Jennifer 1997’s brand personality (BP) scale is widely used in research and is an important foundation for the theory of BP. Building on extant critiques of the scale, this article considers the possibility that 1997’s scale methodology ‘creates’ the BP that it measures.
Using pictures of rocks as stimuli, this article applies the principles of Aaker’s methodology to examine the BP of rocks. Rocks are the chosen stimuli as they do not have any obvious commonalities with brands, or have antecedents to BP formation.
Findings: revealed that each of the rock stimuli has a distinct BP and that the personality is developed from sometimes surprisingly detailed personifications…We found the 3 rocks assessed within this study are statistically-significantly different for 41 out of the 42 BPFFM traits, including variation in the ratings for traits such as ‘sincere’ and ‘leader’ despite the stimuli being inanimate entities. Only ‘secure’ resulted in no statistically-significant differences across the 3 rocks.
…The trait ratings should have been entirely random or the majority of traits rated as not at all descriptive. The fact that participants were able to assign distinct personalities to each rock can therefore only be reasonably explained as an artefact of the research methodology. The RQ1 study supports this view. Rocks were found to have a personality simply because participants were asked to perceive one, and the only explanation of this finding is that the BPFFM therefore ‘creates’ personality.
…In consideration of the importance of Aaker’s scale in the development of the BP concept, the findings raise questions about its conceptualization and emphasises the importance of critical examination of the methods used to measure marketing concepts.
[Keywords: brand personality, personification, research methods, surveys]
