IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v51y2024i2p383-407..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Epistemological Jangle and Jingle Fallacies in the Consumer–Brand Relationship Subfield: A Call to Action

Author

Listed:
  • Noel Albert
  • Matthew Thomson

Abstract

For more than 20 years, the consumer–brand relationship (CBR) subfield has flourished with scores of constructs being employed. We provide an epistemological examination of its 14 most commonly measured relational constructs (e.g., Brand Love, Self-Brand Connection) collected from 767 research articles, reflecting 1,753 scales and approximately 9,200 items. We demonstrate that constructs overlap an average of 43% across all journals and 21% in top journals due to assessing highly similar or synonymous ideas (i.e., jangle). We use a combination of text and cluster analyses to show that measures of allegedly the same construct are polysemic, having an average of 5.3 different meanings (i.e., jingle). The results document in the CBR subfield the types of measurement inconsistencies and ambiguities that have sown confusion and frustration in other academic fields. We discuss the roots of these problems and offer recommendations aimed at helping scholars to improve measurement practices and to limit the presence of jingle and jangle in the CBR subfield.

Suggested Citation

  • Noel Albert & Matthew Thomson, 2024. "Epistemological Jangle and Jingle Fallacies in the Consumer–Brand Relationship Subfield: A Call to Action," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 51(2), pages 383-407.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:51:y:2024:i:2:p:383-407.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucad064
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:51:y:2024:i:2:p:383-407.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.