Access and authentication: Please visit our page. Close !

Enter your search terms here " Advanced search

Home / Journals / Journal of Product & Brand Management / Volume 32 Issue 8 / Brand new: how visual context shapes initial response to logos and corporate visual identity systems

Brand new: how visual context shapes initial response to logos and
corporate visual identity systems
Abstract
Robert A. Wertz !
Introduction
DOWNLOADS
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Literature review ISSN: 1061-0421
Methods
! 173
Article publication date: 9 October 2023 Permissions !

Results Issue publication date: 27 November 2023

Discussion

! PDF (235 KB)

Abstract Related articles

Purpose
Brand mergers: examining consumers'
When a new logo is released, it does not have an established meaning in the mind of the responses to name and logo design
viewer. As logos have become more highly scrutinized by consumers and critics, it has become Joana César Machado et al., Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 2012
more important to understand viewers’ initial responses to logos. While other studies have
researched the impact of aesthetic choices on viewer reaction to logos, this study aims to
Cognitive and emotional processing of brand
understand the e>ect of the surrounding visual identity system when a new logo is introduced. logo changes
Mark Peterson et al., Journal of Product & Brand
Design/methodology/approach Management, 2015

This study combines a content analysis of 335 posts on the logo review website Brand New
with the voting data from their polls to understand how visual context correlates with a Research on logo design and evaluation of youth
education brands based on visual
viewer’s initial response. representation
Zhijuan Zhu et al., Journal of Product & Brand
Findings Management, 2017

Increased amounts of visual context correlate to an improved response from viewers. Di>erent
types of context that can be presented – from logo variations and environmental examples to Agent-based modelling reveals the role of the
tumour microenvironment on the short-term
videos and animation – have varied e>ects. success of combination temozolomide/immune
checkpoint blockade to treat glioblastoma
Practical implications Anudeep Surendran et al., J Pharmacol Exp Ther,
2023
When releasing a new logo, companies and organizations may receive a better response from
viewers if they provide more visual context. Animations may also provide an improved
Learning a Twofold Siamese Network for RGB-T
response. Object Tracking
Yangliu Kuai et al., Journal of Circuits, Systems
Originality/value and Computers, 2020

This study takes a novel approach to exploring viewer responses to logos by combining
Three-dimensional (3D) sca>olds as powerful
content analysis with voting data. While most studies use Lctitious or abstract logo designs, this weapons for tumor immunotherapy
study uses actual logos and context to better understand viewer responses. Shuyan Han et al., Bioactive Materials, 2022

Keywords Powered by

Logos Brand identity Branding Rebranding Visual identity Corporate visual identity I consent to the use of Google Analytics and
related cookies across the TrendMD network
Logo design Corporate branding Brand meaning Corporate identity (widget, website, blog). Learn more

Yes No

Citation
Wertz, R.A. (2023), "Brand new: how visual context shapes initial response to logos and
corporate visual identity systems", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp.
1388-1398. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-08-2022-4124

" Download as .RIS

Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited

Introduction
When a new visual identity is released, it does not have a Lrm meaning in the mind of the
consumer. Instead, the logo gains meaning over time as the design is experienced in context
(Bierut, 2006; Erjansola et al., 2022). This context helps consumers understand the meaning of
the logo and the message it communicates. Current research on logos focuses primarily on
consumer responses to aesthetic properties and separates the logo from any supporting
context (Kim and Lim, 2019). This study takes a di>erent approach to understanding logos –
combining content analysis with user responses to logo designs – to better understand how
the amount and type of visual context surrounding the logo in_uences the initial reaction. It
expands the literature by examining viewer responses to logos in a new way.

Most research on logo design is almost solely focused on logos without context. Many scholars
have run experiments with sample logos for Lctional companies (Kim and Lim, 2019; LuXarelli
et al., 2019a; Sharma and Varki, 2018; Walsh et al., 2011). These studies aim to answer
questions about whether consumers prefer aesthetic choices related to color, shape, or
symmetry in logo designs (LuXarelli et al., 2019b; Meiting and Hua, 2021; Northey and Chan,
2020; Song et al., 2022), but teach us little about how a logo works in use within a larger visual
system.

As logos have become more important to consumers, corporations have become more careful
about how they introduce changes to their logos and visual branding (Walsh et al., 2019). The
logo is a tangible representation of the brand, and altering it can create resistance from
consumers – especially the brand’s most passionate fans (Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach,
2018; Walsh et al., 2019). These fans can use social media to express their concerns and
frustration about logo changes, placing a large amount of pressure on the company to reverse
their decision (Erjansola et al., 2022; Miller et al., 2014; Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach, 2018).
Design practitioners believe that additional visual context at the point of introduction helps
communicate the meaning of the new symbol (Airey, 2014; Bierut, 2006), but very little
research has focused on the impact of this surrounding context when a new logo is seen for
the Lrst time.

This study uses a quantitative content analysis of the branding review site, Brand New, to better
understand how di>erent amounts and types of visual context can in_uence how positively or
negatively viewers respond to a new logo. When companies launch new identities, Brand New
shares not just the logos but additional corporate visual identity elements, including examples
of the logo in use, background on how the logo will be used, animated examples and links to
brand introduction videos. Viewers are then asked to rate the logos that have been presented
with a varied amount of supporting visual elements in each review post. An advantage of this
approach is that it allows the study to include authentic visual branding examples for actual
companies within a larger visual identity context, a perspective that is missing within the
broader literature.

Literature review

Logos and corporate visual identity

Logos, in particular, are viewed as the key element in a company’s larger corporate visual
identity system and are used consistently across a company’s communications to represent
the company’s personality and align with a company’s goals and objectives (Baker and Balmer,
1997; Gregersen and Johansen, 2018; Olins, 1978). Corporate visual identity systems are
complex, and research has attempted to clearly deLne the language we use to describe
corporate visual identity, breaking down the systems into their component parts so they can
be more easily studied and understood. Foroudi notes that:

“ Managers should place more emphasis on the corporate logo as a complex

phenomenon since it is the signature of a company that is determined by multiple
factors, including corporate name, design, color, and typeface, to in_uence a
company’s corporate image and corporate reputation (2017, p. 192). ”
A logo is a symbol that represents a company, product, or service. Logos can consist of a
combination of a visual or pictorial element – an icon – paired with the name of the company in
a particular typeface – the wordmark. Alternatively, the icon or the wordmark can stand alone
to identify the company or organization. (Foroudi et al., 2017; Kim and Lim, 2019).

Corporate visual identity is one element that contributes to brand equity, the value that a
company holds in the mind of the consumer, “including awareness, perceived quality, loyalty,
and associations” (Aaker, 1996, p. 104). Traditionally, a corporate visual identity is
predominantly assumed to be controlled by the company and applied consistently across a
brand’s communication channels, although these perceptions may be shifting as new research
on visual branding is conducted (Gregersen and Johansen, 2021). A corporate visual identity
serves as the tangible manifestation of brand equity, helping frame and shape the relationship
between consumers and corporate entities. Because of the perceived importance of brand
equity, research has focused on identifying ways that a visual identity can shape a consumer’s
perception of a company and build brand loyalty. (Aaker, 1996; Airey, 2014; Balmer, 2008;
Gregersen and Johansen, 2021; Parris and Guzmán, 2022).

As logos have become an increasingly visible aspect of corporate marketing, it is unsurprising

that invested consumers have responded with higher expectations and vocal criticism (Walsh
et al., 2019). Social media allows all interested parties to participate in this public criticism, with
resistance Lnding root on Twitter, Facebook and Reddit (Budds, 2016; Rauschnabel et al.,
2016; Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach, 2018). Recent research has sought to understand the
factors that spark “online Lrestorms,” massive criticism leveled against brands for perceived
misconduct (Delgado-Ballester et al., 2022; Rauschnabel et al., 2016). Companies that develop
anthropomorphic brands through social media connections can develop greater levels of
engagement, but the resulting relationship with loyal fans becomes increasingly personal (Wu
et al., 2023). This relationship between consumer and brand is complex. While positive brand
experience has been shown to lead to improved perceptions of brand authenticity and quality
(Murshed et al., 2023), other research has tried to understand how consumers can develop
“brand shame” when a brand they love fails to live up to their standards (Weitzl et al., 2023).
Companies and their design Lrms – aware of the potential damage sustained criticism and
negative publicity can do to a corporation’s brand equity – plan logo rollouts to in_uence and
shape the initial public response (Walsh et al., 2019). A poorly managed rebranding or logo
introduction can lead to negative consumer reactions on social media and substantial
resistance from important consumers and stakeholders (Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach, 2018;
Walsh et al., 2019).

The most well-known logos – from companies such as Nike, Target, IBM and Apple – have
decades of meaning and brand equity behind them. Consumers have used their products,
visited their stores and seen their ads, so opinions concerning their logos and surrounding
visual identities are assumed to be heavily in_uenced by a customer’s previous experiences
with the company (Aaker, 1996; Airey, 2014). A company does not unilaterally manufacture
brand equity. Instead, its consumers help co-create brand equity for a company through their
interactions, experiences and relationships with the company (Foroudi et al., 2020; Parris and
Guzmán, 2022). Building positive brand equity takes time, but the process must start
somewhere. This initial reaction occurs whenever a viewer experiences a logo for the Lrst time.
Sometimes, a company and a logo are completely new to a viewer. Other times, a consumer
may have an existing relationship with a company but, after a rebranding, experience a new
logo for the Lrst time. In either scenario, at the point of introduction, a viewer does not have a
history with a logo.

Previous studies have sought to understand how successful corporate visual identities are
developed and implemented. Researchers are focused on gauging reactions to logos because
they are considered the centerpiece of a visual identity system (Kim and Lim, 2019). Much of
the research assumes that reactions to a single logo can predict how a person might react to
their entire visual identity (Skaggs, 2019), however, contemporary visual identity systems are
evolving beyond their print-based origins to meet the needs of modern communication
channels such as social media and online video. These new systems feature dynamic designs
and multiple logos that work in a variety of sizes, animated logos, custom typefaces and
bespoke illustrations (Jimerson, 2019; Lelis et al., 2022). Supporting elements help provide
visual context for consumers, far beyond what can be interpreted from a logo alone.

Developing meaning through context

Academic research tends to rely on processing _uency as a theoretical foundation to
understand how logos obtain meaning in the mind of the consumer. Processing _uency seeks
to understand how people encounter, process and recall stimuli. When applied to the study of
logos, the theory suggests that consumers learn to understand what a logo stands for and
then can more quickly process communications from that brand (Janiszewski and Meyvis,
2001; Kim and Lim, 2019). This _uency is developed through repetition over time, and it
explains how branding functions in the traditional sense of clearly identifying a company and
its products. Processing _uency is largely viewed as a way that people recall a logo and connect
it to a particular brand, but one particular facet of the theory, conceptual _uency, looks at the
idea that consumers “create a meaning-based representation of a stimulus” (Kim and Lim,
2019). So not only do they learn to recognize a logo, but they also learn the qualities and
personality that the mark represents. Logos and stimuli that are easier to process are generally
perceived more favorably than marks that are digcult to interpret or understand (Kim and
Lim, 2019; Morgan et al., 2021).

Most quantitative research on visual identity creates logos for Lctitious companies (Kim and
Lim, 2019; LuXarelli et al., 2019a, 2019b), but this approach is potentially _awed. Experimental
logos for imaginary companies are typically presented as a simple icon in a white square,
without the supporting examples that are often included with a rollout, separating them from
any visual orientation that would help a viewer develop any degree of _uency or meaning.

Numerous studies have attempted to apply processing and conceptual _uency to logo
research in di>erent ways. One recent study examined the di>erence in likeability and recall
between image-based logos and wordmarks, Lnding that consumers who were less familiar
with a company were more easily able to understand wordmarks, but noted that positive
reception to more image-based marks would rely on the viewer properly interpreting the
brand messaging (Morgan et al., 2021). Another study trained a neural network with over
500,000 logos to ascertain which traits in_uence memorability and likeability (Hu and Borji,
2018). In 2019, a series of experiments based on processing _uency found that more
descriptive logos were positively perceived by viewers and likely led to increased brand equity.
For example, a logo for a co>ee shop should include a cup of co>ee or at least the word co>ee.
The study acknowledges that many well-known logos do not feature descriptive logos (i.e. Nike,
Starbucks and Apple), but posits that the marks have evolved as they have become well-known
(LuXarelli et al., 2019a).

Design practitioners also stress the critical role that meaning plays in the minds of consumers.
Bierut noted in his essay, The Mysterious Power of Context (2006), that meaning is developed
over time as a logo is experienced by consumers, stating that logo designers have little control
over what meanings consumers will form in their minds. Designers view the logo as one
element of a corporate visual identity that works over time in concert with consumer
experience to develop meaning in the mind of the consumer. Brand New co-founder Armin Vit
commented that context is vital to how people respond to new logos:

“ When the media asks people to view a logo in a white square on a website, they
don’t know how to judge that. There’s no real association, no context and no
experience of the way in which it's going to be used – and most people hate it because
people hate change by default (Creative Bloq, 2013). ”
Researchers are starting to examine the role of context and the supporting visual identity
system. One newer avenue of visual identity research looks at corporate heritage brand design,
focusing on the development of visual identity for companies that have been in existence for at
least three generations (Balmer, 2023; Butcher and Pecot, 2021). Much of a brand’s heritage
is communicated to consumers through its full visual identity and surrounding context, not just
the logo. Other studies have looked at how a perception of a website or packaging connects to
opinions about logos (Butcher and Pecot, 2021; Foroudi et al., 2020).

Visual elements are often more powerful in developing _uency, and any example that helps
build processing _uency should generate a more positive initial reaction from the viewer
(Morgan et al., 2021). Visual context included alongside the initial introduction of a logo could
help establish meaning for the viewer quickly and spark a more positive response from
viewers:

RQ1. Does the amount of overall visual context presented with a logo in_uence the initial
response from viewers?

Not all context is the same, though, and designers use di>erent types of examples to shape
meaning and build _uency. Some examples function as environmental context, attempting to
show images of how the logo functions in use. Logos are most commonly experienced by
consumers as tangible artifacts such as marketing materials and store signage, and the context
of these materials shapes the viewer’s response (Erjansola et al., 2022). Because brand
communications and advertising are “carefully crafted” to communicate brand messaging,
authentic examples of these materials may help viewers properly understand the meaning of
the logo and reduce ambiguity in the mind of the consumer (Morgan et al., 2021). For an initial
rollout, these may be production samples or Photoshop mock-ups to show how the logo
appears on a product or a storefront (Airey, 2014). Packaging designs are often shared via
social media and advertising to communicate key brand messaging (Butcher and Pecot, 2021).
Another study found that favorable attitudes toward a website could in_uence attitudes toward
the brand and its logo (Foroudi et al., 2020). Providing examples of the new logo in use on
packaging and websites may help consumers interpret brand messaging and respond more
favorably to a logo change. This environmental context exposes consumers to the surrounding
visual identity system, helping them develop _uency and understand the full meaning behind
the logo.

A second type of context attempts to establish the professionalism of the design solution.
Informational context provides details of the entire visual identity design system, including logo
variations, colors, illustrations, type and in-process sketches. This informational context seeks
to build meaning and _uency by demonstrating the brand-building process and work that went
into the creation of the new identity. Research has noted that transparency and constant
communication are key elements in successful rebranding (Walsh et al., 2019), and providing
this type of behind-the-scenes information should help build trust and meaning with viewers.
Furthermore, this type of information may be valuable in persuading more branding-savvy
consumers, such as designers and marketers, who can o>er criticism and opinions in a social
media environment. For example, when the Gap attempted to introduce their new logo, they
faced substantial criticism from designers about the process they used to create the new mark
and marketers about the questionable strategy. The criticism of professional marketers and
designers on social media and blogs was one of many factors that led the company to
abandon its rebranding e>orts (Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach, 2018).

Environmental and informational contexts both attempt to shape meaning and improve
processing _uency, but in di>erent ways. In addition to the presence of overall context, it is
valuable to understand if these types of commonly used examples function di>erently from
each other:

RQ2a. How does showing the logo in environmental context in_uence the initial viewer
reaction?

RQ2b. How does the amount of informational context presented in_uence the initial viewer
reaction?

Aesthetic preference in context

Most of the quantitative research on logo reactions is based on aesthetics. These studies have
attempted to identify what e>ects aesthetic features have on consumer responses to logos.
Researchers have looked at how color (Huang et al., 2008; O’Connor, 2011; Song et al., 2022),
shapes (Raeq et al., 2020; Walsh et al., 2011), fonts (Childers and Jass, 2002; Grohmann et al.,
2012), proportion (Pittard et al., 2007), structure (Chen and Bei, 2019; Meiting and Hua,
2021), _atness (Peng et al., 2023a), white space (Sharma and Varki, 2018), cuteness (Septianto
and Kwon, 2022) and complexity (van Grinsven and Das, 2016; Janiszewski and Meyvis, 2001;
Miceli et al., 2014) in_uence a viewer’s opinion of a company. Several studies have tried to
connect these experimental results to the brand equity of corporations (LuXarelli et al., 2019b;
Walsh et al., 2011). Because logos are used to di>erentiate companies from competitors, all
logos cannot follow the recommendations of the experimental advice, and a single design
direction will not be right for all companies (Smith, 2019).

One feature that has been studied widely – symmetry – demonstrates the challenges of this
type of experiment. Many studies have tried to determine whether consumers prefer
symmetry or asymmetry in logo designs and what e>ects that preference has on their reaction
(Bajaj and Bond, 2018; Bettels and Wiedmann, 2019; LuXarelli et al., 2019b; Marsden and
Thomas, 2013). Collectively, these studies have failed to Lnd a deLnitive answer. One study
found that preference for symmetry depended on a viewer’s own self-perception (Bettels and
Wiedmann, 2019), while a di>erent study found that preference for a logo depended on the
personality of the company (LuXarelli et al., 2019b). One study even found that political
agliation was a factor in determining a preference for symmetrical logos (Northey and Chan,
2020).

Visual context should shape viewer impressions of a logo design, regardless of the aesthetic
qualities of the logo. For example, whether a logo is symmetrical or asymmetrical, a new logo
should beneLt from increased _uency provided by supporting visual context at the initial
introduction. Symmetry has been widely studied and presents a variable that is easier to code
consistently and is less subjective than other aesthetic qualities such as complexity or color:

RQ3. How does overall visual context impact the initial reaction to logos with di>erent
aesthetic properties such as symmetry?

Examples in motion
Online media is an increasingly important part of communicating a brand’s identity, and
companies often use animations and videos to introduce their new logos and identity systems
on websites and through social media. Vit feels like video can “tell a compelling story in 30
seconds instead of a long press release no one is going to read” (Hadlock, 2020) and that
animation can “bring to life an entire concept in 2 to 3 seconds” (Q&A: Questions and Armin,
2020). These elements range from longer videos that introduce a brand system to shorter
animated elements to engage the viewer. While video and animation seem similar, users
interact with them in di>erent ways. Animations typically play automatically, while videos must
be clicked on (Amini et al., 2018; Appiah, 2006; Yoo et al., 2004). One study looked at how
users interacted with video and animation in ads, Lnding that low-involvement users tended to
prefer animation while high-involvement users were more likely to click on and watch a video
(Yoo et al., 2004). Several studies have found that animated logos could positively in_uence
viewer responses for certain types of companies (Brasel and Hagtvedt, 2016; Peng et al.,
2023b).

Motion-based examples are increasingly presented as part of the surrounding context of a

logo unveiling. Video examples vary in length but require the viewer to actively click on the
video preview to watch it. Animated examples are shorter sequences that show the logo or
system in motion and are passively presented to the viewer:

RQ4a. How does the presence of video context in_uence the initial viewer reaction?

RQ4b. How does the presence of animated context in_uence the initial viewer reaction?

Methods
This study uses content analysis to explore the impact of context on initial reactions to logos.
The logo review website, Brand New, provides an opportunity to uncover patterns and trends
around how logos are presented at the introduction and how viewers react to those new visual
identities.

Brand New
Design blog Brand New o>ers a unique insight into how viewers respond to logos. Founded in
2006, the site has reviewed thousands of logos and allowed readers to provide their opinions
through voting and commenting. Over the last two decades, Brand New creators Armin Vit and
Bryony Gomez-Palacio have become in_uential Lgures within the branding and graphic design
communities. Brand New has been called “one of the most-read, most-respected, and most-
feared design blogs on the Internet” (Hadlock, 2020).

The scope, variety and longevity of Brand New’s coverage present a realistic data set to study,
re_ecting a full range of branding design and not focusing exclusively on high-proLle branding
projects from New York corporate identity Lrms. More importantly, featuring smaller
businesses from a wider geographic area lessens the systemic impact of brand equity on logo
reaction. Viewers are more likely to have a true initial opinion of a logo for a company they
have never heard of.

According to Brand New’s advertising sales information, the publication reaches 460,000
unique visitors and 2.1 million page views each month. The primary audience is “professional
graphic designers in mid-level and senior positions,” but the readership includes a growing
number of marketing executives and business owners as well (UCllc/Advertising, 2023). This
audience cares deeply about logos and visual identity and may be more likely to comment on
social media with both positive and negative feedback (Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach, 2018).

While Brand New is not the only online publication that critiques logo designs, the site is alone
in allowing viewers to express their opinions through a poll at the end of the review. Because
this study aims to examine viewer responses to new logos and their surrounding context,
Brand New presents the only data set that would allow for this type of analysis. The logos
featured in Brand New reviews represent a company, product, institution or organization and
may include an icon, a wordmark, or both.

Since 2013, Brand New has featured three review types: reviewed, noted and spotted.
Reviewed posts are the longest and most comprehensive, typically featuring more well-known
brands and exceptionally crafted design work. Noted posts have a consistent structure,
providing some detail on the company from a press release and a range of examples – from a
single logo to a full identity system. Spotted posts provide a single logo with no added visual
context or commentary.

A poll with one to three questions is at the bottom of each post. The poll allows viewers to vote
great, Lne or bad. The results of the poll are hidden until someone votes or clicks the “View
Results” button. The results are presented as a bar chart with the number of votes and
percentages. Viewers do not always vote on every question.

Sample
This content analysis looked exclusively at the noted posts on Brand New. The structure of the
noted posts is consistent except for the type and number of visual examples, allowing the most
consistent comparison between posts. The reviewed posts usually feature the most well-
known companies, which could introduce strong brand equity e>ects. Spotted posts provide
no additional context beyond the logo and are thus unsuitable for this study. Noted posts,
however, feature a wide range of companies of all sizes from across the world. This variety
should decrease the likelihood that a viewer has seen the visual identity previously. Using less
familiar logos minimizes the potential impact of established brand equity compared to the
better-known companies included in the reviewed posts.

To ensure consistency across the sample, this study analyzed posts published between July
2013, when the current noted format began, and August 2020, when the site switched to a
subscription model. During that timeframe, a total of 1,535 noted posts were published. Based
on a conLdence interval of 5 and a conLdence level of 95%, a random sample of 355 posts was
selected for analysis. All data was collected in January and February of 2021.

From the sample of 355, twenty posts were excluded from the analysis. Five posts were follow-
ups and provided additional details for a previous post. Four reviews did not feature a logo of
any kind in the primary image. One post was an announcement and did not include a logo
review. Because this study looks primarily at the initial response to logos, these types of posts
were not included in the Lnal data set. In addition, 10 posts contained examples but no voting
or comment data. These errors were only present in posts published in 2017 and earlier, and
the posts were excluded from analysis because viewer reactions could not be gauged. The Lnal
sample for content analysis consisted of 335 noted posts.

Variables
Based on the research questions, variables were identiLed that appeared consistently
throughout the noted posts. Independent variables were related to the quantity and types of
visual context presented within the post. The dependent variable considered how viewers
responded to the posts via the poll at the end of the post, providing a snapshot of how a
viewer felt about the logo after being exposed to the logo design and supporting visual
context.

Independent variables

Amount of overall visual context. The total number of visual examples in the body of the
post was counted and recorded. Each review features examples of the brand, either as an
image or a video, grouped in the “Images” section of the post. To count the number of
images consistently, an example was deLned as an image that spans the whole width of
the post and is divided from other images by a gap, caption, or dividing line. The image at
the top of the post was not included in this count.
Overall visual context groupings. Based on the number of examples variable, posts were
separated into three segments based on the total number of examples included with
each post: three or fewer examples, four to seven examples, and more than eight
examples.
Amount of environmental context. The total number of examples showing environmental
context was counted. Environmental context is deLned as examples that feature images
of how the logo will be used by the brand. For example, an image may show how a logo
will appear on a storefront, packaging, website or social media post. These logos may be
images of real applications or hypothetical uses rendered in photoshop. The key factor is
the intent of the image. If the image is intended to show realistic usage, it is included in
this count.
Amount of informational context. The total number of examples showing informational
context was counted. Informational context is deLned as examples of how the visual
identity system works or how the visual identity was created, aiming to show the
craftsmanship and thought process behind the logo design. Examples include logo
variations, typeface standards, illustration and photography style, icon designs and
before-and-after comparisons. If the image is intended to show how a system was created
or how it should be used, that example was included in this group.
Symmetry. Logos were coded as “Symmetrical,” “Not Symmetrical” or “Wordmark/Not
Applicable.” To judge the e>ect of context on aesthetic qualities, the icon portion of the
logo was coded based on its symmetry. Symmetry was chosen speciLcally because it is
comparatively straightforward to code. Other aesthetic qualities, such as color, typeface,
complexity or cuteness, are harder to quantify in a way that can be coded in an accurate
or meaningful way. For this project, symmetry was deLned as the bilateral symmetry of
the icon, meaning that the right and left halves of the icon are identical. If an icon was
separate from the word mark and was perfectly symmetrical, then the post was coded
“Symmetrical.” If the icon was asymmetrical, then the post was coded as “Not
Symmetrical.” Not all logos contain an independent icon, so those were coded as
“Wordmark/Not Applicable.”
Amount of video context. The total number of videos was counted and recorded. Video
examples are hosted through an outside service such as YouTube or Vimeo and do not
autoplay when the page is loaded. While the videos may show examples of the brand in
use or address the creation of the brand, videos are counted in their own category
because the coder cannot tell if the viewer clicked the play button.
Presence of video context. Based on the number of videos variable, posts were coded as
“Yes” if they featured any video examples and “No” if they had none.
Amount of animated context. The total number of animations was counted and recorded.
Animated contexts are typically animated GIFs that autoplay on the loading of the Web
page. Animated context is counted separately here because the nature of the example
may shape the viewer’s response, but these examples are also coded with either
environmental or informational context because a viewer sees the full intent of the
example.
Presence of animated context. Based on the number of animations variable, posts were
coded as “Yes” if they featured any animated examples and “No” if they had none.

Dependent variables

Voting percentages and viewer score. At the bottom of the post is a poll containing one, two
or three questions. Each question can be answered great, Lne or bad. From the results,
the voting percentages of respondents for each answer were recorded. The viewer score
was calculated as part of the analysis process, and this data was weighted, combined and
averaged to create a rating. The resulting viewer score ranged from 100 to 300 and was
then mapped to a 100-point scale, where 0 was the lowest possible score and 100 was
the highest.

Intercoder reliability was calculated using a 10% random sample (n = 34). The Krippendorf’s
alpha ranged from 0.928 to 1.0. A full list of reliability is included in Table 1.

Results
The Lnal data set included 335 posts from 2013 to 2020. Within those posts, the mean number
of total examples was 6.15, with a range from 0 to 19. The average post had 2.87 examples of
environmental context and 2.78 examples of informational context. Over the entire data set,
including every vote from each question, a total of 460,665 votes were included in the analysis.
The average viewer score was 49.6, from a low of 8.3 to a high of 87.5. A breakdown of the
example types and viewer responses is shown in Table 2.

RQ1. Does the amount of overall visual context presented with a logo inKuence the initial response
from viewers? Yes. Viewers appear to respond more positively when provided with a greater
amount of visual context. Analysis of the data set shows a strong positive correlation between
the amount of context and the viewer score, r(335) = 0.375, p < 0.001. As the number of
examples increased, the resulting viewer score also increased.

While analyzing the distribution of the overall amount of context across posts, peaks were
apparent for posts with three examples and again at seven. Three similar-sized groups
emerged, and a one-way ANOVA was conducted to compare the viewer score for these three
groups: posts with zero to three examples (n = 106), posts with between four and seven
examples (n = 121) and posts with eight or more examples (n = 108). The example groupings
were the independent variables, and the viewer score was the dependent variable. A signiLcant
 result was noted: F (2, 218) = 26.5, p < 0.001. A Tukey’s post hoc test indicated a signiLcant
di>erence between the viewer score for posts with more than eight examples (M = 58.3, SD =
15.2) and both other groupings: four to seven examples (M = 48.7, SD = 17.6) and three or
fewer examples (M = 41.7, SD = 18.7). In addition, the Tukey’s post hoc test showed a signiLcant
di>erence between the four to seven group (M = 48.7, SD = 17.6) and the three or fewer
examples group (M = 41.7, SD = 18.7).

RQ2a. How does showing the logo with environmental context inKuence the initial viewer reaction?
An increased amount of environmental context showing the logo in use corresponds with
higher viewer scores. The average post in the data set had 2.87 examples showing
environmental context, with a minimum of zero examples and a maximum of 16. Posts with a
greater amount of environmental context correlated to an improved viewer score, r(335) =
0.308, p < 0.001.

To better understand the di>erence, posts were divided into two groups – posts with two or
fewer environmental examples (n = 180) and posts with three or more environmental
examples (n = 155) – and compared with an independent t-test. Posts with three or more
examples (M = 55.7, SD = 16.5) had signiLcantly higher viewer scores than the group with two
or fewer environmental examples (M = 44.3, SD = 18.4), t(333) = 5.92, p < 0.001.

RQ2b: How does the amount of informational context presented inKuence the initial viewer
reaction? Increased examples featuring informational context are correlated with positive
viewer scores. The average post in the data set had 2.78 informational examples, with a
minimum of 0 and a maximum of 13. Posts with a greater number of examples correspond
with higher viewer scores, r(335) = 0.331, p < 0.001.

The posts were divided into two groups – posts with two or fewer informational examples (n =
188) and posts with three or more informational examples (n = 147) – and compared with an
independent t-test. Posts with three or more informational examples (M = 55.7, SD = 17.0)
were found to have signiLcantly higher viewer scores than posts with two or fewer
informational examples (M = 44.8, SD = 18.2), t(333) = 5.58, p < 0.001.

RQ3. How does the overall visual context impact the initial reaction to logos with diPerent aesthetic
properties, such as symmetry? Context corresponds with an improved initial reaction, even for
logos with di>erent aesthetic features. To determine whether viewer’s aesthetic preferences
are in_uenced by context, logos were coded for their icon symmetry. Within the data set,
45.7% of the logos featured an asymmetrical icon design (n = 153), 13.7% of the logos had
symmetrical icons (n = 46) and 40.6% featured a wordmark with no icon (n = 136).

An independent t-test evaluated whether there was a signiLcant di>erence in viewer scores
between symmetrical designs (M = 50.6, SD = 17.3) and asymmetrical designs (M = 46.8, SD =
18.4). No signiLcance was found: t(197) = −1.23, p = 0.219.

Viewers did not prefer one aesthetic style over the other, but was context a potential factor in
their rating? The data set was divided into two groups – symmetrical and asymmetrical – to see
whether there was still a correlation between the number of examples in each subset and the
viewer score.

For the symmetrical group (n = 46), there was a signiLcant correlation between the number of
examples and the viewer score, r(46) = 0.417, p = 0.004. The asymmetrical group also showed
a signiLcant correlation between the number of examples and the viewer score, r(153) = 0.287,
p <0.001.

These results indicate that regardless of the aesthetic preference of the viewer, reactions were
better for posts that featured a greater number of examples.

RQ4a: How does the presence of video context inKuence the initial viewer reaction? Posts with
video examples corresponded to slightly lower viewer scores. Within the sample, only 41.8% (n
= 140) included video examples. There was a signiLcant negative correlation between the
number of videos and the viewer score, r(335) = −0.134, p = 0.014. Because video was usually
present in comparatively small numbers, the data was grouped into two groups – posts with
video examples (n = 140) and posts without video examples (n = 195) – and analyzed using an
independent t-test. Posts with video examples (M = 46.4, SD = 16.9) had slightly lower but
signiLcantly di>erent viewer scores than posts with no video (M = 51.8, SD = 19.2), t(333) =
−2.62, p = 0.009.

RQ4b: How does the presence of animated context inKuence the initial viewer reaction? Posts that
featured examples with animation corresponded to higher viewer scores. Animation was only
present in 22.4% of the logo reviews (n = 75). There was a positive correlation between the
number of animations and the viewer score, r(335) = 0.166, p = 0.002. Similar to the video,
because of the smaller numbers of animated examples, the data set was divided into two
groups – one that included animated examples (n = 75) and one group that did not include
animated examples (n = 260) – and analyzed using an independent t-test. Posts that included
animation (M = 55.8, SD = 16.8) were signiLcantly higher than posts that did not include
animation (M = 47.8, SD = 18.5). Posts with animated examples had viewer scores that were 9.4
points better than completely static posts.

Discussion

Discussion and theoretical contributions

In almost all types of visual context examined, more examples resulted in signiLcantly better
ratings from Brand New viewers. The number of total examples correlated with improved
viewer response. Both environmental and informational examples resulted in higher scores.
The presence of animation context correlated with better ratings. Only video context
correlated with slightly lower scores.

When applied to logo research, processing _uency assumes that as more context is presented,
the viewer gains a greater understanding of the meaning of the logo and is more likely to react
favorably to it (Morgan et al., 2021). This study reinforces that expectation and Lnds that
increased context did correlate with an improved viewer response. These Lndings are also in
line with the expectations of design practitioners. Designers have written about and discussed
the power of context for decades, especially when presenting to clients (Airey, 2014; Bierut,
2006), but in today’s media environment, how we present logos to consumers and interested
viewers has become equally important.

Brand New readers are designers and marketers with professional experience that they apply
when voting on the quality of a reviewed logo. In this study, viewers are not necessarily
passionate consumers of the brands presented, but they exhibit high involvement in relation
to the subject matter – logos and visual identities. These professional voices are likely to
criticize the brand on social media if they feel the design is low quality or poorly thought out
(Tarnovskaya and Biedenbach, 2018). While these professionals may present a more
opinionated view of the logos that they are reviewing, their critical attitudes may translate to
those of the most opinionated brand consumers.

These Lndings also seem to indicate that experimental designs should take expanded context
into account to understand how logos and visual identity systems are received. Several studies
found that context within logo designs could result in improved responses from viewers
(LuXarelli et al., 2019a; Morgan et al., 2021). One recent study acknowledged that meaning
“can be fostered by providing context,” but assumed that the context would be contained in
the logo somewhere, perhaps in the name of the company (Morgan et al., 2021). Experiments
focus exclusively on logos because they are easier to work with experimentally, and the
assumption is that insights from those studies can be applied widely across all types of
corporate identities. This study suggests that exploring the impact of a visual identity system is
an exceptionally complicated process.

Previous studies have shown that aesthetics can have a powerful in_uence on consumer
response; however, across the Brand New data set, there was no signiLcant preference for
symmetrical or asymmetrical logos. The presence of context correlated with improved scores
for both symmetrical and asymmetrical designs, suggesting that the e>ect of context is in
addition to any viewer preference for symmetry. Further research would be needed to
determine if the e>ect of context extends to other aesthetic properties such as color, font
choice or complexity, but it is likely that context will improve response regardless of those
decisions.

The study presents an unexpected Lnding with animated and video examples. While both
types of context involve motion, users interact with each media type in di>erent ways, and as a
result, they appear to have opposite e>ects on viewer scores. Video was the only type of
context that correlated with lower scores. Posts that included video were rated slightly lower –
about 5 points less than posts without video.

Video examples are hosted on YouTube or Vimeo, and a thumbnail is embedded in the Brand
New post with a play button that does not autoplay. For this content analysis, there was no way
to tell how many or which Brand New viewers watched the video or how much of it they
watched. The most logical explanation for a lower video score is that viewers simply skip over
the video examples, resulting in the viewer “seeing” fewer examples and the score decreasing
accordingly.

These video Lndings are in direct contrast to animated examples. Animations automatically
play within the post, are typically shorter and, unlike video, animations result in higher viewer
scores for Brand New readers. Posts that featured animation scored eight points higher than
posts without animation. Because they function passively, viewers experience them in the
same way that they experience static examples.

The speciLc connection between the viewers and the company may be a factor. A study into
the use of animations and videos on Web advertisements posited that animations may work
best with low-involvement viewers, while high-involvement viewers were more interested in the
video (Yoo et al., 2004). Because Brand New viewers are not typically heavily invested in the
companies being reviewed, it is logical to assume that they are mostly low-involvement viewers,
and this distinction could contribute to the di>erence in scores between videos and
animations.

Animation is a relatively new component of logo introductions. This study adds to the literature
by showing that animated examples seem to be e>ective at shaping viewer responses to new
logos. More data and study are needed to determine the extent and degree of that e>ect.

Managerial contributions
Based on this study, there are several practical applications of the Lndings for designers and
corporate brand managers who are introducing a new logo to the marketplace and who are
concerned about reactions from consumers and social media in_uencers. The viewers in this
study were knowledgeable consumers – designers and marketers – who may have strong
opinions about logos and are more likely to share their positive and negative opinions on social
media.

Knowledgeable viewers respond best to logos in context. As part of the initial rollout strategy,
brand managers should provide images that show how the logo and its surrounding system
will work. Showing examples of the logo in use should improve customer reactions and
decrease negative responses. While presenting many examples does not guarantee an
improved viewer reaction, in general, more context yields a better response. There was no
evidence in the study that indicated that there was an upper range at which too many
examples resulted in lower scores. Notably, both environmental and informational context
were signiLcantly correlated with improved viewer response, indicating that both types of
context were equally well received by viewers. When planning for a rebranding or new logo
introduction, brand managers may want to build in budget and project scope to allow for a
larger number of examples for the rollout.

Posts that featured animated examples performed better than logos with only static examples
and may help a company communicate its new corporate brand in an engaging way. While
more research is needed to fully understand how longer form video works, brand introduction
videos are likely best reserved for internal and more highly engaged audiences. Brand
managers should consider sharing animated examples of a visual identity when rolling out a
new logo.

Limitations and directions for future research

This content analysis looked at reviews on a publicly available website and their responses.
Brand New’s target audience is people interested in graphic design and branding; thus, these
viewers likely hold strong opinions about logos. It is impossible to guarantee that people did
not vote multiple times or coordinate with others to improve scores. While Brand New’s poll
has a basic restriction to restrict multiple votes from the same IP address, this limitation is
easily overcome by motivated users. In addition, noted posts on Brand New include a
paragraph of commentary for each post, usually written by Vit, and the top of the post includes
short blurbs from the press release or announcement. This study does not examine the
content of those paragraphs and cannot rule out any e>ect that the text may have.

This study presents a novel approach for studying response to logos, and more research is
needed on the visual context and the e>ects on viewer response to new logos. Follow-up
research can assist in better understanding these Lndings and determining new avenues to
explore in future studies. SpeciLcally, do the added examples actually assist with developing
meaning in the mind of the viewer, or is there another mechanism at work?

To test the relationship between aesthetics and context, this study examined only one factor:
symmetry. Future research could look at how context correlates with other aesthetic factors
such as color, shape and typography.

Future experiments can test the impact of context while controlling for the factors that could
not be eliminated through this content analysis. For example, this study could not eliminate the
possible e>ects of brand equity, while an experiment would be able to take into account a
subject’s familiarity with a brand. Furthermore, industry type or company size might shape
viewer response, but it was not possible to analyze those factors with this content analysis.
Additional research could also provide deeper insights into how di>erent types of context are
perceived by viewers. In general, there needs to be more research on corporate visual identity,
not just logos. Future studies cannot simply assume that the logo is representative of the
entire system.

Table 1
Intercoder reliability
Variables Krippendor<’s alpha
Amount of visual context 1.0
Symmetry 0.95
Amount of environmental context 0.932
Amount of informational context 0.928
Amount of animated context 0.934
Amount of video context 1.0
Viewer score (all components) 1.0
Source: Author’s own work

Table 2
Summary context types, viewer score and comments
Value Total Environ. Inform. Animated Video Viewer
type context context context context context score
N 335 335 335 335 335 335
Mean 6.15 2.87 2.78 0.355 0.507 49.6
Min. 0 0 0 0 0 8.30
Max. 19 16 13 6 5 87.5
Source: Author’s own work

References
Aaker, D.A. (1996), “Measuring brand equity across products and markets”, California
Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 102-120, doi: 10.2307/41165845.

Airey, D. (2014), Logo Design Love: A Guide to Creating Iconic Brand Identities, 2nd ed.,
Peachpit Press, Berkeley, Ca.

Amini, F., Riche, N.H., Lee, B., Leboe-McGowan, J. and Irani, P. (2018), “Hooked on data videos:
assessing the ePect of animation and pictographs on viewer engagement”, Proceedings of the
2018 International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, presented at the AVI ‘18: 2018
International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, ACM, Castiglione della Pescaia
Grosseto Italy, doi: 10.1145/3206505.3206552.

Appiah, O. (2006), “Rich media, poor media: the impact of audio/video vs Text/picture testimonial
ads on browsers’ evaluations of commercial web sites and online products”, Journal of Current
Issues & Research in Advertising, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 73-86, doi:
10.1080/10641734.2006.10505192.

Bajaj, A. and Bond, S.D. (2018), “Beyond beauty: design symmetry and brand personality”, Journal
of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 77-98, doi: 10.1002/jcpy.1009.

Baker, M.J. and Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), “Visual identity: trappings or substance?”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 31 Nos 5/6, pp. 366-382.

Balmer, J.M.T. (2008), “Identity based views of the corporation: insights from corporate identity,
adison tional identity, social identity, visual identity, corporate brand identity and corporate
image”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Nos 9/10, pp. 879-906, doi:
10.1108/03090560810891055.

Balmer, J.M.T. (2023), “Design, corporate brand design, and corporate heritage brand design: what
are they? What of them?”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 97-115, doi:
10.1057/s41262-023-00314-z.

Bettels, J. and Wiedmann, K.-P. (2019), “Brand logo symmetry and product design: the spillover
ePects on consumer inferences”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 97, pp. 1-9, doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.039.

Bierut, M. (2006), “The mysterious power of context”, Design Observer, 22 June, available at: htt
p://designobserver.com/feature/the-mysterious-power-of-context/4297 (accessed 27
January 2021).

Brasel, S.A. and Hagtvedt, H. (2016), “Living brands: consumer responses to animated brand
logos”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 639-653, doi:
10.1007/s11747-015-0449-2.

Budds, D. (2016), “The precarious state of logo design”, Fast Company, 8 March, available at: ww
w.fastcompany.com/3056993/the-precarious-state-of-logo-design (accessed 31 March
2019).

Butcher, J. and Pecot, F. (2021), “Visually communicating brand heritage on social media:
champagne on Instagram”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 654-670,
doi: 10.1108/JPBM-01-2021-3334.

Chen, Y.-S.A. and Bei, L.-T. (2019), “The ePects of logo frame design on brand extensions”, Journal
of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 97-113, doi: 10.1108/JPBM-12-2017-1698.

Childers, T.L. and Jass, J. (2002), “All dressed up with something to say: ePects of typeface semantic
associations on brand perceptions and consumer memory”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol.
12 No. 2, pp. 93-106, doi: 10.1207/S15327663JCP1202_03.

Creative Bloq (2013), “Design trends of 2013: the stripped-down logo”, 11 December, available at:
www.creativebloq.com/logo-design/minimalist-logos-5132692 (accessed 17 March 2021).

Delgado-Ballester, E., López-López, I. and Bernal, A. (2022), “Online Zrestorms: an act of civic
engagement or a narcissistic boost? The role of brand misconduct appraisals”, Journal of Product
& Brand Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 257-272, doi: 10.1108/JPBM-08-2021-3627.

Erjansola, A.-M., Virtanen, L. and Lipponen, J. (2022), “It broke my heart when they ripped the old
logo oP the wall’: Places, uses and meanings of the rebranded logo”, Corporate Reputation
Review, doi: 10.1057/s41299-022-00147-7.

Foroudi, P., Melewar, T.C. and Gupta, S. (2017), “Corporate logo: history, deZnition, and
components”, International Studies of Management & Organization, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 176-196,
doi: 10.1080/00208825.2017.1256166.

Foroudi, P., Nazarian, A., Ziyadin, S., Kitchen, P., Hafeez, K., Priporas, C. and Pantano, E. (2020),
“Co-creating brand image and reputation through stakeholder’s social network”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 114, pp. 42-59, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.035.

Gregersen, M.K. and Johansen, T.S. (2018), “Corporate visual identity: exploring the dogma of
consistency”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 3, doi:
10.1108/CCIJ-10-2017-0088.

Gregersen, M.K. and Johansen, T.S. (2021), “Organizational-level visual identity: an integrative
literature review”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp.
441-456, doi: 10.1108/CCIJ-06-2021-0068.

Grohmann, B., Giese, J.L. and Parkman, I.D. (2012), “Using type font characteristics to
communicate brand personality of new brands”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp.
389-403, doi: 10.1057/bm.2012.23.

Hadlock, C. (2020), “Beautiful thinkers armin vit and bryony Gomez-Palacio, founders of brand
new, on the beneZts of being married to your partner, creating to survive and what it’s like to
publicly critique your mentor’s work”, Eunoia, 6 January, available at: https://medium.com/eunoi
a-by-carolyn-hadlock/beautiful-thinkers-armin-vit-and-bryony-gomez-palacio-founders-of-b
rand-new-on-the-beneets-of-35d1f16755c1 (accessed 15 March 2021).

Hu, S. and Borji, A. (2018), “Understanding perceptual and conceptual Kuency at a large scale”, in
Ferrari, V., Hebert, M., Sminchisescu, C. and Weiss, Y. (Eds), Computer Vision – ECCV 2018, Vol.
11220 Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 697-712, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-01270-
0_41.

Huang, K.-C., Lin, C.-C. and Chiang, S.-Y. (2008), “Color preference and familiarity in performance
on brand logo recall”, Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 587-596, doi:
10.2466/pms.107.2.587-596.

Janiszewski, C. and Meyvis, T. (2001), “EPects of brand logo complexity, repetition, and spacing on
processing Kuency and judgment”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 18-32, doi:
10.1086/321945.

Jimerson, J. (2019), “How to unveil a new brand identity (six steps for doing it right)”, Medium27,
September, available at: https://medium.com/adison-ave-collective/how-to-unveil-a-new-bra
nd-identity-six-steps-for-doing-it-right-2cc449a5f48b (accessed 7 March 2021).

Kim, M.J. and Lim, J.H. (2019), “A comprehensive review on logo literature: research topics, Zndings,
and future directions”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 35 Nos 13/14, pp. 1-75, doi:
10.1080/0267257X.2019.1604563.

Lelis, C., Leitão, S., Mealha, Ó. And Dunning, B. (2022), “Typography: the constant vector of
dynamic logos”, Visual Communication, SAGE Publications, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 146-170, doi:
10.1177/1470357220966775.

Lu>arelli, J., Mukesh, M. and Mahmood, A. (2019a), “Let the logo do the talking: the inKuence of
logo descriptiveness on brand equity”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 56 No. 5, pp. 862-878,
doi: 10.1177/0022243719845000.

Lu>arelli, J., Stamatogiannakis, A. and Yang, H. (2019b), “The visual asymmetry ePect: an interplay
of logo design and brand personality on brand equity”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 56 No.
1, pp. 89-103, doi: 10.1177/0022243718820548.

Marsden, J. and Thomas, B. (2013), “Brand values: exploring the associations of symmetry within
Znancial brand marks”, Vol. 8, doi: 10.1111/dmj.12004.

Meiting, L. and Hua, W. (2021), “Angular or rounded? The ePect of the shape of green brand logos
on consumer perception”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 279, p. 123801, doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123801.

Miceli, G.N., Scopelliti, I., Raimondo, M.A. and Donato, C. (2014), “Breaking through complexity:
visual and conceptual dimensions in logo evaluation across exposures”, Psychology & Marketing,
Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 886-899, doi: 10.1002/mar.20741.

Miller, D., Merrilees, B. and Yakimova, R. (2014), “Corporate rebranding: an integrative review of
major enablers and barriers to the rebranding process”, International Journal of Management
Reviews, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 265-289, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12020.

Morgan, C., Fajardo, T.M. and Townsend, C. (2021), “Show it or say it: how brand familiarity
inKuences the ePectiveness of image-based versus text-based logos”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 49 No. 3, doi: 10.1007/s11747-020-00760-0.

Murshed, F., Dwivedi, A. and Nayeem, T. (2023), “Brand authenticity building ePect of brand
experience and downstream ePects”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 32 No. 7, doi:
10.1108/JPBM-02-2021-3377.

Northey, G. and Chan, E.Y. (2020), “Political conservatism and preference for (a)symmetric brand
logos”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 115, pp. 149-159, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.049.

O’Connor, Z. (2011), “Logo colour and diPerentiation: a new application of environmental colour
mapping”, Color Research & Application, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 55-60, doi: 10.1002/col.20594.

Olins, W. (1978), “The corporate personality: an inquiry into the nature of corporate identity”,
Design Council.

Parris, D.L. and Guzmán, F. (2022), “Evolving brand boundaries and expectations: looking back on
brand equity, brand loyalty, and brand image research to move forward”, Journal of Product &
Brand Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 191-234, doi: 10.1108/JPBM-06-2021-3528.

Peng, L., Wei, Y., Zhang, X. and Wang, D. (2023a), “Flatness promotes modernity: logo Katness and
consumers’ perception of brand image”, Asia PaciLc Journal of Marketing and Logistics, doi:
10.1108/APJML-02-2023-0111.

Peng, M., Liang, M., Huang, H., Fan, J., Yu, L. and Liao, J. (2023b), “The ePect of diPerent animated
brand logos on consumer response – an event-related potential and self-reported study”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 143, p. 107701, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2023.107701.

Pittard, N., Ewing, M. and Jevons, C. (2007), “Aesthetic theory and logo design: examining
consumer response to proportion across cultures”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 457-473, doi: 10.1108/02651330710761026.

Q&A: Questions and Armin (2020), “The type directors club”, 22 May, available at: www.tdc.org/n
ews/qa-questions-and-armin/ (accessed 14 March 2021).

RaLq, M., Hussain, R. and Hussain, S. (2020), “The impact of logo shapes redesign on brand
loyalty and repurchase intentions through brand attitude”, International Review of Management
and Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 117-126, doi: 10.32479/irmm.10308.

Rauschnabel, P.A., Kammerlander, N. and Ivens, B.S. (2016), “Collaborative brand attacks in
social media: exploring the antecedents, characteristics, and consequences of a new form of brand
crises”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 381-410, doi:
10.1080/10696679.2016.1205452.

Septianto, F. and Kwon, J. (2022), “Too cute to be bad? Cute brand logo reduces consumer
punishment following brand transgressions”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol.
39 No. 4, pp. 1108-1126, doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2021.12.006.

Sharma, N. and Varki, S. (2018), “Active white space (AWS) in logo designs: ePects on logo
evaluations and brand communication”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 270-281, doi:
10.1080/00913367.2018.1463880.

Skaggs, S. (2019), “The semiotics of visual identity: logos”, The American Journal of Semiotics, Vol.
35 No. 3, pp. 277-307, doi: 10.5840/ajs20201257.

Smith, L. (2019), “Researchers want to help you design more successful logos, but do they have
good advice?”, Eye on Design, 30 October, available at: https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/researche
rs-want-to-help-you-design-more-successful-logos-but-do-they-have-good-advice/ (accessed
7 March 2021).

Song, J., Xu, F. and Jiang, Y. (2022), “The colorful company: ePects of brand logo colorfulness on
consumer judgments”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 39 No. 8, pp. 1610-1620, doi:
10.1002/mar.21674.

Tarnovskaya, V. and Biedenbach, G. (2018), “Corporate rebranding failure and brand meanings in
the digital environment”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 455-469, doi:
10.1108/MIP-09-2017-0192.

Ucllc/Advertising (2023), Available at: https://underconsideration.com/advertising/ (accessed

29 April 2023).

Van Grinsven, B. and Das, E. (2016), “Logo design in marketing communications: brand logo
complexity moderates exposure ePects on brand recognition and brand attitude”, Journal of
Marketing Communications, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 256-270, doi: 10.1080/13527266.2013.866593.

Walsh, M.F., Cui, A.P. and MacInnis, D.J. (2019), “How to successfully introduce logo redesigns”,
Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 365-375, doi: 10.1057/s41262-018-0141-1.

Walsh, M.F., Page Winterich, K. and Mittal, V. (2011), “How re-designing angular logos to be
rounded shapes brand attitude: consumer brand commitment and self-construal”, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 438-447, doi: 10.1108/07363761111165958.

Weitzl, W.J., Hutzinger, C. and Wagner, U. (2023), “I am ashamed of my brand-self! Consumer-

brand identiZcation as a moderator of emotional reactions following symbol-laden brand failures”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, doi: 10.1108/JPBM-02-2022-3853.

Wu, L., Dodoo, N.A. and Choi, C.-W. (2023), “Brand anthropomorphism on twitter: communication
strategies and consumer engagement”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 32 No. 6,
pp. 799-811, doi: 10.1108/JPBM-12-2021-3787.

Yoo, C.Y., Kim, K. and Stout, P.A. (2004), “Assessing the ePects of animation in online banner
advertising: hierarchy of ePects model”, Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 49-60,
doi: 10.1080/15252019.2004.10722087.
Corresponding author
Robert A. Wertz can be contacted at: wertzr@mailbox.sc.edu

About the author

Robert A. Wertz is a PhD student at the University of South Carolina in the College of
Information and Communications. In addition to his research, he serves as the Senior
Associate Director of Visual Branding at the University of South Carolina and has over 20 years
of experience as a designer, creative director and brand manager in the higher education and
insurance industries. His research is focused on media e>ects and visual communication –
especially related to logos and visual identity.

Support & Feedback # Manage cookies

Emerald logo Services About Policies and information

Authors About Emerald Privacy notice
Editors Working for Emerald Site policies $
Librarians Contact us Modern Slavery Act
! ! ! !
Researchers Publication sitemap Chair of Trustees governance statement
© 2023 Emerald Publishing Limited
Reviewers Accessibility