The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-0398.

htm

JEIM 23,4

Dimensions of brand knowledge

Turkish university students consumption of international fashion brands
Nazli Alimen
Graduate School of Social Sciences, Izmir University of Economics, Izmir, Turkey, and

538
Received January 2009 Revised April 2009 December 2009 Accepted January 2010

A. Guldem Cerit
Maritime Faculty, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey
Abstract
Purpose Previous research has suggested that brand knowledge could be affected by companies and consumer characteristics such as consumer personality. The purpose of this study is to analyse the impacts of gender, eld of education, and having consumed the brand, on consumers brand knowledge. Design/methodology/approach An exploratory study is designed to reveal the impacts of gender, eld of education, and usage of a brand by evaluating Turkish university students knowledge of nine international fashion brands. The survey is conducted by using convenience sampling method to reach a heterogeneous group of different departments, gender, and usage frequencies that would reveal whether these variables have an effect on brand knowledge or not. The students are also asked to describe each brand by two or three words. Findings Signicant differences are found with respect to usage, gender, and departments. Students belonging to the departments more related to fashion and female students have more knowledge about these nine brands. Furthermore, the ndings demonstrate that consumption of a brand increases both brand awareness and brand image. Research limitations/implications Future studies could analyse brands by grouping them in accordance with their target segments and product types in order to compare them more strictly. It is also purposeful to compare the brand knowledge of the same brands in different samples and different countries. Practical implications Since brand associations are used in positioning, the results of the open-ended questions advise rms operating marketing activities whether to strengthen or to alter these associations. Originality/value The study could be benecial for academicians and business practitioners, since it reveals the effects of gender, eld of education, and usage on brand knowledge. Keywords Brand awareness, Students, Fashion, International marketing, Turkey Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction Fashion generally refers to clothing and it is described as a process which determines particular design, products or social behaviours for a specic period of time and
Journal of Enterprise Information Management Vol. 23 No. 4, 2010 pp. 538-558 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1741-0398 DOI 10.1108/17410391011061799

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS) 2009, Izmir, Turkey, 13-14 July 2009. The authors would like to thank the reviewers of this article for their insightful and stimulating comments.

replaces them regularly with new ones (Saviolo, 2002, p. 4). It has three components: style, acceptance and timing (Frings, 1982; Packard et al., 1983; Wolfe, 2003). However, fashion is a sector presenting a dream world to consumers, for which brand is essential. Therefore, it should be considered as a fourth component. One of the factors leading international fashion products to success is to have a strong brand, which is achieved through a greater level of brand knowledge (Guedes and da Costa Soares, 2005). Brand awareness and brand image are two components of brand knowledge, which are the consumer sides of the brand, therefore they could be controlled by the company (Rajh, 2002) so that all over the world international brands present the same image of fashion supported by franchising chains and marketing communication activities. On the other hand, it is necessary to clarify the impact of personal or environmental determinants on brand knowledge that consumers characteristics might affect their brand knowledge. Previous research showed the inuence of consumer personality on brand knowledge. However, there are other factors that could affect brand knowledge: gender, eld of education and having consumed a brand. The purpose of this paper is to ascertain these possible effects by comparing the brand knowledge of Turkish students. The paper starts by reviewing the related literature on brand knowledge and its measurement. It is followed by methodology, ndings, and conclusion sections. 2. Brand knowledge Brand helps to differentiate products or services from the others (Kotler and Keller, 2009) and embodies every undertaking of the company and represents it to the world as a hologram, plays a part in the formation of relationships, and expresses and contributes group afliation (Sherry, 2005, p. 46). Brands are markers of offerings for companies, and a sign of quality, and an indicator of risk or trust for consumers (Keller and Lehmann, 2005). An overall value of a brand demonstrates its equity (Kaplan, 2007). Brand equity is a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name, and its symbol that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or a service to a rm and/or to that rms customers (Aaker, 1991, p. 15). Brand equity is studied regarding two aspects. The rst one is nancial that estimates the value of a brand for accounting purposes (Keller, 1993, p. 1), and the second is customer oriented that evaluates consumer perceptions of the brand (Elliot and Percy, 2007, p. 82). Customer-oriented approach is called the customer-based brand equity and described as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand (Keller, 1993, p. 2). Brand knowledge is dened by descriptive and evaluative brand-related information that it is individualistic inference about a brand stored in consumer memory. It comprises brand related notions, brand awareness, and brand image that correlating diverse information such as awareness, attributes, benets, images, thoughts, feelings, attitudes and experiences to a brand constitutes brand knowledge and directly affect consumer responses (Keller, 1993, 2003). It is also indicated that brand knowledge is based on a constant communication with consumers that elicits real comprehension of the product or service (Richards et al., 1998).Therefore brand knowledge could comprehend both explicit and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge is objective and theoretical and can be asserted through many forms of media documents, audiovisual equipment, computerised records, etc. while implicit knowledge is mostly subjective, practical, and personal (Sharif, 2004). Brand

Dimensions of brand knowledge

539

JEIM 23,4

knowledge is found to have a positive and direct effect on internet retailing by lowering the level of perceived risk (Chen and He, 2003) and brand extensions (Pitta and Katsanis, 1995). 2.1 Brand awareness Brand awareness is a potential buyers ability to recognise or recall that shows a brands being a member of a certain product category (Aaker, 1991). It is associated to the strength of brand clew in memory that enables consumers to ascertain the brand under dissimilar conditions (Rossiter and Percy, 1987). Experience-induced antecedents have an impact on brand awareness that it is the strength of a brands presence in the mind of the consumer (Ross, 2006). It could enable consumers to learn and form information about a brand. Emotional associations could have an impact on brand awareness that results in formation of brand preferences and brand loyalty. Firms, on the other hand, could gain a signicant competitive advantage through brand awareness (Elliot and Percy, 2007). Keller (1993) classies brand awareness into brand recognition and brand recall. Brand recognition is consumers ability to conrm prior exposure to the brand when given the brand as a cue. Brand recall, on the other hand, is consumers ability to retrieve the brand when the product category is given, the needs fullled by the category, or some other type of probe as a cue (Keller, 1993). The higher level of brand awareness leads to a higher level of perceived quality (Macdonald and Sharp, 2003) and customer-based brand equity. In consumer decision making, brand awareness has a crucial role that it increases the likelihood of a brands being included in the consideration set, affects consumers decisions even though there is no other brand association, and inuences the formation and strength of brand associations. Furthermore, consumers cannot form a brand image unless having brand awareness (Macdonald and Sharp, 2003; Keller, 2008). 2.2 Brand image Scholars variously described brand image as the perceptions and beliefs held by consumers, as reected in the associations held in consumer memory (Kotler and Keller, 2009, p. 783), a set of associations, usually organized in some meaningful way (Aaker, 1991, p. 109) and the external form and observable characteristics of the markets offering (Sherry, 2005, p. 48). It could be concluded that brand image is a meaning associated to the brand by consumers (Dobni and Zinkhan, 1990; Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1998; Del Rio et al., 2001; Nandan, 2005) which provides the brand to accomplish and remain resonant and adequate in consumers minds (Sherry, 2005). Brand image is regarded as a consumer-constructed concept, due to consumers creating a personal or image related to the brand with regard to their knowledge and perceptions (Nandan, 2005). These associations, which are linkages of a brand in memory (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993, 1998) and differ among consumers (Hung, 2008), enable marketers to differentiate, position, and extend brands (Low and Lamb, 2000) and consumers to process, organize, and retrieve information in making purchase decisions (Aaker, 1991, pp. 109-13). Brand image is a result of consumers decoding of all the signals delivered by the brand such as brand name, visual signs, products, sponsoring, and advertising (Kapferer, 1994). Danesi (2006) proposes that the use of brand name enables consumers not only to recognise certain goods and distinguish

540

them from others, but also to associate connotative meanings to them. Therefore, it allows consumers to decode brand image. Communicating brand image clearly to target consumers is an important part of marketing activity (Gardner and Levy, 1955; Grubb and Grathwol, 1967; Moran, 1973; Roth, 1995) since it allows consumers a need satisfaction by the brand (Park et al., 1986; Gocek et al., 2007) and differentiates the brand from those of the competitors (DiMingo, 1988). Roth (1995) suggests that the impact of brand image strategies on product performance and the management of brand images should be considered while analysing brand image strategies. Gocek et al. (2007) evaluated customer satisfaction in textile industry with respect to genders and revealed the relation between brand image and customer satisfaction. They concluded that there is no difference in brand image perception with respect to gender. 3. Measuring brand knowledge: brand image and brand awareness Brand awareness is evaluated in two ways that are brand recognition and brand recall. Brand recognition is assessed through requesting consumers to distinguish the brand: whether it has been previously seen or heard, or not. Brand recall, on the other hand, is asking consumers to retrieve brands in a given product category (Keller, 2008). Since brand image is perceptions of brand associations held in the consumers minds are called as brand image (Keller, 2003), it is measured by evaluating these brand associations. There are several ways to measure brand image as applying or adapting an existing list of brand associations, e.g. the brand personality list of Aaker, or developing a new scale by revealing brand associations and then measuring the strength of brand associations (Chandon, 2003). Brand image, which is enrooted in both tangible and intangible associations linked to the attributes of the product, is assessed through various approaches (Kaplan, 2007). These approaches could be divided into two main categories: scaling and sorting (Joyce, 1963 cited in Driesener and Romaniuk, 2006, p. 681). Whether a brand and attribute are related or not and the strength of an existent relationship are determined through scaling techniques whereas only corporeity of attribute is detected through sorting techniques (Driesener and Romaniuk, 2006). In addition, scaling and ranking measures enable to distinguish brands, as pick-any measure asks for yes or no for each brand (Driesener and Romaniuk, 2001). Several scholars pointed the distinct patterns in brand image data while applying pick-any technique (Barnard and Ehrenberg, 1990). Comparison of three brand image measurement techniques, sorting a pick-any , scaling Likert rating , and ranking, showed that all these three techniques equivalent results. 4. Methodology 4.1 Objective Shank and Langmeyer (1994) revealed the effect of consumer personality on brand image. Other consumer characteristics that might inuence brand knowledge could be gender, having studied in fashion or having consumed a brand. The purpose of this study is to reveal the impact of these characteristics on brand knowledge of Turkish university students, among whom fashion brands are highly consumed. For the purpose of this study, we decided to assess the fashion brands preferred by them. Conversations with the students of Izmir University of Economics, showed that seven brands, Tommy Hilger, GAP, Lacoste, Diesel, Zara, Mango, and Mavi, are largely

Dimensions of brand knowledge

541

JEIM 23,4

542

consumed fashion brands. Furthermore, four of them, Tommy Hilger, GAP, Lacoste, and Diesel, are conspicuously consumed by the students. Considering both the products and market positions of these seven brands, and our observations of the students, we added two more brands, Guess and Koton, which were not mentioned by the students but these brands were also consumed by them. Therefore, the total number of nine brands were chosen. Seven of these brands were international foreign fashion brands, Tommy Hilger, GAP, Lacoste, Diesel, Zara, Guess, and Mango while the other two were Turkish international fashion brands, Koton and Mavi. We aimed to understand whether having studied in the eld of fashion affected the knowledge about fashion brands or not. In addition, we proposed that gender and having consumed a brand could also be effective on the brand knowledge. Therefore, these variables were considered in the analyses. The research model is given in Figure 1. 4.2 Hypotheses Students knowledge of international fashion brands is evaluated with respect to their gender, eld of education, and usage of these brands. Comparing brand knowledge of students from the ne arts departments, especially those in the elds of fashion design and fashion business, with the other students from diverse departments such as engineering and business administration, could reveal the inuence of education on brand knowledge. Furthermore, gender and having consumed a product of the brand could have an effect on their brand knowledge. Therefore, in order to test the impact of these characteristics, three main hypotheses were developed: H1. Brand awareness differs with respect to demographic variables and usage for different fashion brands. H2. Cognitive brand image differs with respect to demographic variables and usage of different fashion brands. H3. Emotional brand image differs with respect to demographic variables and usage of different fashion brands. These three hypotheses had 16 sub-hypotheses in total: three for H1, eight for H2 and ve for H3. Each one of these 16 hypotheses was analysed with respect to departments, gender, and usage. 4.3 Questionnaire The brand awareness was evaluated by applying the approach of Aaker (1996) by the statements, I am generally aware of this brand, I am aware of this brand and I am

Figure 1. Research model

familiar of this brand, which assess consumers ability to recognise a brand, and were used in the previous study (Lehmann et al., 2008) to evaluate brands awareness scores in a single product category as in our study. The brand awareness statements were translated into Turkish and formed into a ve-point Likert-scale construct (1 strongly disagree, 5 strongly agree). For brand image, the scale of Kaplan (2007), which includes 13 items evaluated on a ve-point Likert-scale (1 strongly disagree, 5 strongly agree), was used. First eight items of this scale are cognitive brand associations, which evaluate the associations attached to the physical features and functions of each brands products, and the remaining ve items are emotional brand associations, which measure attributions that each individual himself or herself attaches to a brand (Table I). Since product appearance is crucial for both marketing a product and consumers decision making (Kaplan, 2007) and visual attractiveness is a key element for fashion brands, the brand image scale of Kaplan, of which purpose is to evaluate consumers perceptions of product appearance on cognitive and emotional brand associations, was appropriate for this study. Both scales, brand awareness and brand image, were pre-tested to check whether the statements were comprehensible and distinguishable from each other. In the pre-test phase, 11 students evaluated the statements and accordingly the translation of brand awareness statements was reviewed since the students could not distinguish the difference between the translation of the two statements, I am generally aware of this brand and I am aware of this brand. Therefore, they were adapted into the Turkish meanings that is what was intended to be gathered from respondents via these statements instead of the literal translation. After the pre-test and review of the scales, the questionnaire form including three parts was obtained. In the rst part of the questionnaire, the demographic variables, which include age, gender, department, grade, if they had ever shopped or frequently shop from the brands listed, were asked. The second part contained open-ended questions and the participants were asked to describe each brand by two or three words that come in to mind. The brand awareness and brand image statements were inquired in the third part.
Products of this brand Cognitive brand associations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Perform as expected Offer value for price Are reliable Are functional Are usable Are durable Have technical sophistication Are expensive Make a person feel good Target high-income level Increase the respectability of its user Are admired by my friends and relatives Express my personality

Dimensions of brand knowledge

543

Emotional brand associations

Note: Kaplan (2007)

Table I. Brand image scale items

JEIM 23,4

544

4.4 Sample The survey was conducted at Izmir University of Economics in January 2009. Convenience sampling method was used in order to reach a heterogeneous group and a total number of 247 undergraduate students participated to the study. In order to achieve validity in our study, we excluded some departments since the number of students participated from those departments was very low that was not enough to compare with the other departments. Therefore, 201 undergraduate students from ten different departments were included in the analyses. These ten departments were Business Administration, Interior Design, Fashion Business, Translation and Interpretation Studies, Public Relations, Industrial Design, Fashion Design, Communication Design, Architecture and Logistics Management, of Izmir University of Economics. 4.5 Analysis The data were analysed by using SPSS 11. The hypotheses based on multiple-choice questions are analysed by frequencies and t-test. The Cronbach Alpha of the brand knowledge scale was 0.96 (brand awareness 0.96 and brand image 0.94). The answers to the open-ended questions were analysed and counted manually. 5. Findings 5.1 Prole of the respondents The questionnaires were responded in January 2009 by 201 undergraduate students from ten different departments of Izmir University of Economics. In total, 63.7 per cent of the students were female and 36.3 per cent were male. A total of 3 per cent, six students, were aged 18, 9 per cent, 18 students, were aged 19, 13.4 per cent, 27 students, were aged 20, and 22.4 per cent, 45 students, were aged 21. The majority, 52.2 per cent of the sample, was 22 years old and over, there were 105 students, shown in Table II. Of the students, 33, 16.4 per cent, were freshmen, 68, 33.8 per cent, sophomore, 49, 24.4 per cent, junior, and 51, 25.4 per cent, at the senior (Table III). The respondents shopped from at least one of the brands listed. The majority of the students have bought an item from Zara, Mavi, Koton, and Mango, respectively. The number of consumers for Lacoste and Diesel were the same. The students often shop from Zara, Mango, Mavi and Koton. The least preferred ones for habitual shopping are
I have shopped from n (%) 151 150 145 131 112 107 107 95 59 75.1 74.6 72.1 65.2 55.7 53.2 53.2 47.3 29.4 I have never shopped from n (%) 50 51 56 70 89 94 94 106 142 24.9 25.4 27.9 34.8 44.3 46.8 46.8 52.7 70.6

Brands Zara Mavi Koton Mango Tommy Hilger Diesel Lacoste GAP Guess

I often shop from n (%) 118 85 80 106 30 48 37 42 17 58.7 42.3 39.8 52.7 14.9 23.9 18.4 20.9 8.5

Table II. Usage frequencies (number of students and percentages)

Gender Male 19 54.3 5 45.5 13 39.4 3 16.7 16 50 3 33 5 12.5 3 50 2 28.6 4 40 73 36.3 128 63.7 6 3 18 9 27 13.4 6 60 3 30 4 40 45 22.4 5 71.4 3 43 1 14 3 43 3 30 85 42.3 3 50 1 16.7 1 16.7 4 66.6 35 87.5 1 2.5 2 5 9 22.5 10 25 18 45 11 27.5 2 33.3 2 20 33 16.4 6 67 1 11.1 3 33.3 5 55.6 1 11.1 1 11.1 19 47.5 3 50 7 100 6 60 68 33.8 16 50 1 3.1 2 6.2 1 3.1 6 18.8 22 68.8 2 6.2 8 25 3 9.4 5 55.6 9 22.5 1 16.7 1 10 49 24.4 15 83.3 4 22 5 28 3 17 2 11 4 22 13 72.2 1 5.6 2 11.1 2 11.1 19 59.4 2 22.2 1 2.5 1 10 51 25.4 20 60.6 4 12 29 88 9 27.3 5 15.2 19 57.5 6 54.5 1 9 3 27.3 4 36.4 3 27.3 1 9.1 8 72.7 1 9.1 1 9.1 11 5.5 33 16.4 18 9 32 15.9 9 4.5 40 19.9 6 3 7 3.5 10 5 16 45.7 4 11.4 5 14.3 9 25.7 17 48.6 1 2.9 6 17.1 22 62.9 6 17.1 35 17.4 Female 18 19 20 21 22 and over 1 2 3 4 Total (n 201 (100 per cent))

Age

Grade

Departments

Business Administration n % Interior Design n % Fashion Business n % Translation and Interpretation Studies n % Public Relations n % Industrial Design n % Fashion Design n % Communication Design n % Architecture n % Logistics Management

Total (n 201 (100 per cent)) n %

545

Dimensions of brand knowledge

Table III. Demographic variables (number of students and percentages)

JEIM 23,4

Tommy Hilger, Diesel, Lacoste, GAP, and Guess. For both of the questions, GAP and Guess were on the bottom line (Table II). 5.2 Results of the hypotheses tests H1 aimed to reveal that there is a difference in brand awareness for different fashion brands with respect to the demographic variables, which are departments and gender, and with usage frequency. For that t-test was run and according to the results, p values lower than 0.05 showed that there was a signicant difference. H11 was supported within Public Relations and Fashion Design departments for the brands Zara and Mango, and within Public Relations and Fashion Business departments for Zara that the students of these departments are more aware of these brands than the students from the other departments. It was also supported among male and female students for the brands Zara, Guess, Mango and Koton (shown in Table IV). H12 was supported between gender for Zara, Guess, Mango, Koton, and Mavi that female students are more aware of these brands than male students. H13 was supported within Business Administration-Fashion Design for GAP, Diesel, Zara, Mango, Guess and Koton, Public Relations-Fashion Design for Mango and Koton, and Fashion Business-Fashion Design departments for Koton and Mavi that Fashion Design students are more familiar with those brands than the students from Business Administration, Public Relations and Fashion Business departments. Additionally Fashion Business students were more familiar with GAP, Lacoste, Diesel and Guess than Business Administration students that H13 was supported also between those departments. All the sub-hypotheses of H1 were supported for all brands due to consumption of the brands that a student, who has consumed a brand, is more aware of it than others. Thus, having consumed a brand increases the brand awareness. The cognitive brand image among the demographic variables and usage was hypothesised as H2. Except H24 among departments and H26 among genders, it was supported (Table V). Therefore, no difference was found according to departments, genders and usage for the brands reliability. In addition, there is no difference in perception of the brands functionality among the students from different departments and due to gender, there is no difference in the students evaluation of the brands as durable. It proposes that the male and female students equally perceive durability of a brand. The sub-hypotheses of H3, which aimed to evaluate the difference in the emotional brand image among the demographic variables, supported that emotional brand image differs with respect to the departments, gender and usage except H332 that there was no signicant difference between genders for augmentation of respectability of its user. The supported sub-hypotheses of H3 are shown in Table VI. 5.3 Results of the open-ended questions Most of the respondents described the brands by their own words, brand associations, which are grouped and listed in accordance with each statements frequency (shown in Table VII). The most repeated brand associations were being an expensive brand or an inexpensive brand. For all brands, the most often repeated associations were quality, sportive, expensive and inexpensive. The brands and the frequency of mentioning these associations are shown on Figure 2. The students considered the brands Tommy Hilger, GAP, Lacoste, Diesel, Zara, Guess and Mavi as being

546

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) H11. I am generally aware of this brand H111: Departments Public Relations-Fashion Design Zara Mango Fashion Business-Public Relations Zara H112: Gender Zara Guess Mango Koton H113: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H12: I am aware of this brand H122: Gender Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H123: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H13: I am familiar with this brand H131: Departments Business Administration-Fashion Design GAP Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton

t-value

Dimensions of brand knowledge

22,247 22,057 2,163 3,886 2,094 4,818 2,274

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

547

2,683 4,317 4,277 4,680

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

2,019 2,747 3,914 2,581 2,403 2,708 3,241 2,098 2,715 3,850 3,033 3,308 3,203 2,659

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

22,511 22,087 22,020 22,630 22,484 22,049

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 (continued)

Table IV. The comparative analyses of brand awareness with respect to the demographic variables and usage

JEIM 23,4

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) Business Administration-Fashion Business GAP Lacoste Diesel Guess Public Relations-Fashion Design Mango Koton Fashion Business-Fashion Design Koton Mavi H132: Gender GAP Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H133: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi

t-value 22,864 22,347 22,277 22,252 22,012 22,042 22,708 22,270 3,137 4,313 3,253 9,187 5,177 2,647 6,945 4,365 3,896 5,267 6,220 4,827 8,613 6,550 4,695

p , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

548

Table IV.

expensive and having high quality. There were also students claimed Zara as an inexpensive brand. The other two inexpensive brands for the students were Mango and Koton. Tommy Hilger, GAP, Diesel and Mavi were also sportive according to the students description. The descriptions given by the respondents reveal prominence of these brands; how consumers correlate them. Since brand associations are used in positioning (Aaker, 1991), the results of the open-ended questions could provide the rms to operate marketing activities whether to strengthen or to alter these associations. 6. Conclusion Consumer demands are rapidly changing and getting similar to each other not only in a single country but also internationally. In order to be successful internationally, it is important to have a strong brand. In this study, brand knowledge, which consists of brand awareness and brand image, of nine international fashion brands was evaluated among the Turkish university students. This study contributes to the ndings of previous studies held on customer based brand equity that consumer characteristics of gender, eld of education, and having consumed the brand have an inuence on brand knowledge. Females, Fashion Design and Fashion Business departments students,

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) H2: Cognitive brand image differs with respect to demographic variables and usage of different fashion brands H21: Perform as expected. H211: Departments Fashion Business-Public Relations Diesel Zara Mango Business Administration-Fashion Business Diesel Fashion Design-Public Relations GAP Diesel Business Administration-Fashion Design GAP Diesel Fashion Design-Fashion Business GAP H212: Gender GAP Zara Guess Mango Koton H213: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H22: Offer value for price. H221: Departments Business Administration-Fashion Design Diesel Fashion Design-Fashion Business Tommy Hilger H222: Gender GAP Guess H223: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Koton Mavi

t-value

Dimensions of brand knowledge

3,103 2,211 3,008 2,496 3,575 2,575 2,700 1,999 2,700 2,531 2,021 3,344 2,116 2,122 6,106 2,667 3,955 5,202 5,408 4,494 3,435 5,295 4,965

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

549

2,488 2,180 2,863 3,301 5,099 2,819 4,534 4,618 5,232 3,828 3,993

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 (continued)

Table V. The comparative analyses of cognitive brand image with respect to the demographic variables

JEIM 23,4

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) H24: Are functional. H242: Gender Mango H243: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Mango Koton Mavi H25: Are usable H251: Departments Business Administration-Fashion Design Lacoste Diesel Mango Business Administration-Fashion Business Tommy Hilger Mango Business Administration-Public Relations Tommy Hilger Mango H252: Gender Mango Koton Mavi H253: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H26: Are not durable H261: Departments Business Administration-Public Relations Zara Fashion Design-Public Relations Tommy Hilger Business Administration-Fashion Business Zara Mango Koton Business Administration-Fashion Design Zara Mango

t-value

2,347 3,168 3,157 2,711 3,829 3,852 2,935 2,299 2,612

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

550

22,074 22,075 22,261 2,148 2,073 2,261 2,754 2,438 2,630 2,078 5,245 5,350 4,051 2,614 4,483 2,261 3,468 4,139 2,928

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

22,068 22,103 22,294 23,139 22,081 2,196 2,106

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 (continued)

Table V.

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) H263: Usage Koton H27: Have technical sophistication H271: Departments Fashion Design-Public Relations Tommy Hilger Business Administration-Fashion Business Mango Koton H272: Gender Guess H273: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Guess Mavi H28: Are expensive H281: Departments Fashion Business-Public Relations Zara Koton Business Administration-Fashion Business Zara H282: Gender Koton H283: Usage Zara

t-value 23,310

p , 0.05

Dimensions of brand knowledge

2,408 2,649 2,540 2,426 4,887 4,263 2,301 2,975 4,189 3,230

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

551

22,744 22,329 3,564 22,008 22,947

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 Table V.

and those who had already consumed a product of the brands listed, had more knowledge on these nine international fashion brands. The students, who were studying in Fashion Design and Fashion Business departments, had a little more knowledge of these brands than the others. This slight difference could be as a result of advertising and communication activities. Not only people in the fashion business, but also others get some information about fashion brands willingly or not through promotions. Magazines, shopping centres and other consumers around could also provide such knowledge. This could also be an explanation for the knowledge about GAP, which recently entered into the Turkish market that had almost the same values as the other brands. The students might have accumulated information about GAP via television, magazines, travels and so on. Hung (2008) found that positive PR perceptions have a positive effect on brand image that would inuence consumer loyalty. Also the results of our study points out the importance of marketing communication activities such as PR and advertising. Therefore, it is important to consider these factors while creating a successful fashion brand or entering into a new market. Comparison of the brand knowledge among genders revealed that the female students had more knowledge of the listed brands than the males. As mentioned

JEIM 23,4

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) H3: Emotional brand image differs with respect to demographic variables for different fashion brands H31: Make a person feel good H311: Departments Fashion Business-Public Relations Mango Fashion Design-Public Relations Zara H312: Gender Zara Guess Mango H313: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H32: Target low-income level H321: Departments Fashion Design-Public Relations Mango Business Administration-Fashion Design Koton Mavi Business Administration-Fashion Business GAP Diesel Mavi H322: Gender Diesel Mango H323: Usage Zara Mango H33: Increase the respectability of its user H331: Departments Fashion Business-Public Relations Mango Business Administration-Public Relations Mango H333: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Lacoste Diesel Guess Koton Mavi

t-value

552

1,998 2,188 2,087 2,013 3,395 6,384 4,586 5,16 4,467 6,384 3,507 4,620 3,858 4,729

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

2,886 2,094 2,300 22,262 22,081 22,971 21,930 2,545 2,821 2,738

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

2,143 2,080

, 0.05 , 0.05

Table VI. The comparative analyses of emotional brand image with respect to the demographic variables

5,376 , 0.05 5,174 , 0.05 2,475 , 0.05 3,421 , 0.05 3,374 , 0.05 2,077 , 0.05 2,636 , 0.05 (continued)

Supported sub-hypotheses (method of analyses: t-test) H34: Are admired by my friends and relatives H341: Departments Fashion Business-Public Relations Koton Mavi Business Administration-Fashion Business Koton Mavi Fashion Design-Fashion Business Tommy Hilger GAP Guess Koton Mavi H342: Gender Zara Mango H343: Usage Tommy Hilger GAP Mango Koton Mavi H35: Express my personality H351: Departments Fashion Business-Public Relations GAP Diesel Fashion Design-Public Relations Tommy Hilger Zara Mango Koton Business Administration-Fashion Business Diesel H352: Gender GAP Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi H353: Usage Tommy Hilger Gap Lacoste Diesel Zara Guess Mango Koton Mavi

t-value

Dimensions of brand knowledge

22,188 23,558 3,139 2,400 2,294 2,163 2,031 2,575 2,168 2,111 3,272 2,795 2,130 4,269 4,025 4,599

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

553

2,343 2,617 2,126 2,464 2,506 2,626 23,292 2,074 2,912 3,076 2,463 6,577 2,321 2,985 6,971 6,786 5,415 7,451 5,927 4,470 6,683 4,987 5,262

, 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.05

Table VI.

JEIM 23,4

Brands Tommy Hilger (total number of respondents 140)

Statements Expensive High quality Sportive Colours (red, white, and/or blue) Products (sweater and T-shirt) Brand Sportive Comfortable Expensive Products (sweat shirt, polar and T-shirt) Basic High quality Expensive High quality Classic Crocodile Basic Products (shirt, T-shirt and shoes) Expensive Stylish Products ( jeans and shoes High quality Sportive Young Inexpensive Many assortments Stylish High quality Casual Form Expensive Products (bag, shoes and watch) Unnecessary High quality Exaggeration Stylish Inexpensive For women Low quality Bazaar Design Many people have Inexpensive Assortment Low quality Feminine High quality Turkish Jeans Turkish Sportive High quality Expensive Proper price

n 40 19 15 14 4 4 28 18 14 12 7 6 27 27 19 11 11 5 44 38 16 15 8 6 33 19 17 12 6 3 27 20 14 7 6 6 44 14 12 10 8 5 25 10 8 7 6 3 32 17 13 11 10 9

% 28.6 13.6 10.7 10 2.9 2.9 21.9 14 11 9.4 5.5 4.7 19 19 13.4 7.8 7.8 3.5 30.7 26.6 11.2 10.5 5.6 4.2 23.4 13.5 12 8.5 4.3 2.1 23 17 12 6 5.1 5.1 33.6 10.7 9.2 7.6 6.1 3.8 21 8.4 6.7 5.9 5 2.5 24.4 13 10 8.4 7.6 6.8

554
GAP (total number of respondents 128)

Lacoste (total number of respondents 142)

Diesel (total number of respondents 143)

Zara (total number of respondents 141)

Guess (total number of respondents 117)

Mango (total number of respondents 131)

Koton (total number of respondents 119)

Mavi (total number of respondents 131) Table VII. Description of the brands by the respondents

Dimensions of brand knowledge

555

Figure 2. Most repeated brand associations for all brands analysed

previously, Gocek et al. (2007) claimed that there was no difference in brand image perception according to gender. However, the results of our study show that brand image perception could differ due to gender. Furthermore, having consumed a brand leads to a signicant effect on brand knowledge. Moreover, the brands Lacoste, Tommy Hilger, Diesel and Guess, which are positioned as luxury items in Turkey and conspicuously consumed by students, were more likely to be described on a negative way, e.g. unnecessary, for middle-age and low quality, by non-users and positively, such as high quality and comfortable by users. The study presents interesting outcomes regarding the perceptions of university students from different departments. The fashion brands targeting young consumers should consider the impacts of brand knowledge on their target segments. In a globalised world where local preferences are also playing an important role, brands act effectively in the development of the market demand. Brand knowledge is a key to evaluate in reaching the consumers and this study has proved the importance of empirical studies in this respect.

6.1 Limitations and further research This study reveals the effects of demographic variables on brand knowledge by evaluating nine international fashion brands. Since the target segments of these brands are not known, future studies could analyse the brands by grouping them according to their segmentation and probably product types in order to compare them more strictly. It is also noticed that the brand awareness statements, although they were not literally translated into Turkish, were difcult to be understood by the students since there was no strict line to describe them in Turkish. Therefore, further studies might describe what is aimed to gather through these statements in the native language instead of translating the exact statements. It is also purposeful to compare the brand knowledge of the same brands in different samples and different countries in future studies. These studies could enable us comprehend and compare the effects of gender, eld of education, and usage of brand on brand knowledge in different cultures.

JEIM 23,4

556

References Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, Free Press, New York, NY. Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, Free Press, New York, NY. Barnard, N.R. and Ehrenberg, A.S.C. (1990), Robust measures of consumer brand beliefs, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 27, November, pp. 477-87. Chandon, P. (2003), Note on measuring brand awareness, brand image, brand equity and brand value, INSEAD Working Paper Series, March, available at: http://library.nyenrode.nl/ INSEAD/2003/2003-019.pdf (accessed 26 December 2008). Chen, R. and He, F. (2003), Examination of brand knowledge, perceived risk and consumers intention to adopt and online retailer, TQM & Business Excellence, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 677-93. Danesi, M. (2006), Brands, Routledge, London. Del Rio, A.B., Vazquez, R. and Iglesias, V. (2001), The effects of brand associations on consumer response, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 410-25. DiMingo, E. (1988), The ne art of positioning, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 34-8. Dobni, D. and Zinkhan, G.M. (1990), In search of brand image: a foundation analysis, in Goldberg, M.E., Corn, G. and Pollay, R. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, Association of Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 110-19. Driesener, C. and Romaniuk, J. (2001), Brand image? Pick a measure, any measure, available at: http://smib.vuw.ac.nz:8081/WWW/ANZMAC2001/anzmac/AUTHORS/pdfs/Driesener. pdf (accessed 26 December 2008). Driesener, C. and Romaniuk, J. (2006), Comparing methods of brand image measurement, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 681-98. Elliot, R. and Percy, L. (2007), Strategic Brand Management, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Frings, G.S. (1982), Fashion from Concept to Consumer, 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Gardner, B.B. and Levy, S.J. (1955), The product and the brand, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 33, pp. 33-9. Gocek, I., Kursun, S. and Beceren, I. (2007), The perception of customer satisfaction in the textile industry according to gender in Turkey, Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 24, pp. 79-82. Grubb, E.L. and Grathwol, H.L. (1967), Consumer self-concept, symbolism, and market behaviour: a theoretical approach, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31, October, pp. 22-7. Guedes, G. and da Costa Soares, P. (2005), Branding of fashion products: a communication process, a marketing approach, Proceedings of the Association for Business Communication 7th European Convention, Copenhagen, Denmark, 26-28 May, available at: www.businesscommunication.org/conventions/Proceedings/2005/PDFs/ 25ABCEurope05.pdf (accessed 26 December 2009). Hung, C. (2008), The effect of brand image on public relations perceptions and customer loyalty, International Journal of Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 237-46. Kapferer, J. (1994), Strategic Brand Management, Free Press, New York, NY.

Kaplan, M.D. (2007), Product appearance and brand knowledge: an analysis of critical relationships, doctoral dissertation, Izmir University of Economics, Izmir. Keller, K.L. (1993), Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, January, pp. 1-22. Keller, K.L. (2003), Brand synthesis: the multidimensionality of brand knowledge, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 595-600. Keller, K.L. (2008), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity, 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Keller, K.L. and Lehmann, D.R. (2005), Brands and branding: research ndings and future priorities, Marketing Science, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 740-59. Kotler, P. and Keller, K.L. (2009), Marketing Management, 13th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Lehmann, D.R., Keller, K.L. and Farley, J.U. (2008), The structure of survey-based brand metrics, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 29-56. Low, G.S. and Lamb, C.W. Jr (2000), The measurement and dimensionality of brand associations, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 350-68. Macdonald, E. and Sharp, B. (2003), Management perceptions of the importance of brand awareness as an indication of advertising effectiveness, Marketing Bulletin, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 1-11. Moran, W.R. (1973), Why new products fail, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 13, April, pp. 5-13. Nandan, S. (2005), An exploration of the brand identity-brand image linkage: a communications perspective, Brand Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 264-78. Packard, S., Winters, A.A. and Axelrod, N. (1983), Fashion Buying and Merchandising, 2nd ed., Fairchild Publications, New York, NY. Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J. and MacInnis, D.J. (1986), Strategic brand concept-image management, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 135-45. Pitta, D.A. and Katsanis, L.P. (1995), Understanding brand equity for successful brand extension, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 51-64. Rajh, E. (2002), Development of a scale for measuring customer-based brand equity, Ekonomski Preglet, Vol. 53 Nos 7-8, pp. 770-81. Richards, I., Foster, D. and Morgan, R. (1998), Brand knowledge management: growing brand equity, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 47-54. Ross, S.D. (2006), A conceptual framework for understanding spectator-based brand equity, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 22-38. Rossiter, J.R. and Percy, L. (1987), Advertising and Promotion Management, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Roth, M.S. (1995), The effects of culture and socioeconomics on the performance of global brand image strategies, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, May, pp. 163-75. Saviolo, S. (2002), Brand and identity management in fashion companies, DIR, Research Division SDA BOCCONI Working Paper No. 02-66, available at: www.sdabocconi.it/les/ wp66_Z8G3EIAJARH74NLHNCD8DZ1168009541.pdf (accessed 26 December 2008). Shank, M.D. and Langmeyer, L. (1994), Does personality inuence brand image?, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 128 No. 2, pp. 157-64.

Dimensions of brand knowledge

557

JEIM 23,4

Sherry, J.E. (2005), Brand meaning, in Tybout, A.M. and Calkins, T. (Eds), Kellogg on Branding: The Marketing Faculty of the Kellogg School of Management, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ. Wolfe, M.G. (2003), The World of Fashion Merchandising, The Goodheart-Wilcox Company, Tinsley Park, IL. Further reading Sharif, A.M. (2008), Information, knowledge and the context of interaction, paper presented at European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS), Dubai, 25-26 May. About the authors Nazli Alimen is a PhD Candidate in Marketing at Izmir University of Economics, Izmir, Turkey. She completed her BA degree in 2001 from Gazi University, MA degree in Brand Management from Istituto Marangoni in 2004 and her MBA degree from Izmir University of Economics in 2008. Having worked in visual merchandising and public relations departments of several companies, she started to pursue her PhD degree in September 2008 at Izmir University of Economics. Nazli Alimen is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: nazlialimen@gmail.com A. Guldem Cerit is a Professor in the Maritime Faculty, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey. She received her BSc degree from the Engineering School of the Middle East Technical University, Ankara. She worked in the private sector for nine years in various engineering and marketing positions, all at managerial levels. While in the private industry, she completed the MBA program and the PhD degree in the Marketing discipline of the Business Program at the Dokuz Eylul University. She joined Dokuz Eylul University School of Maritime Business and Management (turned into Maritime Faculty in 2009) in 1993 as an Assistant Professor, being the rst appointed instructor of the School, founded in 1988 as the leading Turkish higher education institute in the maritime business area, the medium of instruction being English. She has served as the Director of the School since 1997. She has received her Associate Professor and Professor degrees in Maritime Transport Business discipline.

558

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints