Cronbachs alpha values ranged from 0.74 to 0.90, sug-
gesting high reliability. The results showed a high score for excitement
(M = 3.66) and a moderately high score for mildness (M = 3.25). However,
respondents perceptions for the brand personality traits of sophistica-
tion (M = 2.96), naivety (M = 2.95), and resolution (M = 2.93) were
not high.
Paired sample t-tests were run to determine differences in perceptions
of brand personality for each coffee chain. Results showed that among
36 brand personality traits, Starbucks and 85 Degrees significantly differed
from each other in 29 traits. In general, Starbucks was perceived to be
significantly more consistent, responsible, reliable, thoughtful, kind, warm,
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

sophisticated, extravagant, and stylish than 85 Degrees. 85 Degrees was

perceived to be significantly more youthful, likeable, talkative, dependent,
nave, and childlike than Starbucks. There were no significant differences
in the perceptions for the funny, optimistic, free, friendly, happy, energetic,
and spirited traits.
These results provided empirical support for the hypothesis that
Starbucks and 85 Degrees have different brand personalities. Therefore,
Hypothesis 1 has been supported.

Brand Personality Dimensions Effects on Repurchase Intentions

To investigate the effect of brand personality dimensions on repurchase
intentions, repurchase intentions were regressed on the factor scores of
brand personality dimensions. The results of hierarchical regression analyses
(Table 4) revealed that, overall, the brand personality dimensions for
Starbucks had a significantly positive impact on repurchase intentions
(F = 18.921, p < 0.01), and R 2 is 0.202. These results showed that repurchase
intentions explained 20.7% of the variance in seven dimensions of brand
personality and demographic variables. The brand personality trait sophis-
tication ( = 0.243) was the most important determinant of purchase
intentions. It had the highest standardized coefficient value, followed by

TABLE 4 Regression Analysis for Starbucks (N = 380)

Variable F-value R2 t-Value

18.921 0.202
Excitement 0.219 4.717
Sophistication 0.243 5.201
Naivety 0.134 2.874
Sincerity 0.214 4.586
Resolution 0.032 0.683
p < 0.01.
 12 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

TABLE 5 Regression Analysis for 85 Degrees (N = 380)

Variable F-value R2 t-Value

23.109 0.236
Excitement 0.374 8.243
Sophistication 0.166 3.647
Naivety 0.127 2.789
Mildness 0.143 3.148
Resolution 0.081 1.779
p < 0.01.

excitement ( = 0.219), sincerity ( = 0.214), and naivety ( = 0.134).

Only one dimension, resolution ( = 0.032), had a nonsignificant influ-
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

ence on repurchase intentions. That is, sophistication, excitement, sincerity,

and naivety characteristics were recognized by consumers in regard to
consuming Starbucks coffee.
Among the five brand personality dimensions for 85 Degrees (Table 5),
four had significantly positive effects on repurchase intentions (F = 23.109,
p < 0.01). R 2 is 0.236, which indicated that 23.6% of the variation
in repurchase intentions was explained by these five brand personal-
ity dimensions and demographic variables. According to the results, the
variable excitement ( = 0.374) was the most important factor in affect-
ing repurchase intentions toward 85 Degrees, followed by sophistication
( = 0.166), mildness ( = 0.143), and naivety ( = 0.127). The brand
personality trait resolution ( = 0.081) did not have a significant influence
on repurchase intentions. In other words, four brand characteristics
excitement, sophistication, mildness, and naivetywere recognized by
consumers in regard to consuming coffee from 85 Degrees.
Additionally, regarding the differences in purchase intention between
Starbucks and 85 Degrees, only the item I would buy the same coffee
brand again showed a significant difference (t = 3.33, p < 0.01). More
respondents indicated that they would prefer to buy Starbucks coffee again
(M = 3.66) rather than 85 Degrees coffee (M = 3.45).
Based on these findings, it is apparent that favorable personality traits
of a coffee chain have the power to influence the respondents purchase
intentions. For example, respondents rated responsibility, sophistication, and
sincerity as the top three preferred traits of Starbucks. These three personal-
ity traits are also the three most important factors that influence purchase
intentions. On the other hand, excitement, sophistication, and mildness
were the three main preferred brand personality traits for 85 Degrees. Also,
these three brand personality traits were the three most important factors
that influenced purchase intentions. Consequently, Hypothesis 2 has been
supported.
Overall, results of this study were consistent with Freling and Forbess
(2005) findings in terms of the close relationship between preferred
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 13

personality traits and purchase intentions. Therefore, a brand has to create

positive and desirable personality traits to attract consumers. Brand managers
need to constantly evaluate their own brands characteristics and perform
appropriately to win consumers confidence and loyalty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The present study extended research on the use of the brand personality
concept by examining its impact on customer repurchase intentions. Two
branded coffee chains were used as examples. Based on these findings, the
study has provided several theoretical and managerial implications to assist
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

hospitality brands in maintaining successful positioning and in differentiating

their products and services from those of their competitors.
From a theoretical perspective, according to Aaker et al.s (2001)
modified BPS, the study encompassed 36 items representing 5 personal-
ity dimensions. Findings of the present study also yielded five personality
dimensions for Starbucks and for 85 Degrees; however, results showed that
components of brand personality dimensions varied for the coffee chains
and differed from those of Aaker et al.s (2001) brand personality dimen-
sions. First, the specified five dimensions of brand personality for Starbucks
and for 85 Degrees were not completely identical to those of Aaker et al.s
(2001) modified BPS.
The modified BPS presents five dimensions of brand personality: excite-
ment, competence, peacefulness, sincerity, and sophistication. For Starbucks,
the dimensions were excitement, sophistication, naivety, sincerity, and res-
olution. For 85 Degrees, the dimensions were excitement, sophistication,
naivety, mildness, and resolution. Compared to the five dimensions from
Aaker et al.s (2001) modified BPS, 85 Degrees illustrated two dimensions:
naivety and mildness, relating to the peacefulness dimension. In other
words, there was a lack of the sincerity dimension for 85 Degrees. The five
dimensions for Starbucks were the same as the aspects of the modified BPS.
An example of this can be shown by comparing only the sophistica-
tion factor. The sophistication factor of the modified BPS (Aaker et al., 2001)
consists of six personality traits: elegant, smooth, romantic, stylish, sophisti-
cated, and extravagant, whereas the sophistication factor for Starbucks and
for 85 Degrees consists of only five personality traits: elegant, romantic,
stylish, sophisticated, and extravagant. The excitement dimension in Aaker
et al.s (2001) BPS is made up of 4 facets and 12 personality traits. However,
the excitement dimension for Starbucks consisted of six traits: energetic, spir-
ited, optimistic, youthful, positive, and funny. 85 Degrees included 10 traits:
energetic, youthful, happy, friendly, spirited, optimistic, free, positive, funny,
and likable. Only the sincerity dimension was completely the same for the
modified BPS and Starbucks.
 14 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

Taken as a whole, this study confirmed the multiple dimensions of

brand personality for the coffee chains. Starbucks and 85 Degrees have
different brand personalities. Starbucks has been designed to offer cus-
tomers great coffee in comfortable surroundings and to create an atmosphere
that encourages customers to settle in and hang out with friends. As such,
Starbucks is perceived as being exciting, sophisticated, and sincere. On the
other hand, the phenomenon of many people gathering at 85 Degrees shops
for social activities was reflected through the perceived dimension of excite-
ment. Findings indicated that excitement, sophistication, and sincerity are
three preferred brand personality dimensions and that these are also the
main factors that influence repurchase intentions for Starbucks. The key fac-
tor affecting repurchase intentions for 85 Degrees was excitement, and
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

this particular dimension is the most favorable characteristic of 85 Degrees.

It implies that if customers perceive a brand personality trait as being more
positive, they are more likely to make preferable responses in terms of the
likelihood of repurchasing a specific coffee brand in the future. The findings
were consistent with Lee et al.s (2009) and Wang and Yangs (2008) findings
that brand personalities do positively affect purchasing behavior.
From a practical point of view, this study should help coffee brand
managers gain a better understanding of the role of brand personality in
building brand-loyal behavior. It is suggested that brand managers have to
understand consumers preferred brand characteristics in order to adequately
market their products and services. Brand managers also need to know
how to communicate the desired personality traits of a given brand to the
main target markets and strengthen the relationship between the brand and
consumers. This is likely to result in increased identification with the brand.
In other words, if brand managers want to improve long-term relationships
between branded coffee chains and consumers, they need to consider how
to design distinctive and positive brand personality traits for their products
and services, as well as targeting consumers preferences and willingness to
increase their purchasing. Brand managers also need to consider selective
targets in light of the coffee chains own brand personality. Most importantly,
creating and maintaining a consistent brand personality with overall brand
image and brand concept is important. It could clarify and refine consumers
perspectives concerning the specific brand. In turn, this would assist a brand
in developing a long-lasting relationship with customers (Murase & Bojanic,
2004). Eventually, a firm could enhance its brand equity.
On the whole, a favorable perception of brand personality for a given
brand could lead to a positive influence on consumer post-purchase behav-
ior related to a brand. In view of this, a strong and distinctive brand
personality could be the foundation for brand differentiation, which, in turn,
could help attain a sustainable competitive advantage. Brand managers of
coffee chains need to create and design unique brand characteristics that
are difficult to copy in order to increase competitiveness in the markets.
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 15

Specifically, a brand needs to have a suitable personality, and consistent

efforts have to be made to strengthen and maintain a brand personality to
successfully compete with other brands. The BPS provides the means for
brand managers to review the brand positioning of existing products or ser-
vices. It is recommended that coffee chain practitioners should continuously
monitor customers perceptions regarding brand personalities to ascertain
whether the brand personality is aligned with the firms mission, vision, and
objectives.
This study was a first step in examining the differences in brand per-
sonalities for branded coffee chains. Although the study brought forth many
interesting findings, it has some limitations. First, results cannot be gener-
alized to the whole population and to other contexts, because data from
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

this study were collected in Taiwan using a convenient sampling method.

Future studies should consider developing a systematic design to better rep-
resent the population. Second, there may be issues concerning the validity
of the modified BPS with respect to the use of the same scale in different
countries or contexts. This study only focused on two branded coffee chains
in Taiwan. The results may have been different if other coffee chains and
more countries had been included in the sample. Furthermore, although it is
known that favorable brand personality traits can significantly influence con-
sumers responses, in this study, brand personality only explained about 20%
of the total variance of repurchase intentions. There are likely to be other
variables that influence consumers repurchasing behaviors. It is suggested
that more variables related to brand personality and repurchase intentions
should be included in future studies in order to improve the understanding
of the role of brand personality in affecting consumer behavior. It is recom-
mended that future research should explore the effects of brand personality
dimensions among other populations. A wide variety of product categories,
such as different hospitality brands, should also be investigated to benefit
the development of the hospitality industry.

REFERENCES

85 Degrees. (2010). 85 Degrees. Retrieved January 18, 2010, from http://www.

85cafe.com.
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building strong brand. New York: Free Press.
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research,
34(3), 347356.
Aaker, J. L. (1999). The malleable self: The role of self-expression in persuasion.
Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 4557.
Aaker, J. L., Benet-Martinez, V., & Garolera, J. (2001). Consumption symbols as car-
riers of culture: A Study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 492508.
 16 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

Aaker, J. L., & Fournier, S. (1995). A brand as a character, a partner and a person:
Three perspectives on the question of brand personality. Advances in consumer
Research, 22, 391395.
Ang, S. H., & Lim, E. A. C. (2006). The influence of metaphors and product type
on brand personality perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 35(2),
3953.
Batra, R., Lehmann, D. R., & Singh, D. (1993). The brand personality component of
brand goodwill: Some antecedents and consequences. In D. A. Aaker & A. L.
Biel (Eds.), Brand equity and advertising (pp. 8395). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Biel, A. (1993). Converting image into equity. In D. A. Aaker & A. L. Biel (Eds.),
Brand equity and advertising (pp. 6782). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

Boudreaux, C. A., & Palmer, S. E. (2007). A charming little Cabernet: Effects of wine
label design on purchase intent and brand personality. International Journal
of Wine Business Research, 19(3), 170186.
Carlson, B. D., Donavan, D. T., & Cumiskey, K. J. (2009). Consumer-brand relation-
ships in sport: Brand personality and identification. International Journal of
Retail & Distribution Management, 37(4), 370384.
Fennis, B. M., Pruyn, A. T. H., & Maasland, M. (2005). Revisiting the malleable self:
Brand effects on consumer self-perceptions of personality traits. Advances in
Consumer Research, 32, 371377.
Ferrandi, J. M., Falcy, F. S., Kreziak, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (1999). Aakers
brand personality scale: A replication and a double methodological validation
in a French setting. Proceedings of the 26th International Research Seminar
in Marketing and the Third International Research Seminar on Marketing
Communications and Consumer Behavior, France, 240259.
Ferrandi, J. M., Merunka, D., Valette-Florence, P., & De Barnier, V. (2002). Brand
personality: How well does a human personality scale apply to brands? Asia
Pacific Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 5360.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in
consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343373.
Freling, T. H., & Forbes, L. P. (2005). An empirical analysis of the brand personality
effect. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(7), 404413.
Haigood, T. L. (1999). The brand personality effect: An empirical investiga-
tion. Proceedings of the American Marketing Association Winter Educators
Conference, New York.
Hayes, J. B., Capella, L. M., & Alford, B. L. (2001). Summary briefthe brand person-
ality as a basis for consumer-brand relationships. Proceedings of the Academy
of Marketing Science Conference, Cardiff, Ireland.
Helgeson, J. G., & Supphellen, M. (2004). A conceptual and measurement compar-
ison of self-congruity and brand personality: The impact of socially desirable
responding. International Journal of Marketing Research, 46(2), 205233.
Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultures consequences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Johnson, L. W., Soutar, G. N., & Sweeney, J. C. (2000). Moderators of the
brand image/perceived product quality relationship. The Journal of Brand
Management, 7(6), 425433.
 Brand Personality Dimensions Effects 17

Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based

brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 122.
Kumar, R., Luthra, A., & Datta, G. (2006). Linkages between brand personality and
brand loyalty: A qualitative study in an emerging market in the Indian context.
South Asian Journal of Management, 13(2), 1135.
Lee, Y.-K., Back, K.-J., & Kim, J.-Y. (2009). Family restaurant brand personality and
its impact on customers emotion, satisfaction, and brand loyalty. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, 33(3), 305328.
Murase, H., & Bojanic, D. C. (2004). An examination of the differences in restaurant
brand personality across cultures. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing,
11(2/3), 97113.
Musante, M. D., Bojanic, D. C., & Zhang, J. (2008). A modified brand personality
scale for the restaurant industry. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing,
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017

16(4), 303323.
OCass, A., & Lim, K. (2002). The influence of brand associations on brand pref-
erence and purchase intention. Journal of International Consumer Marketing,
14(2), 4171.
Opoku, R. A., Abratt, R., Bendixen, M., & Pitt, L. (2007). Communicating brand
personality: Are the web sites doing the talking for food SMEs? Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal, 10(4), 362374.
Phau, I., & Lau, K. C. (2000). Conceptualising brand personality: A review and
research propositions. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for
Marketing, 9(1), 5269.
Plummer, J. J. (1985). How brand personality makes a difference. Journal of
Advertising Research, 24(6), 2731.
Ramaseshan, B., & Tsao, H.-Y. (2007). Moderating effects of the brand concept on
the relationship between brand personality and perceived quality. The Journal
of Brand Management, 14(6), 458466.
Saucier, G. (1994). Separating description and evaluation in the structure of
personality attributes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1),
141154.
Shank, M. D., & Langmeyer, L. (1994). Does personality influence brand image?
Journal of Psychology, 128, 157164.
Siguaw, J. A., Mattila, A., & Austin, J. R. (1999). The brand-personality scale:
An application for restaurants. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, 40(3), 4855.
Sirgy, J. M. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of
Consumer Research, 9, 287300.
Starbucks. (2010). About Starbucks. Retrieved January 16, 2010, from http://www.
starbucks.com.tw.
Su, A., Chiou, W.-B., & Chang, M.-H. (2006). The impact of western culture adoration
on the coffee consumption of Taiwan: A case study of Starbucks. Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, 11(2), 177187.
Sung, Y., & Tinkham, S. F. (2005). Brand personality structures in the United
States and Korea: Common and culture-specific factors. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 15(4), 334350.
 18 Y.-C. Lin and P.-W. Huang

Supphellen, M., & Grnhaug, K. (2003). Building foreign brand personalities

in Russia: The moderating effect of consumer ethnocentrism. International
Journal of Advertising, 22, 203226.
Wang, X., & Yang, Z. (2008). Does country-of-origin matter in the relationship
between brand personality and purchase intention in emerging economies?
Evidence from Chinas auto industry. International Marketing Review, 25(4),
458474.
Downloaded by [Charles Sturt University] at 00:59 16 December 2017