IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition for memory retrieval between private label and national brands


  • Nenycz-Thiel, Magda
  • Sharp, Byron
  • Dawes, John
  • Romaniuk, Jenni


Perceptions of private label brands (PLBs) reside in consumer memory along with national brands (NBs). When a consumer engages in a choice situation, both PLBs and NBs rely on links to retrieval cues in consumer memory to give them a chance of purchase. This study examines the underlying competition between NBs and PLBs across different retrieval cues. The findings show that PLBs link to the same attributes as NBs and so compete with NBs for retrieval. However, while any brand typically competes most with the brands more commonly associated with any specific cue, the study finds evidence of PLB sub-categorization. That is, if a consumer elicits one PLB for a certain cue, he/she has four times the propensity to elicit other PLBs than elicit a NB for that same cue. This heightened propensity suggests that when a consumer learns that one PLB has a particular quality, the consumer generalizes that quality to other PLBs. Therefore, retailers should realize that the image of competitor retailers' PLBs affects the image of their own PLBs.

Suggested Citation

  • Nenycz-Thiel, Magda & Sharp, Byron & Dawes, John & Romaniuk, Jenni, 2010. "Competition for memory retrieval between private label and national brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(11), pages 1142-1147, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:63:y:2010:i:11:p:1142-1147

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Cotterill, Ronald W & Putsis, William P, Jr & Dhar, Ravi, 2000. "Assessing the Competitive Interaction between Private Labels and National Brands," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(1), pages 109-137, January.
    2. Nedungadi, Prakash, 1990. " Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 263-276, December.
    3. Hawkins, Scott A & Hoch, Stephen J, 1992. " Low-Involvement Learning: Memory without Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 212-225, September.
    4. Hoyer, Wayne D, 1984. " An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 822-829, December.
    5. Mark Uncles & Andrew Ehrenberg & Kathy Hammond, 1995. "Patterns of Buyer Behavior: Regularities, Models, and Extensions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3_supplem), pages 71-78.
    6. Uncles, Mark D. & Ehrenberg, Andrew S. C. & Goodhardt, Gerald J., 2004. "Reply to commentary on "Understanding brand performance measures: using Dirichlet benchmarks"," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(12), pages 1329-1330, December.
    7. Robert L. Steiner, 2004. "The Nature and Benefits of National Brand/Private Label Competition," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 24(2), pages 105-127, March.
    8. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. " An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    9. Karsten Hansen & Vishal Singh & Pradeep Chintagunta, 2006. "Understanding Store-Brand Purchase Behavior Across Categories," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 75-90, 01-02.
    10. Ehrenberg, Andrew S. C. & Uncles, Mark D. & Goodhardt, Gerald J., 2004. "Understanding brand performance measures: using Dirichlet benchmarks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(12), pages 1307-1325, December.
    11. Meyers-Levy, Joan, 1989. " The Influence of a Brand Name's Association Set Size and Word Frequency on Brand Memory," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 197-207, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Giang Trinh & Cam Rungie & Malcolm Wright & Carl Driesener & John Dawes, 2014. "Predicting future purchases with the Poisson log-normal model," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 219-234, June.


    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:eee:jbrese:v:63:y:2010:i:11:p:1142-1147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.