An Investigation of the Processes by Which Product Design and Brand Strength Interact to Determine Initial Affect and Quality Judgments

By Christine M. Page, P. Herr. 2002

260 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Marketing, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/edcbcad5b3a5b4337b35975c030c72de0cc4bab1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Marketing

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

It’s Too Pretty to Use! When and How Enhanced Product Aesthetics Discourage Usage and Lower Consumption Enjoyment (2017, background): “Further, visually appealing products elicit positive consumer responses at an affective, cognitive, or even neural level (Hagtvedt and Patrick 2008; Page and Herr 2002; Reimann et al. 2010).”
Experiential product attributes and preferences for new products: The role of processing fluency (2014, background): “Consumer research has shown that aesthetically appealing product design leads to positive emotional reactions and has a positive effect on attitudes (Bloch, 1995; Page & Herr, 2002; Veryzer & Hutchinson, 1998).”
Do logo redesigns help or hurt your brand? The role of brand commitment (2010, unknown): “Applying those ideas to marketing, research has examined how visual elements of the marketing mix such as advertising (Bloch, 1995) and new-product design (Page and Herr, 2002; Veryzer and Hutchinson, 1998) affect customer reactions.”
The role of aesthetic taste in consumer behavior (2012, background): “Studies have examined, for example, aesthetic and design issues in consumer behavior and marketing (e.g., Creusen and Schoormans 2005; Holbrook 1986; Page and Herr 2002; Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998).”
The aesthetic pleasure in design scale:The development of a scale to measure aesthetic pleasure for designed artifacts (2017, result): “The final scale may not come as a surprise to some as several of the items identified and validated to measure aesthetic pleasure in this research (e.g., “beautiful” and “attractive”) are the same as the items used in existing literature (Hassenzahl, 2003; Page & Herr, 2002).”
The good, the bad, and the ugly: Influence of aesthetics on product feature judgments (2010, background): “Study 3 extended prior research on the interaction of brand name and aesthetics, demonstrating that although brand names dominate overall quality judgments (see Page & Herr, 2002), they do not alter the influence of aesthetics on judgments of feature functionality.”
Too Exciting to Fail, Too Sincere to Succeed: The Effects of Brand Personality on Sensory Disconfirmation (2016, unknown): “This fits the notion that consumers engage in more deliberative processing when cued to evaluate a product’s functionality (Hoegg, Alba, and Dahl 2010; Page and Herr 2002), and that functionality is often inferred from a product’s form (Veryzer 1995).”
Sensory cues and shoppers’ touching behaviour: the case of IKEA (2012, background): “Research has demonstrated that a preference for a product is related to its design, rather than to the brand name or product functionality (Page and Herr, 2002).”
The effect of context attractiveness on product attractiveness and product quality: the moderating role of product familiarity (2017, background): “Further, in an advertising context, a spill-over effect exists in which physically attractive testimonials used in advertisements lead to more positive perceptions of product quality than physically less attractive testimonials (Petroshius and Crocker 1989).”