Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling:

influence of consumers’ storytelling on brand

attitude via emotions and cognitions
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong, Jie Yang and Barbara Ross Wooldridge
Soules College of Business, University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler, Texas, USA, and
Anita D. Bhappu
University of California Merced, Merced, California, USA

Abstract
Purpose – Brand storytelling has been found to be an effective marketing tool. Unlike a brand story that originates from a firm, consumers’ brand
storytelling is created, developed and shared by consumers. This research aims to examine whether consumers’ brand storytelling leads to increased
favorable brand evaluations and compares its effects on consumer cognition and emotions, to a brand story generated by a firm.
Design/methodology/approach – Three experiments were conducted to test the hypotheses. In Study 1, a 2 (story: consumers’ brand storytelling
vs brand story by a firm)  2 (product: coffee shop vs airline mileage programs) between-subjects design was used. Studies 2 and 3 replicated Study
1 and investigated different measurements of the constructs using different brands. Additionally, a mediation analysis was conducted.
Findings – The results show that consumers’ brand storytelling increases favorable brand attitudes. Consumers present deeper cognitive processing
and higher experienced positive emotions when they read consumer brand storytelling as compared to a firm-created brand story, leading to a more
favorable brand attitude.
Originality/value – There is a lack of empirical research investigating how consumers’ brand storytelling is different from brand stories created by
firms, and how consumers’ brand storytelling influences brand attitudes. This study extends the literature by clarifying how consumers respond to
consumers’ brand storytelling and evaluates brands by exploring the underlying mechanism for the effect of brand storytelling via consumers’
cognitions and emotions.
Keywords Narratives, Brand attitude, Brand storytelling, Brand story, Consumer stories
Paper type Research paper

Introduction Many existing studies have suggested that brand storytelling

A story provides a structure for our perceptions; only through stories do
facts assume any meaning whatsoever [. . .]. Without air, our cells died.
Without a story, our selves die – Neil Postman
Stories move people (McKee, 2003). Stories enable people to
dream and imagine a whole new world, which is why an
interesting story is loved (Zemke, 1990; Yueh and Zheng,
2019). Humans are natural storytellers and are aware of stories
in nature (Nehaniv, 1999; Granitz and Forman, 2015; Kao,
2019). Consumers share stories with each other, and by doing
so they understand themselves and others via imagination or
shared experiences (Nehaniv, 1999; Escalas, 2004; Sax, 2006;
Granitz and Forman, 2015). As consumers construct stories in
relation to brands that reflect their experiences with the brands,
it is not surprising that storytelling could be an effective
marketing tool for branding (Woodside, 2010; Gensler et al.,
2013; Granitz and Forman, 2015; Solja et al., 2018; Kao,
2019).
is useful for building strong brands and brand loyalty because it
has the power to persuade consumers, entertain them and
imprint a brand in their minds (Fog et al., 2005; Woodside,
2010; Lundqvist et al., 2013; Gensler et al., 2013; Freeman,
2014; Feng, 2018). Brand storytelling refers to the art of
creating a compelling story about a brand that creates
emotional connections between the brand and consumers
(Granitz and Forman, 2015; Lundqvist et al., 2013). It includes
actors, plots, causality and chronology of the events related to
the brand (Delgadillo and Escalas, 2004; Escalas, 2004; Solja
et al., 2018). Brand storytelling can be created by a firm or
consumer, and they have a different influence on brand
attitude. Current research differentiates between a firm-
generated brand story (i.e. a brand story) and brand storytelling
by a consumer. A brand story is designed and delivered to
consumers in a controlled manner by a firm (Solja et al., 2018).
It can be developed from stories in the workplace, employees,
the company’s foundation story, stories about the CEO, the

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no
Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1061-0421.htm conflict of interest.

Received 31 July 2019

Journal of Product & Brand Management
Revised 29 February 2020
31/2 (2022) 265–278 14 November 2020
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421] 17 March 2021
[DOI 10.1108/JPBM-07-2019-2485] Accepted 25 March 2021

265
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
history of the brand (successes and crises), characters that
interact with brands, product stories and more (Fog et al.,
2005; Solja et al., 2018). There are great variations in the
elements of corporate storytelling (Spear and Roper, 2013).
Meanwhile, consumers’ brand storytelling is generated,
elaborated and shared by consumers based on their experiences
with the brand. Their stories consist of a plot, characters,
causality and chronology. Hence, consumers’ brand
storytelling is different from word of mouth (WoM), which
includes all types of informal communications related to the
product (Westbrook, 1987; Delgadillo and Escalas, 2004;
Escalas, 2004; Berger, 2014). As the narrative format itself has
the power to connect consumers and brands, it is worthwhile to
distinguish consumers’ brand storytelling and WoM to
investigate its influence. Because of the emergence of new
communication technologies, social media and the impact of
globalization (van Laer et al., 2019), consumers are now able to
spread and share their brand storytelling much more easily than
before. Meanwhile, consumers have a higher level of
motivation to tell and listen to consumers’ storytelling about
brands, and they are more engaged and involved in the story
and brand (Woodside et al., 2008; Woodside, 2010).
Consumers’ brand storytelling helps people better imagine
events related to brands, which eventually leads to long-term
memories (Gensler et al., 2013). Consumers are the primary
agents sharing their own experiences of the brand via
consumers’ brand storytelling, unlike a firm-generated brand
story where consumers are passive recipients.
Previous research suggests that consumers hold different
attitudes toward different types of brand storytelling. For
example, consumers tend to be motivated to share the story and
perceive the brands positively when they realize that the story is
generated by other consumers’ real experiences (Kang and
Schuett, 2013; Berger, 2014; Pera and Viglia, 2016; Lund
et al., 2019). However, they are less engaged with a brand story
once they recognize that the story was created and propagated
by a firm as an advertising and sales tool (Dessart, 2018; Li
et al., 2019). Therefore, it is critical to differentiate these two
types of brand storytelling when analyzing the impact of brand
storytelling on consumer attitudes. This research proposes that
the two different types of brand storytelling (brand story vs
consumers’ brand storytelling) will have different influences on
branding. Specifically, consumers’ brand storytelling increases
positive brand attitudes more than a brand story. Thus, it is also
important to understand the underlying mechanism to explain
this effect. This research argues that consumers’ brand
storytelling evokes positive emotions and enhances the
cognitive processing of consumers in their brand evaluations.
When consumers are involved in brand storytelling,
engagement increases and it becomes relatively easier to
experience emotional processes occurring from appraisals of
real or imagined events, actions or attributes (O’Shaughnessy
and O’Shaughnessy, 2003). Emotional engagement through
effective storytelling plays an important role in enhancing
brand value (Mills and Robson, 2019). Consumers’ brand
storytelling makes the brand information more tangible and
creates cognitive memories in the mind of the audience
(Denning, 2006). As a result, consumers’ brand storytelling
evokes not only positive emotions but also cognitive processing
leading to positive brand attitudes.
266
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
This research makes three major contributions to the extant
literature. First, although the literature confirms that brand
storytelling is an effective marketing tool to attract consumers
and increase positive responses (Lundqvist et al., 2013; Granitz
and Forman, 2015; Feng, 2018; Solja et al., 2018; Kao, 2019;
Woodside and Fine, 2019), these studies focus either a brand
story designed by a company or consumer experiences about
the brand. In other words, there has been a lack of empirical
work directly comparing the effect of these two different types
of brand storytelling on consumer attitudes for effective
branding. Gensler et al. (2013) also called for a broader
understanding of how brands can be stimulated by storytelling.
To answer the above call, this study investigates the influence of
consumers’ brand storying telling on brand attitudes by
comparing it with a brand story told by companies.
Second, this study goes a step further to investigate the
underlying mechanism regarding how consumers’ brand
storytelling positively influences brand attitudes. Focusing on
brand storytelling, this research explores the mediating role of
consumers’ cognitions and emotions after experiencing
different types of brand storytelling. This research emphasizes
the unique characteristics of consumers’ brand storytelling and
remarks about difference from WoM. As the narrative format
has the power to connect consumers and brands, it is
worthwhile to examine the influence of brand storytelling in
depth.
Finally, the findings provide significant practical implications
for brand managers. With the increasing power of consumers
and their growing participation in brand storytelling via social
media, consumers can play a significant role in increasing
brand awareness, image and loyalty. Thus, marketers need to
better understand the value of consumers’ brand storytelling.
Literature review and hypotheses development
Brand story versus consumers’ brand storytelling
Compelling and well-designed brand stories influence
consumers’ brand experience, which consists of all
the sensations, feelings, cognitions and behavioral responses to
the brand (Brakus et al., 2009). Brand managers aim to use
powerful brand stories to build a strong brand by imprinting
positive brand image and information in consumer memory
(Srivastava et al., 1998; Gensler et al., 2013). Stories have a
structure that engages listeners. Brand stories also contain a
chronological sequence as well as a plot, characters and
causality (Bruner, 1990; Delgadillo and Escalas, 2004;
Woodside, 2010; Solja et al., 2018). Based on previous
literature, a brand story is defined as a firm-created story about
a brand, consisting of a plot, actors, causality and chronology,
and is delivered to consumers by a firm (Singh and
Sonnenburg, 2012; Gensler et al., 2013; Lundqvist et al., 2013;
Solja et al., 2018; Kao, 2019). For example, Toms and its “one
for one” shoes story and Warby Parker’s founders’ story of
realizing glasses were too expensive and wanting to create a
socially conscious company, and the origins of Ben & Jerry’s
and its giving back practices. All these instances reflect a
brand’s ability to attract consumers and help them recognize
the brand better because of a compelling story (Singh and
Sonnenburg, 2012). A brand story not only enables consumers
to emotionally connect to the brand (Kim et al., 2016; Dessart
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
and Pitardi, 2019; Kao, 2019) but also expresses the brand
value (Fog et al., 2005; Gensler et al., 2013). Consumers who
are exposed to a brand story have an increased positive attitude
toward the brand because they indirectly experience the brand
(Lundqvist et al., 2013) and consequently show higher
engagement (Dessart and Pitardi, 2019). A brand story helps
“to build brand awareness, comprehension, empathy,
recognition, recall, and provide meaning to the brand” (Singh
and Sonnenburg, 2012, p. 189).
However, a brand story is delivered to consumers using one-
to-many marketing communication mediums such as
advertising or sales, and is delivered to consumers in a
controlled manner (Hoffman and Novak, 1996; Escalas and
Stern, 2003; Escalas, 2007; Gensler et al., 2013). For example,
the influence of storytelling about a brand in TV or radio
commercials on consumers’ attitudes was investigated (Escalas
and Stern, 2003; Escalas, 2007), and the positive impact of
brand stories on product packages was examined (Solja et al.,
2018). Even though a brand story increases consumers’
engagement more than providing a list of product information
(Kim et al., 2016; Solja et al., 2018; Dessart and Pitardi, 2019),
it does not present the audience’s perspectives. Since a brand
story is developed and manipulated by a company, it represents
only a firm’s perspectives and lacks the consumers’ point of
view.
Consumers often share their experiences and opinions about
brands with others (Berger, 2014). This interpersonal
communication is described as WoM and is defined as “all
informal communications directed at other consumers about
the ownership, usage, or characteristics of particular goods and
services or their sellers” (Westbrook, 1987, p. 261). WoM is
more persuasive to consumers than advertisements because
consumers consider an advertisement as a corporate sales tool,
whereas WoM disarms them and they accept the information
(Dichter, 1966). Even though WoM is considered beyond the
direct control of marketers, it is a valuable source of
information for consumers to evaluate brands (Kotler, 1988)
and influences consumers’ buying decisions significantly
(Westbrook, 1987). WoM can be structured as a narrative
(Delgadillo and Escalas, 2004), and consumer storytelling,
which is one form of WoM, is the focus of this study. Although
WoM embraces all types of informal communication among
consumers, consumers’ brand storytelling is a communication
process that includes elements of a narrative (story) such as
chronology and causality (Delgadillo and Escalas, 2004).
Consumers as “Homo Narrans” create and communicate
with stories across times and cultures and they tell a story that is
meaningful for them personally or in general (Fisher, 1984;
Adaval and Wyer, 1998). Consumers tend to use products to
tell stories of themselves (Fog et al., 2005). The stories of
product usage and experiences help them express themselves,
and this authentic storytelling influences other consumers’
judgments. Consumers connect themselves to a brand via
narrative processing as they interpret and relate their
experiences of a brand into a story (Escalas, 2004). Consumers’
brand storytelling often includes user and usage associations, as
well as psychological and symbolic benefits related to the value
of a brand (Aaker, 1991). Consumers constantly tell each other
stories and match or compare incoming stories with their
267
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
stories, to understand one another (Delgadillo and Escalas,
2004).
Consumers’ desire to share their stories related to brands
arises especially when the consumption experience is unique.
This activity allows them to connect closely to the brand. When
consumers recognize a story as consumers’ brand storytelling
(generated by consumers), they see the messages as less biased
(Lin et al., 2011). When the source in the story is similar to the
consumer, consumers feel an increased familiarity and
favorability toward the brand (Simon et al., 1970). Consumers
build strong brand connections when they interact and
communicate with other users via brand communities
(Veloutsou and Moutinho, 2009). Likewise, when consumers
read other consumers’ brand storytelling, they feel closer to the
brand because it is easier for them to imagine similar situations.
Imagination via storytelling helps consumers understand the
brand better because of narrative transportation, which is
defined as “a convergent process, where all mental systems and
capabilities become focused on events occurring in the
narrative” (Green and Brock, 2000, p. 701).
Hence, based on the WoM and brand storytelling literature,
there are similarities and differences between a brand story,
WoM and consumers’ brand storytelling. A brand story shows
a company’s perspective and is delivered to consumers in a
controlled manner; hence, consumers are less motivated to
share the story with other consumers. Once consumers realize
that a message is created and generated by a company to
influence consumers, they tend to show reverse behaviors by
correcting their behaviors and attitudes. For example, when
consumers see the brand slogan of Walmart – “Save Money.
Live Better,” they spend more money because they see the
message as a persuasion tactic created by a company. Thus,
they reverse their behaviors to correct for bias (Laran et al.,
2011). Additionally, consumers tend to be passive recipients
when they hear a brand story and show a lack of interaction
with other consumers. However, consumers’ brand storytelling
and WoM are created based on consumers’ experiences and
stories from their perspectives. These stories could include both
negative and positive experiences, and they are spread
voluntarily and actively by consumers. Increasing access to
information and communication technology via social media
has empowered consumers in the market to engage more
actively (Singh and Sonnenburg, 2012). Even though WoM
and consumers’ brand storytelling share several characteristics
– such as the origin and source of creation, consumers’
participation and the valence of communication – consumers’
brand storytelling has a more specific narrative format that
includes chronology and causality. Thus, consumers’ brand
storytelling would be a distinct category under the umbrella of
WoM.
Consumers’ brand storytelling for branding
Consumers’ brand storytelling can be used as a valuable
marketing communication tool to differentiate a brand from its
rivals. Storytelling helps establish an in-depth understanding of
brand values and builds consumer trust and loyalty (McLellan,
2006; Spear and Roper, 2013; Granitz and Forman, 2015).
Consumers’ brand storytelling helps other consumers imagine
the usage of a brand’s products (McLellan, 2006) and
understand consumption experiences as part of their lives
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
(Shankar et al., 2001). The use of consumers’ brand
storytelling is effective for branding. Companies have found
that consumers who share their unique experiences with a
brand increase other consumers’ empathy and familiarity with
the brand. In fact, when consumers listen to other consumers’
stories, they process information by relating it to themselves or
their experiences (Burnkrant and Unnava, 1995; Woodside,
2010). This self-referencing allows consumers to experience
the main characters in the story as well (Escalas, 2007).
Therefore, because of its narrative format, consumers’ brand
storytelling allows consumers to more deeply and vividly
imagine and experience a situation as well as more deeply
engage with the story and brand as supported by narrative
transportation and self-referencing (Escalas, 2004; Green and
Brock, 2000).
Companies can use consumers’ brand storytelling as a bridge
to create mutual understanding and trust between consumers
and a company (Gensler et al., 2013). Consumers engage in
brand communities via social media and interact with other
consumers and brands (Dessart et al., 2015). Consumers’
active participation in sharing their stories related to the brand
could lead to enduring, long-lasting and successful brands.
Consumers’ brand storytelling involves consumers’ higher
motivation to share a story with other consumers and/or with
the company. By sharing and interacting with the stories,
consumers have higher levels of engagement in the brand and
the story, which could provide significant managerial
implications (Gensler et al., 2013). Prior research shows that
sharing consumers’ personal experiences though narratives
creates connections among consumers, and this co-created
marketing is successful for luxury brands such as Tiffany and
Co. (Hughes et al., 2016). Moreover, consumers are
empowered to easily share their stories via social media and
brand managers can no longer ignore consumers’ voices
(Gensler et al., 2013). As consumers use brands to express their
identity and self-concept, consumers’ active role as a co-creator
for branding becomes significant (Gensler et al., 2013).
Influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on brand
attitudes
Prior literature suggests that consumers’ brand storytelling is
more influential and persuasive than arguments because
consumers tend to organize information in narrative formats
(Escalas, 2004) and easily retrieve their experiences and
memories (Woodside, 2010). Consumers evaluate brands
based on prior experiences and/or information obtained
cognitively and emotionally (Chaudhuri, 2006). Tangible
brand beliefs affect cognitive brand evaluation, whereas
intangible brand beliefs affect emotional brand evaluation
(Chaudhuri, 2006). Chaudhuri (2006) states that, “brand
attitudes are predispositions that can be regarded as a person’s
level of interest in a brand that results from the person’s rational
and emotional evaluations of the brand. Thus, attitudes are a
function of both the brand and the person, and they are based
on a match between these two elements” (p. 47). Cognition
and emotion play important roles in decisionmaking; these
could be facilitated by consumers’ brand storytelling. Emotions
are the holistic and synthetic integration of sensory data,
whereas cognition represents the sequential and analytical
processing of information based on the appraisal of the
268
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
environment (Chaudhuri, 2006). Consumers analyze and
process information of products to make an optimal buying
decision and cognitions and emotions are complementary in
the brand evaluation process (Chaudhuri, 2006).
Consumers evaluate and choose a brand based on
information about a product, such as attributes through
cognitive processing (Holbrook and Batra, 1987). It is critical
to obtain information such as the costs and benefits of a
product since consumers do not want to waste their money and
effort. Thus, cognitive processes play an important role in
buying decisions and consumers’ brand storytelling can
facilitate it. Consumers tend to remember and memorize
specific information better through familiar anecdotes or stories
rather than lectures or a list of information (Wells, 1988).
Anecdotal WoM has a significant effect on brand judgment
(Herr et al., 1991; Gensler et al., 2013). Specifically, in
consumer information processing for decision-making, a
narrative format (i.e. storytelling) is more important than
providing a list of product characteristics (Adaval and Wyer,
1998; van Laer et al., 2019).
Consumers are often driven by emotions and follow their
“heart” or “gut feeling” that are independent of conscious
control (Pawle and Cooper, 2006). O’Shaughnessy and
O’Shaughnessy (2003) illustrate that “marketing folklore
suggests that emotions can stimulate buying interest, guide
choices, arouse buying intentions, and influence future buying
decisions. These popular beliefs about the power of emotions
have received research support” (p. 3). Uniting an idea with an
emotion through a compelling story is a powerful way to
persuade consumers to buy a specific brand (McKee, 2003).
McKee (2003) advises marketers that “in a story, you not only
weave a lot of information into the telling but you also arouse
your listener’s emotions and energy” (2003, p. 52).
Additionally, narrative transportation and self-referencing
helps consumers imagine and engage in a story and experience
the main characters’ feelings (Escalas, 1998, 2004; Green and
Brock, 2000; O’Shaughnessy and O’Shaughnessy, 2003).
Since consumers’ brand storytelling touches the teller’s and the
audience’s emotions, storytelling becomes an effective tool for
creating an entire brand concept (Fog et al., 2005; Gensler
et al., 2013).
Sharing stories automatically involves both the left and right
hemispheres of the brain; the left side aids in understanding the
sequence and details of the events, whereas the right side
generates sensory impressions and creates a bigger picture
(Lickorish, 2009). However, depending on whether the story
has authenticity based on real experience or not, consumers will
have different cognitive processes and emotions. Consumers
might be engaged in another consumer’s brand storytelling
more than a brand story, so they might remember and process
brand information more deeply. Given that consumers
consider each other as their peer reference groups (Park and
Lee, 2008), they are relatively more interested in other
consumers’ storytelling compared to a brand story. Moreover,
because other consumers’ stories help consumers to imagine
the story and to engage in the plot, consumers experience
stronger emotions when they listen to real stories rather than
artificial stories. In fact, the sincerity of real stories helps other
consumers be more involved in the story and evoke empathy.
Employees (internal customers) tend to feel encouraged when
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
they hear the stories of fellow employees. Companies use this
strategy of sharing emotions to promote company culture
(Denning, 2006). Therefore, considering the above literature,
it is hypothesized as follows:
H1. Consumers’ brand storytelling will lead to a higher level
of cognitive processing by consumers than a brand story.
H2. Consumers’ brand storytelling will lead to greater
positive emotions for consumers than a brand story.
H3. Consumers’ brand storytelling will lead to a stronger
favorable brand attitude than a brand story.
H4. The influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on brand
attitudes is mediated by higher levels of cognitive
processing and greater positive emotions.
Study 1
This study examines the differential effect of consumers’ brand
storytelling versus brand story on brand attitudes. Additionally,
the impact of positive emotions and cognitive processing
evoked by consumers’ band storytelling on brand attitude is
tested.
Research design and procedure
Study 1 used two product categories (i.e. coffee shops and
airline mileage programs) with real brands: Angel-in-us coffee
shop in Korea and the Emirates Airline Skywards program.
Even though these are real brands, the assumption was that
most people in the USA were unfamiliar with and had little
experience with these brands. Based on this expectation, the
two brands were chosen to control the different levels of
experience and/or other internal/external factors. Furthermore,
the product categories chosen were gender-neutral. Instead of
using fictitious brands and developing stories, actual
consumers and products/services of these brands were used
(slight modifications were done to align the stories),
maintaining the reality of the brand storytelling/the realism of
the scenarios. Additionally, we only focused on positive valence
because a brand story tends to have positive valence as it is
developed by the firm. Thus, this study focuses on the influence
of two different types of brand storytelling: consumers’ brand
storytelling and a brand story. As expected, the level of prior
experience was low (4.8% of awareness and 1.4% of usage
experience). For the purpose of this study, those who had
experience with the brands were excluded. Hence, these actual
brands could be considered as “fictitious,” with no biases
caused by brand effect. Participants were asked to read either a
consumers’ brand story or a firm-created brand story that was
manipulated based on the narrative point of view (for each
story). As a manipulation check, participants were asked
whether the story was developed by consumers or a company;
based on their answers, only the data that met the criteria were
included in this study.
Two hundred online panel respondents recruited from a
third-party vendor, GlobalTestMarket (by GMI), participated
in the study. Most respondents (more than 60%) were between
25 and 54 years old and 48% were men. Participants were
randomly assigned to a 2 (story: consumers’ brand storytelling
269
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
vs brand story)  2 (product: coffee shop vs airline mileage
program) -subjects design. First, participants read a scenario
that was either a consumer’s brand story or a brand story of a
coffee shop or mileage program (Appendix 1). In the
consumers’ brand storytelling condition, participants read a
consumer’s story based on their experience with the brand. In
contrast, in the brand story condition, participants read a story
of the brand usage by a third person, including the firm’s
perspective. After reading the scenario, respondents rated
brand attitudes based on four items: anchored by good/bad,
like very much/dislike very much, pleasant/unpleasant and poor
quality/high quality using a seven-point scale (a = 0.97;
Mitchell and Olson, 1981). Next, participants were asked to
answer cognitive processing items and experience emotions.
Experienced emotions were measured with four items in a
positive category: happy, pleased, friendly and excited, based
on a seven-point scale (a = 0.94; Holbrook and Batra, 1987).
The depth of information processing was measured with open-
ended questions. Participants were asked to write down
everything they thought and remembered about the story. The
answers were classified by the reference points, and two
independent coders identified the levels of cognitive processing
(Appendix 2; Chebat et al., 2003).
Results and discussion
A 2 (consumers’ brand storytelling vs brand story)  2 (coffee
shop vs airline mileage program) ANOVA reveals a significant
main effect of the different types of stories, suggesting that
consumers’ brand storytelling (M = 2.8) has a higher level of
cognitive processing compared to a brand story (M = 2.1;
F(1,198) = 7.92, p < 0.05). Moreover, neither the main effect
of product category (F(1, 198) = 0.20, p > 0.66) nor the types
of storytelling and product category interaction (F(1, 198) =
2.63, p > 0.11) was significant. Thus, the participants had
higher levels of cognitive processing when they were exposed to
consumers’ brand storytelling compared to a story created by a
firm, regardless of the product type. These findings support
H1.
Next, the influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on
experienced emotions was investigated to test H2. The 2  2
ANOVA results indicated that participants had greater positive
emotions when they read consumers’ brand storytelling (M =
4.8), compared to a brand story by a firm (M = 4.2; F(1,198) =
6.82, p < 0.05). There was no significant main effect of product
category (F(1, 198) = 1.37, p > 0.24) nor the interaction effect
of different types of brand storytelling and product category
(F(1, 198) = 0.25, p > 0.62). Therefore, this result confirms
that brand storytelling by consumers evokes positive emotions
to a greater extent than a brand’s story, which supports H2.
A separate ANOVA analysis was conducted for brand
attitude as a dependent variable. The results reveal that there is
a significant main effect of product category on brand attitude;
specifically, participants had a more positive attitude toward
the coffee shop (M = 5.1) than the airline mileage program
(M = 4.6; F(1, 198) = 6.60, p < 0.05). More importantly, there
was a significant main effect of brand storytelling on brand
attitude, suggesting that consumers’ brand storytelling (M =
5.2) increases positive attitudes toward a brand to a greater
extent than a brand’s story (M = 4.6; F(1, 198) = 6.78, p <
0.05), which supports H3. There was no significant interaction
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling Journal of Product & Brand Management
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al. Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278

effect of storytelling and product category (F(1, 198) = 0.21, subjects participated in the study (male = 57%; Mage =
p > 0.65) (Figure 1). 41 years). Similar to Study 1, Study 2 was conducted in a 2
Mediation analysis: As the replicate factor (i.e. product (story: consumers’ brand storytelling vs brand story)  2
category) did not interact with the other factor (i.e. (product: coffee shop vs airline mileage program) between-
storytelling), the two replications were combined for further subjects design. As expected, consumers did not have
analysis. We tested to see whether the influence of consumers’ experience with brands and brand recognition was low as well.
brand storytelling on brand attitude was mediated by cognitive Prior experience was used as a control variable in the analysis.
processing and positive emotions. Specifically, we test for two Participants were randomly assigned into four groups and were
parallel mediations using PROCESS Model 4 and 10,000 asked to imagine browsing websites where they came upon an
bootstrap samples. This helps to examine whether consumers’ article about either a consumer’s brand story or a brand story of
brand storytelling enhances the level of cognitive processing, the brand. To check whether the manipulation worked
evokes more positive emotions compared to a firm created properly for the two brand storytelling, participants rated the
brand story and whether they result in greater favorable source of a story with two (a = 0.98; “This story is created by”,
attitudes toward a brand. As expected, consumers’ brand “The author of this story is”) with a seven-point bipolar scale
storytelling gives rise to participants with higher levels of (1 = a company; 7 = a consumer). The results of the
cognitive processing consequently leading to greater brand manipulation check confirmed that participants believed that
attitudes (b = 0.12, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.0461, 0.1933]). In consumers’ storytelling was generated by a consumer, whereas
addition, consumers’ brand storytelling evokes greater positive a brand story was generated by a company (Mcbs = 6.2 vs Mbs =
emotions compared to a brand story, which leads to greater 1.9; F(1,115) = 247.3, p < 0.001). Study 2 also included two
positive brand attitudes (b = 0.69, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.6100, additional measures to confirm that consumers’ brand
0.7726]). Collectively, the findings support H4, suggesting that storytelling compared to a brand story increases consumers’
both cognitive processing and positive emotions play roles as motivation to share the story with others and carries a higher
mediators in the relationship between consumers’ brand authenticity. In terms of motivation to share the story,
storytelling and brand attitudes. Therefore, the results confirm participants were asked to indicate the desirability to share the
story and their thoughts about the story with others using a
that consumers’ brand storytelling is more effective in
seven-point-Likert scale (a = 0.98; “I want to share this story
increasing brand attitudes compared to a brand story.
with others,” “I want to introduce this story to others,” “I want
Consumers’ storytelling about a brand enables other
to talk about this story to others,” “I want to share my reflection
consumers to think and recall more about the brand and share
of the story,” “This story makes me want to share other similar
positive emotions.
experiences,” “This story makes me want to share my own
story,” “This story makes me want to share my reaction”). The
Study 2 authenticity of the story was measured using five items (a =
This study had several purposes: 0.97; “The story is [. . .]”. “credible, believable, authentic,
 to replicate study 1; realistic, genuine”) using a seven-point Likert scale (1 =
 to vary the measurements of cognitive processing and strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The results showed that
positive emotions to provide additional robust evidence consumers’ brand storytelling resulted in a higher motivation to
that consumers’ brand storytelling enhances both share the story (M = 4.7 vs M = 3.5; F(1,115) = 13.4, p <
consumers cognitions and emotions; 0.001) and greater authenticity (Mcbs = 5.4 vs Mbs = 4.3;
 to more precisely distinguish between brand story and F(1,115) = 15, p < 0.001) of the story compared to a brand
consumer brand storytelling; and story. These findings confirmed the theoretical distinction
 to control variables such as product involvement and prior between consumers’ brand storytelling and a brand story, and
experiences. this research investigated how these two stories influenced
consumers’ responses in a more precise manner.
Consumers’ brand attitude was measured as a dependent
Research design and procedure variable, as in Study 1, and positive emotions and cognition
One hundred and twenty respondents recruited from Amazon were measured to test the underlying mechanism of the
Mturk participated in this online survey. Three respondents influence of consumers’ brand storytelling. In terms of positive
failed the attention check and were excluded. A total of 117 emotions, respondents were asked to indicate their emotions
from a list of seven positive emotions (a = 0.96; happy, pleased,
Figure 1 Results joyful, friendly, excited, interesting, amazed). Only positive
emotions were used for the same reasons as in Study 1. Because
7 all the emotions were positive and this study investigated how
6 the intensity of emotions generated from the two different
5 stories influenced brand attitudes, the averaged positive
4 emotion was used for the analysis. Regarding cognition,
3 participants’ cognitive personalization was measured to
2 investigate the level of cognitive processing after reading a
1 story. Personalization is a cognitive operation on how readers
Cognitive Processing Positive Emotions Brand Attitude
think about the events and respond to it when it happens to
Consumers' Brand storytelling A brand story
them (Larsen et al., 1987; Xia and Bechwati, 2008). As a

270
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
mental operation by the reader, after exposure to the stimuli,
cognitive personalization is an appropriate measurement to
investigate consumers’ cognition based on brand storytelling.
When consumers process information more cognitively, they
relate the situations and information to themselves. Cognitive
personalization was measured using three items based on a
seven-point Likert scale (Larsen et al., 1987; Xia and Bechwati,
2008; a = 0.91; “As I read the story, I thought about how I
would feel if my friends, family, or I were in that situation,”
“While reading the story, I was thinking about my own
emotional reactions,” “As I read the story, I kept on thinking
about how I would feel if the same thing happened to me”).
Finally, prior brand experiences (a = 0.89; “how well I know
this brand” or “how much experience I have using this brand”)
and product category involvement (Zaichkowsky, 1994; a =
0.96) were used as control variables.
Results and discussion
To test H1, the influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on
cognitive personalization was examined. A 2 (consumers’
brand storytelling vs brand story)  2 (coffee shop vs. airline
mileage program) ANOVA analysis showed that participants
revealed greater cognitive personalization when they read
consumers’ brand storytelling (M = 5.2), compared to a brand
story by a firm (M = 4.1; F(1,113) = 18.1, p < 0.05). There was
no significant main effect of product category (F(1, 113) =
0.002, p > 0.96) nor the interaction effect of different types of
brand storytelling and product category (F(1, 113) = 0.47, p >
0.49). The effect of consumers’ brand storytelling (vs a brand
story) on cognitive processing remained significant with the
covariates included (F(1,111) = 8.7, p < 0.05). The covariates
did not account for these findings. A 2  2 ANOVA analysis
was conducted to examine the influence of consumers’ brand
storytelling on positive emotions. The results were consistent
with the findings in Study 1, suggesting that participants had
greater positive emotions when they read consumers’ brand
storytelling (M = 5.3), compared to a firm’s brand story (M =
4.3; F(1,113) = 12.01, p < 0.05). There was no significant
main effect of product category (F(1, 113) = 2.68, p > 0.10)
nor the interaction effect of different types of brand storytelling
and product category (F(1, 113) = 0.28, p > 0.64), which
supports H2. The effect of consumers’ brand storytelling (vs a
brand story) on positive emotions remained significant with the
covariates included (F(1,111) = 4.1, p < 0.05). The covariates
did not account for our findings. A 2  2 ANOVA reveals a
significant main effect of different types of stories, suggesting
that consumers’ brand storytelling (M = 5.9) has a higher brand
attitude than a brand story (M = 5.0; F(1,113) = 17.2, p <
0.05). This supports H3. Moreover, neither the main effect of
product category (F(1, 113) = 0.05, p > 0.82) nor the types of
storytelling  product category interaction (F(1, 113) = 0.02,
p > 0.88) was significant. The effect of consumers’ brand
storytelling (vs a brand story) on brand attitudes remained
significant with the covariates (i.e. prior experiences, product
category involvement) included (F(1,111) = 8.45, p < 0.05).
The covariates did not account for these findings.
Mediation analysis: Consistent with Study 1, the replicate
factor (i.e. product category) did not interact with the other
factor (i.e. storytelling); the two replications were combined for
further analysis. It is expected that the higher consumer
271
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
cognition and positive emotions evoked from consumers’ brand
storytelling (vs a brand story) resulted in higher brand attitudes.
In terms of the mediating role of consumers’ cognition and
positive emotions on the relationship between storytelling and
brand attitudes, a mediation analysis using PROCESS Model 4
and 10,000 bootstrap samples (Hayes, 2013) was conducted.
As expected, consumers’ brand storytelling allowed
participants to have greater cognition (b = 0.19, SE = 0.07,
95% CI [0.0407, 0.3299]) and positive emotions (b = 0.41,
SE = 0.07, 95% CI [0.2737, 0.5498]), which led to greater
brand attitudes. These findings support H4, suggesting that
consumers’ brand storytelling enhances consumers’ cognition
and evokes positive emotions, which in turn enhances favorable
brand attitudes compared to a brand story.
Study 3
This study was conducted to confirm the consistent results of
the influence of consumer brand storytelling on brand attitudes
using a real brand. This study also used new measures for
cognitive processing to provide evidence that consumers’ band
storytelling enhances not only emotions but also cognitions.
Research design and procedure
One hundred and sixty respondents from Amazon Mturk
participated in the online survey. Five respondents failed the
attention check and were excluded. A total of 155 respondents
(male = 57%, Mage = 44 years) participated in this study.
Participants were randomly assigned to 2 (story: consumers’
brand Storytelling vs brand story) between-subjects design.
Since consumers had different levels of prior experiences and
knowledge about the Warby Parker brand (a = 0.86), they were
controlled in the analysis.
Consistent with Study 2, participants were asked to imagine
that they were browsing websites and reading an article about
Warby Parker. Participants read either a consumer’s brand
storytelling or a brand story on Warby Parker (Appendix 1).
Stories were adapted and developed from the brand website
and consumers’ reviews. The real brand name, brand story and
consumers’ storytelling were developed to be comparable to
their brand story and consumers’ reviews. Although there were
differences in the content of the stories, these differences
reflected real-world content and both stories demonstrated
consistent brand characteristics and included the real brand
name. This provided strong potential to understand different
types of stories and how they influenced brand attitudes. The
survey asked participants to indicate the source of the story with
two items (a = 0.95; “This story is created by,” “The author of
this story is”) based on a seven-point bipolar scale (1 = a
company; 7 = a consumer). The results indicate that
participants who read the consumers’ brand storytelling think
the story is from consumers, whereas participants who read the
brand story think the story is from the company (Mcbs = 6.1 vs
Mbs = 2.6; F(1,153) = 131, p < 0.001). These results are
consistent with those of Study 2. Consumers’ motivation to
share the story (a = 0.98) and the authenticity of the story (a =
0.97) were measured, providing support for the theoretical
distinction between consumers’ brand storytelling and a firm
brand story. As expected, consumers’ brand storytelling
resulted in higher motivation to share the story (M = 4.9 vs M =
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
4.2; F(1,153) = 6.5, p < 0.05) and greater authenticity of the
story (Mcbs = 5.8 vs Mbs = 4.7; F(1,153) = 29.9, p < 0.001)
compared to a brand story.
After reading the story, participants were asked to rate their
attitude toward the brand and answer questions about their
positive emotions. In terms of cognition, imagery processing in
addition to cognitive personalization was measured to confirm
that consumers’ brand storytelling enhanced cognition.
Consumers use imagery or analytical information processing
for elaboration (Oliver et al., 1993) and consumers use imagery
processing to understand perceptual information from
imagined experiences by envisioning the situation (Keller and
McGill, 1994). Therefore, consumers’ storytelling, which
provides more sensory experience, will enhance cognition by
operating imagery processing. This study’s use of various
measurements of cognitive processing provides strong evidence
that consumers’ brand storytelling enhances consumers’
cognition. With respect to imagery processing, participants
responded to three statements (a = 0.93; Oliver et al., 1993;
e.g. “Clear and detailed images come to mind as I read the
story,” “while reading the story, I visualized many images” “all
sorts of pictures, sounds, tastes, and/or smells come to my mind
while I read the story”) on a seven-point Likert scale (1 =
strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). Finally, prior brand
experiences and product category involvement were measured
as control variables, as in Study 2.
Results and discussion
To test H1, the influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on
cognitive personalization was investigated. A one-way ANOVA
revealed that participants had greater cognitive personalization
when they read consumers’ brand storytelling (M = 5.5),
compared to a brand story by a firm (M = 5.1; F(1,153) = 4.4, p
< 0.05). The effect of consumers’ brand storytelling (vs a brand
story) on cognitive personalization remained significant with
the covariates included (F(1,151) = 3.8, p < 0.05). The
influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on imagery
information processing as another measure of cognitive
processing was tested. The results suggest that respondents
showed greater image processing when they read consumers’
brand storytelling (vs a brand story) (Mcbs = 5.3 vs Mbs = 4.9;
F(1,153) = 8.59, p < 0.05). The effect of consumers’ brand
storytelling (vs a brand story) on imagery processing remained
significant with the covariates included (F(1,151) = 8.64,
p < 0.05).
The results of the influence of consumers’ brand storytelling
on positive emotions were consistent with the findings in Study
1, indicating that participants had greater positive emotions
when they read consumers’ brand storytelling (M = 5.6),
compared to a brand story (M = 4.8; F(1,153) = 10.3, p <
0.05), which supports H2. The effect of consumers’ brand
storytelling (vs a brand story) on positive emotions remained
significant with the covariates included (F(1,151) = 12.3, p <
0.05). The covariates did not account for these findings.
A one-way ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of a
story, suggesting that consumers’ brand storytelling (M = 6.2)
has a higher brand attitude compared to a brand story (M =
5.7; F(1,153) = 9.5, p < 0.05) and supports H3. The effect of
consumers’ brand storytelling (vs a brand story) on brand
attitudes remained significant with the covariates (i.e. prior
272
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
experiences and category involvement) included (F(1,151) =
9.5, p < 0.05). The covariates did not account for these
findings.
Mediation analysis: Consistent with the findings in Studies 1
and 2, higher consumer cognition and positive emotions are
expected after participants read consumers’ brand storytelling
(vs a brand story) leading to higher brand attitudes. This
research suggests that consumers’ brand storytelling evokes
both emotions and cognitions; hence, the two mediators were
entered in the mediation analysis using PROCESS Model 4
and 10,000 bootstrap samples (Hayes, 2013). The results
indicate that consumers’ brand storytelling facilitates
participants ability for greater cognition (b = 0.20, SE = 0.06,
95% CI [0.0742, 0.3291]) and positive emotions (b = 0.33,
SE = 0.05, 95% CI [0.2196, 0.4328]), which lead to greater
brand attitudes, supporting H4. Additionally, the mediating
role of cognition using imagery processing and positive
emotions was investigated. The results show that consumers’
brand storytelling leads to greater favorable attitudes via
enhanced cognition (b = 0.19, SE = 0.06, 95% CI [0.0740,
0.3116]) and positive emotions (b = 0.32, SE = 0.06, 95% CI
[0.2079, 0.4261]). These findings demonstrate that
consumers’ brand storytelling enhances consumers’ cognitive
processing based on various measurements and allows
consumers to have a more positive attitude toward a brand.
Finally, even with the use of an actual brand rather than a
fictitious brand, consumers’ brand storytelling compared to a
brand story increased favorable attitudes via enhanced
cognition and positive emotions.
General discussion
This research empirically examined the effects of consumers’
brand storytelling compared to a brand story. Across three
experiments, this research finds that consumers’ brand
storytelling significantly improves brand attitude compared to a
brand story. When consumers read consumers’ brand
storytelling, they have a higher motivation to share the story
with others and they believe the story is more authentic. As a
result, consumers evoke more cognitive thoughts about the
story and brand. The findings reveal that consumers’ brand
storytelling enhances consumers’ memory and allows
consumers to have a higher level of information processing,
which influences brand evaluations. Moreover, consumers’
brand storytelling increases cognitive personalization and
imagery processing. Not only is consumers’ cognition
enhanced, so is consumers’ positive emotions (in reading a
consumer’s brand storytelling vs a brand story). Consumers
reveal greater intensity of positive emotions with consumers’
brand storytelling, leading to a higher brand attitude. Both
positive emotions and cognition evoked from consumers’ brand
storytelling, play a mediating role in influencing brand attitude.
Hypotheses were tested using three different product
categories. The categories were gender neutral, familiar and
accessible to consumers, making our results generalizable. The
results reveal no significant main effect of product category on
brand attitude, cognition processing and positive emotions, nor
an interaction effect between product category and brand
storytelling. This confirms that consumers’ brand story telling
is an important antecedent of cognitive processing and
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
emotions, which results in favorable brand attitudes, regardless
of product categories. It provides robust evidence that
consumers’ brand storytelling has a greater impact on brand
attitudes compared to a brand story.
Theoretical implications
This research provides theoretical contributions to the existing
literature. First, this paper expands the branding literature by
empirically testing the different influences of consumers’ brand
storytelling versus a brand story on brand attitudes. Previous
studies tend to focus only on the impact of either a firm-
generated brand story or consumer brand storytelling and how
it is useful for branding (Lundqvist et al., 2013; Granitz and
Forman, 2015; Kirmani et al., 2017; Solja et al., 2018; Kao,
2019; Woodside and Fine, 2019). For example, a brand story
on the product package compared to a list of product
information on the package was more effective in enhancing
positive attitudes (Solja et al., 2018) and narratives in
advertising was helpful for consumer engagement in luxury
branding (Kim et al., 2016). Different types of brand stories
such as underdogs versus top dogs were investigated (Paharia
et al., 2011; Kao, 2019), and the findings suggest that the
underdog type of brand story is more attractive to consumers
(Paharia et al., 2011). These research findings have confirmed
that a brand story is an effective branding tool to attract
consumers and can be used in advertising and sales.
Other research streams have focused only on consumers’
storytelling about the brand and its impact in various
consumption contexts (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2013; Cowley,
2014; Hughes et al., 2016). For example, consumers’
experiences with the brand in a narrative format influence other
consumers’ brand evaluation (Cowley, 2014), helping to
understand the brand values (Granitz and Forman, 2015).
Consumers’ brand storytelling via social media compared to
traditional channels is more impactful (Hennig-Thurau et al.,
2013) and is useful for building connections between
consumers and brands (Hughes et al., 2016). However, these
prior studies have not investigated the direct comparison of a
firm-generated brand story versus consumers’ brand
storytelling. Although van Laer et al. (2019) discuss the
different influences between a firm- versus consumer-generated
brand story using a meta-analysis study. Therefore, by
empirically testing the two types of brand stories using
experiments, this research addresses the research gap.
Second, this research contributes to the WoM literature by
defining consumers’ brand storytelling, which is distinguished
from WoM and a brand story. Even though WoM includes
various consumer reviews related to products and has an
important impact on consumer behavior (Berger, 2014), it does
not have to be structured as a story that includes causality and
chronology (Delgadillo and Escalas, 2004). Rather, it is a
broader term that includes consumers’ brand storytelling in the
category. Therefore, based on the differences and similarities
between these constructs, this research suggests that
consumers’ brand storytelling refers to a narrative format of
consumption experience that is created and shared by
consumers. Consumers remember, longer and more vividly,
their stories as the experiences are episodic memories stored in
long-term memory (Bettman, 1979). With high motivation to
share an interesting story with others, consumers’ brand
273
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
storytelling can be considered a trigger to ignite WoM (Say
daily, 2014). Therefore, the distinctions among constructs
allow a broader understanding of brand storytelling and WoM
in response to prior literature (Woodside, 2010; Gensler et al.,
2013; Berger, 2014).
Third, this research provides the underlying mechanism of
consumers’ brand storytelling on brand attitude by
investigating consumers’ cognition and emotions. Emotions
can be evoked separately from cognition and/or simultaneously
(Zajonc, 1980; Carrera and Oceja, 2007; Taylor, 2009). The
findings suggest that there is no correlation between
consumers’ cognitive processing and emotions after exposing
subjects to consumers’ brand storytelling or a brand story.
However, both variables play a significant role as mediators
since consumers’ brand storytelling evokes greater positive
emotions and enhances cognitive processing. Hence, these
findings add insight to branding literature by explaining the
underlying reasons for the positive effects of consumers’ brand
storytelling on brand evaluation.
Managerial implications
This study contributes to building a useful branding strategy, as
the findings provide important implications for managers to
ensure successful branding. The results reveal that consumers’
brand storytelling has a greater impact than a brand story,
indicating that marketers should put more effort into
encouraging their loyal consumers to share their own stories
with other consumers. Brand managers and marketers can
provide social media platforms for consumers to talk about
their stories in a more comfortable environment. As
communication via social media is more persuasive than
traditional channels (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2013), facilitating
consumer brand stories on social media would take advantage
of the marketplace trend of consumers sharing their stories
related to brands. Engaging consumers via storytelling will
enhance information sharing and spread about the brand
(Hong et al., 2018), and these voluntary and active interactions
will provide insight for further effective branding strategies.
Because consumers consider other consumers as a valuable
reference group (Park and Lee, 2008), consumers’ brand
storytelling will allow them to process the information more
meaningfully and engage more (Dessart and Pitardi, 2019).
With respect to the long-term relationship between consumers
and a brand, it would be a great opportunity for each to interact
with the other to understand the needs and wants of
consumers. This interaction enables consumers to increase
their commitment and loyalty to the brand.
The branding strategy of using consumers’ brand storytelling
could be applied in many areas. For example, this strategy
could enhance the relationship between a company and its
internal customers (employees). Internal customers would
prefer to understand the company’s core values and culture by
listening to other customers’ (other employees’) stories instead
of listening to the company’s stories, which tend to emphasize
only management perspectives. Similarly, consumers’
storytelling as a communication tool can be used to evoke
positive emotions such as passion and love toward the
company, making the company a more enjoyable place to work.
Moreover, building a strong brand using consumers’ brand
storytelling can be applied in the tourism and hospitality
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
management area. As consumers’ reviews and experiences
during stays at a hotel or Airbnb are important information to
other consumers, hospitality brand managers can use
consumers’ storytelling to attract visitors. Local governments
can also use this branding strategy to build a destination brand
to attract tourists, as consumers’ storytelling enhances co-
creation of the destination brands (Lund et al., 2019).
Limitations and future research
This research highlights the power of consumers’ brand
storytelling, but it has some limitations and offers several
opportunities for further research. This research includes three
product categories: a coffee shop, an airline mileage program
(with limited brand awareness or experience allowing the
creation of “fictitious brands”) to remove bias but maintain
authenticity of the stories and a manufacturer of glasses. The
glasses are from Warby Parker and this brand provides unique
shopping experiences and services that are different from other
competitors. Therefore, the three products in our study could
be considered experiential products. Thus, in future studies, it
would be interesting to see whether different types of products,
such as utilitarian versus hedonic goods, moderate the
influence of consumers’ brand storytelling on brand attitudes.
Next, this study tests only the positive content of stories and
emotions; therefore, future studies might be expanded to
include negative stories and emotions. It would be interesting
to discover which positive or negative emotions have a greater
impact on brand evaluation. Additionally, it would be
interesting to investigate how mixed emotions (like sadness and
happiness) or negative emotions (sadness) from consumers’
brand storytelling influence brand evaluations. Moreover, it
would be interesting to investigate how specific emotions
elicited by a story influence evaluations and which emotions are
more useful for branding. For example, “amazement”
compared to “pleasure” with higher arousal would enable
consumers to have a greater willingness to recommend the
brand to others and increase brand loyalty.
This study investigates the influence of consumers’ brand
storytelling by asking participants to read a story. However,
consumers’ brand storytelling can be shared in many ways.
With advanced technology, consumers share their stories using
various social media platforms such as posting pictures on
Instagram, uploading videos on YouTube and sharing
thoughts/interests on Blogs, Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and
others. Therefore, a future study examining the moderating
role of different types of social media on the influence of
consumers’ brand storytelling would be of value.
Finally, in this research, participants were forced to be
listeners, but people can choose whether to listen, tell or do
neither in real life. Since consumers’ brand storytelling is
shared among consumers and it can be performed under the
circumstance of interpersonal communication, it might be
interesting to explore the difference between tellers and
listeners.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the
Value of a Brand Name, Free Press, New York, NY.
274
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
Adaval, R. and Wyer, R.S. (1998), “The role of narratives in
consumer information processing”, Journal of Consumer
Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 207-245.
Berger, J. (2014), “Word of mouth and interpersonal
communication: a review and directions for future research”,
Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 586-607.
Bettman, J.R. (1979), “Memory factors in consumer choice: a
review”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 37-53.
Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H. and Zarantonello, L. (2009),
“Brand experience: what is it? How is it measured? Does it
affect loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 3,
pp. 52-68.
Bruner, J. (1990), Acts of Meaning, Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Burnkrant, R.E. and Unnava, R.H. (1995), “Effects of self-
referencing on persuasion”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 17-26.
Carrera, P. and Oceja, L. (2007), “Drawing mixed emotions:
sequential or simultaneous experiences?”, Cognition &
Emotion, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 422-441.
Chaudhuri, A. (2006), Emotions and Reason in Consumer
Behavior, Elsevier, Burlington, MA.
Chebat, J.C., Gelinas-Chebat, C., Hombourger, S. and
Woodside, A.G. (2003), “Testing consumers’ motivation
and linguistic ability as moderators of advertising
readability”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 7,
pp. 599-624.
Cowley, E. (2014), “Consumers telling consumption stories:
word-of-mouth and retrospective evaluations”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 7, pp. 1522-1529.
Delgadillo, Y. and Escalas, J.E. (2004), “Narrative word-of-
mouth communication: exploring memory and attitude
effects of consumer storytelling”, in Kahn, B.E. and Luce,
M.F. (Eds), NA – Advances in Consumer Research Vol. 31,
Association for Consumer Research, Valdosta, GA,
pp. 186-192.
Denning, S. (2006), “Effective storytelling: strategic business
narrative techniques”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 34 No. 1,
pp. 42-48.
Dessart, L. (2018), “Do ads that tell a story always perform
better? The role of character identification and character type
in storytelling ads”, International Journal of Research in
Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 289-304.
Dessart, L. and Pitardi, V. (2019), “How stories generate
consumer engagement: an exploratory study”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 104, pp. 183-195.
Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C. and Morgan-Thomas, A. (2015),
“Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a
social media perspective”, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 28-42.
Dichter, E. (1966), “How word of mouth advertising words”,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 147-160.
Escalas, J.E. (1998), “Advertising narratives: what are they and
how do they work?”, in Stern, B.B. (Ed.), Representing
Consumers: Voices, Views, and Visions, Routledge & Kegan
Paul, New York, NY, pp. 267-289.
Escalas, J.E. (2004), “Narrative processing: building consumer
connection to brands”, Journal of Consumer Psychology,
Vol. 14 Nos 1/2, pp. 168-180.
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
Escalas, J.E. (2007), “Self-referencing and persuasion:
narrative transportation versus analytical elaboration”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 421-429.
Escalas, J.E. and Stern, B.B. (2003), “Sympathy and empathy:
emotional responses to advertising dramas”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 566-578.
Feng, Y. (2018), “Facilitator or inhibitor? The use of 360-
degree videos for immersive Brand storytelling”, Journal of
Interactive Advertising, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 28-42.
Fisher, W.R. (1984), “Narration as a human communication
paradigm: the case of public moral argument”,
Communication Monographs, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Fog, K., Budtz, C. and Yakaboylu, B. (2005), Storytelling:
Branding in Practice, Springer, Denmark.
Freeman, M. (2014), “Advertising the yellow brick road:
historicizing the industrial emergence of transmedia
storytelling”, International Journal of Communication, Vol. 8,
pp. 2362-2381.
Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y. and Wiertz, C.
(2013), “Managing brands in the social media
environment”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 27
No. 4, pp. 242-256.
Granitz, N. and Forman, H. (2015), “Building self-Brand
connections: exploring Brand stories through a transmedia
perspective”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 22 No. 1,
pp. 38-59.
Green, M.C. and Brock, T.C. (2000), “The role of
transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives”,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 5,
pp. 701-721.
Hayes, A.F. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and
Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach,
Guilford Press, New York, NY.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Hofacker, C.F. and Bloching, B. (2013),
“Marketing the pinball way: understanding how social media
change the generation of value for consumers and
companies”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 237-241.
Herr, P.M., Kardes, F.R. and Kim, J. (1991), “Effects of word-
of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion:
an accessibility-diagnosticity perspective”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 454-462.
Hoffman, D.L. and Novak, T.P. (1996), “Marketing in
hypermedia computer-mediated environments: conceptual
foundations”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 50-68.
Holbrook, M.B. and Batra, R. (1987), “Assessing the role of
emotions as mediators of consumer responses to
advertising”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 No. 3,
pp. 404-420.
Hong, S., Kang, J.A. and Hubbard, G.T. (2018), “The effects
of founder’s storytelling advertising”, International Journal of
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 1-9.
Hughes, M.U., Bendoni, W.K. and Pehlivan, E. (2016),
“Storygiving as a co-creation tool for luxury brands in the age
of the internet: a love story by tiffany and thousands of
lovers”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 25
No. 4, pp. 357-364.
Kang, M. and Schuett, M.A. (2013), “Determinants of sharing
travel experiences in social media”, Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 1-2, pp. 93-107.
275
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
Kao, D.T. (2019), “The impact of envy on Brand preference:
brand storytelling and psychological distance as
moderators”, Journal of Product & Brand Management,
Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 515-528.
Keller, P.A. and McGill, A. (1994), “Differences in the relative
influence of product attributes under alternative processing
conditions: attribute importance versus attribute ease of
imageability”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 1,
pp. 29-49.
Kim, J.E., Lloyd, S. and Cervellon, M.C. (2016), “Narrative-
transportation storylines in luxury Brand advertising:
motivating consumer engagement”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 304-313.
Kirmani, A., Hamilton, R.W., Thompson, D.V. and Lantzy, S.
(2017), “Doing well versus doing good: the differential effect
of underdog positioning on moral and competent service
providers”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 103-117.
Kotler, P. (1988), “Planning marketing programs”, Marketing
Management-Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control,
Vol. 6 No. 20, pp. 588-603.
Laran, J., Dalton, A.N. and Andrade, E.B. (2011), “The
curious case of behavioral backlash: why brands produce
priming effects and slogans produce reverse priming effects”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 999-1014.
Larsen, R.J., Diener, E. and Cropanzana, R.S. (1987),
“Cognitive operations associated with individual differences
in affect intensity”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 767-774.
Li, J., Zou, S. and Yang, H. (2019), “How does”, st
“Orytelling” influence consumer trust in we media
advertorials? An investigation in China”, Journal of Global
Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 319-334.
Lickorish, S. (2009), “Storytelling: how to enrich the learning
experiences”, Training Journal, Vol. 2, pp. 21-23.
Lin, C.L., Lee, S.H. and Horng, D.J. (2011), “The effects of
online reviews on purchasing intention: the moderating role
of need for cognition”, Social Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 71-82.
Lund, N.F., Scaries, C. and Cohen, S. (2019), “The Brand
value continuum: countering co-destruction of destination
branding in social media through storytelling”, Journal of
Travel Research, Vol. 59 No. 8, pp. 1506-1521.
Lundqvist, A., Liljander, V., Gummerus, J. and van Riel, A.
(2013), “The impact of storytelling on the consumer Brand
experience: the case of a firm-originated story”, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 283-297.
McKee, R. (2003), “Storytelling that moves people”, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 81 No. 6, pp. 51-55.
McLellan, H. (2006), “Corporate storytelling perspectives”,
The Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 17-20.
Mills, A.J. and Robson, K. (2019), “Brand management in the
era of fake news: narrative response as a strategy to insulate
Brand value”, Journal of Product & Brand Management,
Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 159-167.
Mitchell, A.A. and Olson, J.C. (1981), “Are product attribute
beliefs the only mediator of advising effects on Brand
attitude?”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 318-332.
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
Nehaniv, C.L. (1999), “Story-telling and emotions: cognitive
technology considerations in networking temporally and
affectively grounded minds”, in Cox, K., Gorayska, B. and
Marsh, J. (Eds), Proceedings of the Third International
Conference on Cognitive technology: Networked minds (CT’99),
San Francisco, USA, pp. 313-322.
O’Shaughnessy, J. and O’Shaughnessy, N.J. (2003), The
Marketing Power of Emotions, Oxford University Press,
New York, NY.
Oliver, R.L., Robertson, T.S. and Mitchell, D.J. (1993),
“Imaging and analyzing in response to new product
advertising”, Journal Journal of Advertising, Vol. 22 No. 4,
pp. 35-50.
Paharia, N., Keinan, A., Avery, J. and Schor, J.B. (2011), “The
underdog effect: the marketing of disadvantage and
determination through Brand biography”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 775-790.
Park, D. and Lee, J. (2008), “eWOM overload and its effect on
consumer behavioral intention depending on consumer
involvement”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,
Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 386-398.
Pawle, J. and Cooper, P. (2006), “Measuring emotions -
lovemarks, the future beyond brands”, Journal of Advertising
Research, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 38-48.
Pera, R. and Viglia, G. (2016), “Exploring how video digital
storytelling builds relationship experiences”, Psychology &
Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 12, pp. 1142-1150.
Sax, B. (2006), “Storytelling and the information overload”,
On the Horizon, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 165-170.
Say Daily (2014), “Using storytelling to ignite word-of-mouth
marketing”, available at: https://www.saydaily.com/2013/04/
using-storytelling-to-ignite-word-of-mouth-marketing (accessed
1 February 2021).
Shankar, A., Elliott, R. and Goulding, C. (2001),
“Understanding consumption: contributions from a
narrative perspective”, Journal of Marketing Management,
Vol. 17 No. 3/4, pp. 429-453.
Simon, H., Berkowitz, N. and Moyer, J. (1970), “Similarity,
credibility, and attitude change: a review and a theory”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Singh, S. and Sonnenburg, S. (2012), “Brand performance in
social media”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 189-197.
Solja, E., Liljander, V. and Soderlund, M. (2018), “Short
Brand stories on packaging: an examination of consumer
responses”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 4,
pp. 294-306.
Spear, S. and Roper, S. (2013), “Using corporate stories to
build the corporate Brand: an impression management
perspective”, Journal of Product & Brand Management,
Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 491-501.
Srivastava, R.K., Tasadduq, A.S. and Fahey, L. (1998),
“Market-based assets and shareholder value: a framework for
analysis”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 2-18.
Taylor, S.A. (2009), “Reconciling satisfaction, emotions,
attitudes, and ambivalence within consumer models of
judgment and decision making: a cautionary tale”, Journal of
Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction & Complaining
Behavior, Vol. 21, pp. 41-65.
276
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
van Laer, T., Feiereisen, S. and Visconti, L.M. (2019),
“Storytelling in the digital era: relevant moderators of the
narrative transportation effect”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 96, pp. 135-146.
Veloutsou, C. and Moutinho, L. (2009), “Brand relationships
through Brand reputation and Brand tribalism”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 3, pp. 314-322.
Wells, W.D. (1988), “Lectures and dramas”, in Cafferta, P.
and Tybout, A. (Eds), Cognitive and Affective Responses to
Advertising, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 13-20.
Westbrook, R. (1987), “Product/consumption-based affective
responses and postpurchase processes”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 258-270.
Woodside, A. (2010), “Brand consumer storytelling theory and
research: introduction to psychology and marketing special
issue”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 531-540.
Woodside, A.G. and Fine, M.B. (2019), “Sustainable fashion
themes in luxury Brand storytelling: the sustainability
fashion research grid”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing,
Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 111-128.
Woodside, A.G., Sood, S. and Miller, K.E. (2008), “When
consumers and brands talk: storytelling theory and research
in psychology and marketing”, Psychology and Marketing,
Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 97-145.
Xia, L. and Bechwati, N.N. (2008), “Word of mouse: the role
of cognitive personalization in online consumer reviews”,
Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 3-13.
Yueh, H.P. and Zheng, Y.L. (2019), “Effectiveness of
storytelling in agricultural marketing: scale development and
model evaluation”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10, p. 452.
Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1994), “The personal involvement
inventory: reduction, revision, and application to
advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 59-70.
Zajonc, R.B. (1980), “Feeling and thinking: preferences need
no inferences”, American Psychologist, Vol. 35 No. 2,
pp. 151-175.
Zemke, R. (1990), “Storytelling: back to basics”, Training
Magazine, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 44-50.
Further reading
Businessweek (2005), “Buzzwords 2005: a glossary”, available
at: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_51/
b3964407.htm (accessed 19 December 2005).
Postman, N. (1989), “Learning by story”, Atlantic, Vol. 264
No. 6, pp. 119-122.
Appendix 1
Consumers’ brand storytelling of Emirates
Skywards mileage program
I woke up today after an exhausting week of work where I
stayed at my office until midnight almost every day to meet a
deadline. I really needed to de-stress, so I would not go crazy.
I decided to plan a getaway to have fun, but I did not want to
spend a lot of money. I remembered that I had miles from
Emirates Skywards and I thought I might look to see what I
could get. To be honest, I was not sure that I really could use
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
this service and their advertisements seemed to offer too much
to believe, so I was skeptical at first. I was pleasantly surprised
to find that I could reserve a flight ticket easily through the
website to just about any location, including the place I always
wanted to visit. I could even use the miles to book a rental car,
cruise, and a nice hotel. I was so excited to take this trip, which
ended up being entirely free with my miles! I felt like someone
gave me a gift and said “You deserve this. You work so hard!”
I was so happy to be a member of this program, and my
unplanned adventure ended up being everything I hoped for
and more, especially since my miles paid for all my trip
expenses.
Brand story of Emirates Skywards mileage
program
One sunny morning, Jason woke up to find his miles anxiously
tugging at his toes. “Let’s go out and play,” they seemed to
say. After all the hard work, he felt that he needed a getaway
to have fun and reduce stress. Unable to resist, Jason decided
to see where his miles could take him. As it turned out, they
could take him almost anywhere. His miles had the clout to
book him any open seat on Emirates Skywards-guaranteed.
Relaxed, excited, and ready to go, Jason set off on his journey.
Booking the plane ticket was just the beginning of his
adventure. With his miles, he was able to book a car and cruise
down the coast until the sun began to set. He then pulled into
his favorite hotel, one of the thousands available, where his
miles booked him a comfortable suite. The miles were like a
gift for him because the trip ended up being entirely free with
his miles! Jason was so happy that he was a member of this
program and that he had set off with his miles on this
wonderful adventure.
Consumers’ Brand storytelling of Angel-in-us
Coffee
Today was a rainy, cloudy day, and I missed a get together at
my wellness center. As I was walking through the rain feeling a
little gray, I saw an Angel-in-us Coffee shop on the corner near
the Westfield Center. I walked in and felt the inviting layout,
with the warm aroma of freshly brewed coffee and comfy
chairs shaped like the wings of an angel. The shop was ethereal
with a warm decor. I felt comforted as I had my coffee. The
aroma of fresh-brewed coffee made me feel happy and helped
me forget about my stress. A barista at the store told me that
they had their own patented roasting system and they used
only the finest coffee beans, which made the aroma and flavor
of the coffee rich and fresh. After looking at the menu, I was
impressed by the many different coffee drinks available. I
decided to order a hot cappuccino and once they started to
make my drink, the smell of coffee filled the room. After just
one sip of coffee, while sitting on the angel’s wing sofa, I
literally felt like I was floating on the wings of an angel. The
cappuccino warmed my body and rejuvenated my soul. I
noticed the words “daily delight” written on the inside of my
cup each time I took a sip of my coffee. Even though I felt
gloomy this morning, I forgot my worries and felt much better
after only a cup of coffee. I was very impressed with the effort
277
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
of Angel-in-us to provide a cozy atmosphere to relax in and
have a cup of their delicious, high-quality coffee.
Brand story of Angel-in-us Coffee
On a gloomy, rainy morning, have you ever felt comforted by
the aroma of freshly brewed coffee? On a busy afternoon, have
you ever sought escape in a warm cup of coffee? If the thought
of a good cup of coffee makes you happy, then you should
come and experience a great cup of coffee at Angel-in-us. Our
coffee fills your body and soul with satisfaction and spirit
that comes from a hidden angel brewed deep into each cup of
coffee. Have you yearned to be touched by an angel? Well,
yearn no more since our coffee is the earthly ambrosia of
aroma and taste. Angel-in-us is the only place to experience
coffee that has been touched by an angel. Come and
experience heavenly comfort in our cozy, plush coffee shops.
Experience the ethereal taste and aroma of our delicate fresh
brewed coffee. Angel-in-us is a way point for people who want
to recharge their body, mind, and soul. With our patented
roasting and brewing systems, we provide you with
exceptional coffee and espresso drinks made from only the
finest coffee beans. Angel-in-us coffees are imbued with
Angels who deliver joy and rejuvenation and your “daily
delight” in our coffees. With the wonderful aroma of fresh
coffee permeating the atmosphere, mellow music calming you,
and comfortable sofas lining the walls, we will mesmerize and
restore your mind, body, and soul.
Consumers’ Brand storytelling of Warby Parker
I have worn glasses for many years, and I realized that it was
time to replace them. However, I have been disappointed by
the selection in my area and the frames (which I am usually
unhappy with) and lenses are too expensive. Luckily, I found
Warby Parker, which sells glasses, and I could not believe it at
first. I ordered three frames to try at home and still did not
believe this was real. I made my first purchase, absolutely
loved the frames and their reasonable prices. They were
everything I could have wanted and more. I absolutely loved
them. However, one day, I accidently left my pair of glasses on
the train. I was so upset, but there had no choice but to buy
new pair. But what a surprise! Three days later, I received a
mysterious package with two pairs of those same glasses of
mine and a copy of the “On the Road” by Jack Parker with the
following note: “Hi Rachel. This might be odd [. . .] but you
sat across from me on the train ride from NYC to Boston and
left your glasses on the train! As luck would have it, I happen
to be the CEO of Warby Parker, and there is nothing I like
more than a good mystery [. . .] I hope these find you in good
health!” I was so impressed with this that I decided to share
this experience.
Brand story of Warby Parker
We were students when one of us lost his glasses on a
backpacking trip. The cost of replacing them was so high that
he spent the first semester of grad school without them,
squinting, and complaining (we do not recommend this). The
rest of us had similar experiences, and we were amazed at how
hard it was to find a pair of great frames that did not leave our
 Sharing consumers’ brand storytelling
JungHwa (Jenny) Hong et al.
wallets bare. Where were the options? There was a simple
explanation. The eyewear industry is dominated by a single
company that has been able to keep prices artificially high
while reaping huge profits from consumers who have no other
options. We started Warby Parker to create an alternative. By
circumventing traditional channels, designing glasses in-
house, and engaging with customers directly, we are able to
provide higher-quality, better-looking prescription eyewear at
a fraction of the going price. We believe that buying glasses
should be easy and fun. It should leave you happy and good-
looking, with money in your pocket.
Appendix 2
Cognitive processing measurement (Study 1; Chebat et al.,
2003).
Six levels of MacInnis and Jaworski’s information
processing.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
278
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 31 · Number 2 · 2022 · 265–278
 Level 1: Cognitive response based on the recollection of
certain contextual elements of the message (presentation,
name, logo).
 Level 2: Opinions that stemmed from certain contextual
elements of the message.
 Level 3: Recollection of certain major arguments of the
message, paraphrases.
 Level 4: Logical conclusions derived from the arguments
in the message.
 Level 5: Cognitive responses reflecting a general
impression of the product, illogical conclusions.
 Level 6: The respondent goes beyond the arguments in
the message to form attributes or to imagine scenarios in
which the product is being used.
Corresponding author
Jie Yang can be contacted at: jyang@uttyler.edu