IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jacres/doi10.1086-727831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Brand Narratives Are Written in Metaphoric Terms, Can They Weaken Self-Brand Connections?

Author

Listed:
  • Sydni Fomas Do
  • Martin Reimann
  • Alberto López
  • Raquel Castaño

Abstract

Previous research has established that brand narratives can strengthen the connection between consumers and brands. The present investigation raises the question of whether this finding holds when narratives are written in metaphoric terms. Three studies, including a pilot study of Amazon.com brand reviews (N=1,000) and two experiments (N=4,017), illustrate that metaphoric (vs. nonmetaphoric) narratives can actually weaken the self-brand connection. The studies illuminate that, while metaphoric narratives are prevalent in consumer reviews, such reviews seem less likely to provide the narrative structure necessary to establish a strong connection with the brand. This work contributes to the novel insight that while consumers often use metaphors as a way to talk about brands, relying on metaphors may actually weaken the review writer’s connection with the brand. This effect remains robust even when considering high levels of brand familiarity and linguistic abilities of the brand review writer.

Suggested Citation

  • Sydni Fomas Do & Martin Reimann & Alberto López & Raquel Castaño, 2024. "When Brand Narratives Are Written in Metaphoric Terms, Can They Weaken Self-Brand Connections?," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 21-31.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/727831
    DOI: 10.1086/727831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/727831
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/727831
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/727831?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/727831. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JACR .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.