Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos.
Logos
Marketing
Transposed-letter confusability effect
Word recognition
Journal
Psychonomic bulletin & review
ISSN: 1531-5320
Titre abrégé: Psychon Bull Rev
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9502924
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
accepted:
11
12
2020
pubmed:
11
2
2021
medline:
22
7
2021
entrez:
10
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Companies and products are identified by their brand names, which are typically written with a specific letter style, color, and design (i.e., logos). This graphical information offers a distinctive image that facilitates their recognition. However, the uniqueness of these configuration cues may make brand names more vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling. We examined whether the confusability at detecting misspelled brand names is higher when embedded in the full logo than when presented in plain format (Experiment 1), when removing all graphical information of the logo other than typeface (Experiment 2), and when only modifying the typeface (Experiment 3). Participants had to decide whether the presented item was a correctly spelled brand name. The misspelled stimuli were created by either transposing or replacing two internal letters of popular brand names (amazon → amzaon vs. amceon), thus allowing us to have a measure of the transposed-letter confusability effect. Results showed a sizeable transposed-letter confusability effect for all types of brand names, but the effect was greatest for the misspelled full logos. Thus, the distinctiveness of the graphical information in logos has a deleterious side effect: logos are quite vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling branding.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33565044
doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01863-z
pii: 10.3758/s13423-020-01863-z
pmc: PMC7872310
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
969-977Références
Abdel-Khalik, J. (2007). Is a rose by any other image still a rose? Disconnecting dilution’s similarity test from traditional trademark concepts. University of Toledo Law Review, 39(3), 591.
Anwyl-Irvine, A. L., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2019). Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 388–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x
doi: 10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x
pmcid: 7005094
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Bimbo V. Panrico (2014). Case R C-591/12: Court of Justice of the European Union. http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=151966 . Retrieved on June 8, 2020
Blake, A. B., Nazarian, M., & Castel, A. D. (2015). The Apple of the mind’s eye: Everyday attention, metamemory, and reconstructive memory for the Apple logo. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 858–865. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.1002798
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.1002798
Butler, S. (2017). Yoko Ono halts sale of John Lemon lemonade. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/19/yoko-ono-john-lemon-lemonade-copyright . Accessed 8 June 2020
Chang, J. (2014). Trademark counterfeiting in China: The real price of knock-offs. Santa Clara Law Review, 54(3), 765–790.
Clear, M. (2013). Own-label ‘copycat’ products: Can you spot the difference? Which? https://www.which.co.uk/news/2013/04/own-label-copycat-products-can-you-spot-the-difference-316370 . Retrieved on June 8, 2020
Davis, C. J. (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review, 117(3), 713–758. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019738
doi: 10.1037/a0019738
pubmed: 20658851
Davis, C. J., & Perea, M. (2005). BuscaPalabras: A program for deriving orthographic and phonological neighborhood statistics and other psycholinguistic indices in Spanish. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 665–671. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03192738
doi: 10.3758/bf03192738
pubmed: 16629300
Foroudi, P., Melewar, T. C., & Gupta, S. (2017). Corporate logo: History, definition, and components. International Studies of Management & Organization, 47, 176–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2017.1256166
doi: 10.1080/00208825.2017.1256166
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35, 116–124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503
doi: 10.3758/BF03195503
pubmed: 12723786
Gontijo, P. F. G., & Zhang, S. (2007). The mental representation of brand names: Are brand names a class by themselves? In T. M. Lowrey (Ed.), Psycholinguistic phenomena in marketing communications (pp. 23–37). Erlbaum.
Grainger, J. (2018). Orthographic processing: A “mid-level” vision of reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(2), 335–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1314515
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2017.1314515
Kuby, P., Aldridge, J., & Snyder, S. (1994). Developmental progression of environmental print recognition in kindergarten children. Reading Psychology, 15(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/0270271940150101
doi: 10.1080/0270271940150101
Masonheimer, P. E., Drum, P. A., & Ehri, L. C. (1984). Does environmental print identification lead children into word reading? Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968409547520
doi: 10.1080/10862968409547520
Marcet, A., & Perea, M. (2018). Can I order a burger at rnacdonalds.com? Visual similarity effects of multi-letter combinations at the early stages of word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 44(5), 699–706. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000477
doi: 10.1037/xlm0000477
O’Connor, R. E., & Forster, K. I. (1981). Criterion bias and search sequence bias in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 9, 78–92. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196953
doi: 10.3758/bf03196953
OECD. (2019). Trends in trade in counterfeit and pirated goods [Illicit Trade series]. https://doi.org/10.1787/26175835
doi: 10.1787/26175835
Pathak, A., Velasco, C., & Calvert, G. A. (2019a). Identifying counterfeit brand logos: On the importance of the first and last letters of a logotype. European Journal of Marketing, 53(6), 2109–2125. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejm-09-2017-0586
doi: 10.1108/ejm-09-2017-0586
Pathak, A., Velasco, C., & Calvert, G. A. (2019b). Implicit and explicit identification of counterfeit brand logos based on logotype transposition. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 28(10). https://doi.org/10.1108/jpbm-06-2018-1921
Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(2), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.005
doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.005
Perea, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Transposed-letter priming effects for close versus distant transpositions. Experimental Psychology, 55(6), 384–393. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.55.6.384
Perea, M., Jiménez, M., Talero, F., & López-Cañada, S. (2015). Letter-case information and the identification of brand names. British Journal of Psychology, 106, 162-173. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12071
doi: 10.1111/bjop.12071
pubmed: 24766365
Peressotti, F., Cubelli, R., & Job, R. (2003). On recognizing proper names: The orthographic cue hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 47(1), 87–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0285(03)00004-5
doi: 10.1016/s0010-0285(03)00004-5
pubmed: 12852936
Qiao, F., Chicotsky, B., & Billings, A. C. (2016). Loving “Mapple Store” but Hating “Sprawl-Mart”: A case study of brand parodies in The Simpsons. KOME—An International Journal of Pure Communication Inquiry, 4(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.2016.15
doi: 10.17646/kome.2016.15
Scaltritti, M., Dufau, S., & Grainger, J. (2018). Stimulus orientation and the first-letter advantage. Acta Psychologica, 183, 37–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.12.009
doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.12.009
pubmed: 29306099
pmcid: 5809025
Share, D. L., & Gur, T. (1999). How reading begins: A study of preschoolers' print identification strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 17(2), 177–213. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci170202
doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci170202
Tydgat, I., & Grainger, J. (2009). Serial position effects in the identification of letters, digits, and symbols. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(2), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013027
doi: 10.1037/a0013027
pubmed: 19331502
van Horen, F., & Pieters, R. (2012). Consumer evaluation of copycat brands: The effect of imitation type. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(3), 246–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.04.001
doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.04.001
Wong, K., Wadee, F., Ellenblum, G., & McCloskey, M. (2018). The devil’s in the g-tails: Deficient letter-shape knowledge and awareness despite massive visual experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(9), 1324–1335. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000532
doi: 10.1037/xhp0000532
pubmed: 29608074
Yang, H., & Lupker, S. J. (2019). Does letter rotation decrease transposed letter priming effects? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(12), 2309–2318. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000697
doi: 10.1037/xlm0000697
pubmed: 30816764