Does product design matter? Exploring its influences in consumers’ psychological responses and brand loyalty

Abstract

Purpose

Unique product design is a highlight of sustainable branding. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether product design affects customers’ psychological responses (i.e. cognitive and affective responses) to smartphones, and, in turn, affects their brand loyalty (i.e. attitudinal and behavioral brand loyalty), further advancing the knowledge of product design and brand management.

Design/methodology/approach

This work used survey data from 456 Taiwanese with experience using smartphone. Structural equation modeling was employed to test the proposed model and hypotheses.

Findings

The results indicate that the product design significantly affects both cognitive response and affective response, which, in turn, significantly affect both attitudinal brand loyalty and behavioral brand loyalty. The findings also suggest that the moderating effect of product involvement on the relationship between product design and affective response is statistically significant, although it does not positively and significantly moderate the link between product design and cognitive response.

Research limitations/implications

This study has two main limitations. First, this study was conducted in the context of smartphones, thus potentially constraining the generalization of the results to other industries. Second, the data in this study were obtained from a cross-sectional design.

Practical implications

These findings can permit companies to generate more brand loyalty in their customers and guide their management of assets and marketing activities.

Originality/value

This paper presents new insights into the nature and importance of product design in brand value.

Citation

Hsu, C.-L., Chen, Y.-C., Yang, T.-N., Lin, W.-K. and Liu, Y.-H. (2018), "Does product design matter? Exploring its influences in consumers’ psychological responses and brand loyalty", Information Technology & People, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 886-907. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-07-2017-0206