A brand relationship

x Sponsored content on Research Live and in Impact magazine is editorially independent.
Find out more about advertising and sponsorship.

Does your car have a face? Do you choose masculine-styled furniture because it feels ‘like you’? Giving human attributes to physical objects can operate on several levels and is increasing with the rise of voice technology – we can talk to machines like friends and choose the voice they respond with.

Indeed, in their communications, marketers often portray brands as having human characteristics – such as being a hero or taking care of the consumer. And, in the case of challenger brands, they may be cast as ‘outlaws’ breaking the rules of others in the category.

Many research studies have looked at different aspects of humanising brands and a recent paper has collated these to gain a broader view of this area of consumer behaviour.

Deborah MacInnis, professor of marketing at the Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, and one of the authors of the review, says she was interested in why people develop intense brand attachments, exhibiting enduring relationships that are almost like
human relationships. 

She brought together three streams of existing research: the human-focused perspective when people anthropomorphise brands; the self-focused perspective when brands are seen as ‘being like me’; and the relationship-focused perspective when people have attachments – and aversions – to brands as they would with a partner. 

Giving a product a human name, describing it in the first person, and labelling a brand as gendered all increase people’s tendencies to anthropomorphise brands. 

Epley, Waytz and Cacioppo developed the SEEK model to understand the factors involved. How likely people are to perceive objects in human-like terms depends on their knowledge of people and how they behave. 

“Their research suggested that the drivers of anthropomorphism can be clustered into three broad factors: motivations to connect with others (sociality); motivation to make change and be in control (effectance); and to factors in the environment that made human qualities seem more salient (elicited agent knowledge),” explains MacInnis. 

These drivers may be associated with how people grew up, or were socialised, their culture, and the personality traits they were born with. 

“We thought that this model could be helpful in categorising some of the research in consumer behaviour on anthropomorphising brands, and in understanding how consumers might humanise brands in other ways,” adds MacInnis. 

Anthropomorphism might lead to greater brand trust, although researchers think this may depend on how much consumers trust other people in general, how deeply they process the brand’s advertising message, and the baseline for comparison. 

So, has humanising brands become more prevalent? “While children have always humanised objects and brands to a certain extent, I think the various elements in the SEEK model suggest this tendency is increasing,” says MacInnis. “We know that people are more likely to anthropomorphise brands and objects when sociality motivations are activated – when we are lonely, disconnected, or from a collectivist culture that makes us want to connect with others.”

The lonely and disconnected nature of people’s lives appears to be increasing, whether because of far-flung families, longer work hours or increased online interactions over real-life ones. 

“Additionally – and relevant to the SEEK model – society, and the fear-inducing elements of things like authoritarian leaders, global warming, terrorism, random shootings and more, have made people feel less in control of their lives and looking for opportunities to have power and control,” she says. 

The rise of the Internet of Things and virtual assistants has introduced a degree of interaction where it didn’t previously exist – we can now talk to these devices as if they were another member of the family. So, does this mean some products or sectors are more prone to anthropomorphism than others? 

“I am not aware of research that has studied this directly. My sense is that it could be relevant to brands or products that people develop close attachments to because they are self-defined or reflect one’s identity such as one’s car, and those that are seen as unfamiliar and a bit intimidating and hence need to be perceived as a bit warmer and friendlier, like some new technology,” says MacInnis.

“From an aesthetic perspective, the design of many products have lines or curves that make them look more masculine or feminine. This characterisation of products runs throughout interior design, product design and food design. People might choose feminine or masculine or androgynously styled furniture because it is ‘like me’.” So, anthropomorphism should be prevalent in categories that consumers use as signals to others of who they are. This is particularly true in the case of brand personalities, where people want to signal their own personality by the personality of the brand they are using,” she adds. 

Where brand humanisation does take place, it has the potential to build increased loyalty. When people see a brand as not only like them, but also connected to their sense of self, they are more likely to stick with it. 

“Describing a brand in human-like terms – particularly with respect to brand personality – could help in developing a brand story, but I think marketers have to be a bit careful not to go overboard. In many cases, consumers are not aware of a tendency to humanise brands, and when they become aware, they are likely to recognise that and correct for it,” says MacInnis.

To date, the research reviewed in this paper has mostly been done on the positive relationship with brands; but what about when the relationship is more negative? MacInnis thinks there are three negative relationships that might warrant more research: brand betrayal – how people react when a brand they were attached to lies or hides information, or even abandons them for more lucrative customers; brand dependency – when people have no choice; and when people view a brand as their slave.

So, what should marketers take away from this research review? 

“Strong brand-self connections create more brand attachment, which, in turn, creates more loyalty and advocacy behaviours. Marketers need to do what they can to secure strong links. Whereas techniques like anthropomorphising might be helpful, brand-self connections can be formed in other ways as well,” she says. 

Overall, scientists are only just beginning to understand this area, but one aspect that should be explored in future is whether humanising brands is a good thing in terms of people’s happiness. 

Does it actually reflect some general deficiency in consumers’ lives? “The SEEK model suggests that the answer may be yes,” says MacInnis.

Reference:

Humanizing Brands: When brands seem to be like me, part of me, and in a relationship with me, Deborah MacInnis, Valerie Folkes, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2017