基于脑电信号分析的消费者品牌延伸评估决策研究
|
摘要
决策神经科学(Decision Neuroscience)是快速成长的前沿交叉学科,也是管理科学的新生研究领域。它将管理科学延伸到神经科学层面,通过研究传统决策“黑箱”的神经活动,从而更好的构建决策行为模型,它可用于对消费者决策问题的研究。事件相关脑电位(ERP)是认知神经科学中最为成熟的脑扫描研究工具之一,它借助稳定的内源性脑电生理指标,结合行为学数据,能够研究传统的外显评估技术难以涉及的认知过程。运用ERP来研究消费者决策,不仅为消费者决策理论找到神经学证据,而且它所采取的基于过程测量的、多系统协作的视角,可弥补过去决策理论中基于结果测量的、单一系统框架不足。
品牌延伸是常见的营销手段,主要用来降低推出新产品的成本,以及避免新品牌失败的风险。在过去二十多年里,学者们致力于探讨品牌延伸的评估决策过程,形成了围绕A&K模型(Aaker and Keller,1990)的主流学派,研究主题主要围绕影响品牌延伸态度形成的感知质量、契合性、类别相似性等变量;但是品牌延伸评估决策过程中的“黑箱”,即延伸评估的认知处理过程和伴随它的情感迁移过程却讨论不多,并由此带来一些学术争论。检验经典评估模型,弥补理论缺口,对关键性的学术争论给出解释,这是当前品牌延伸研究的主要任务。
本研究以A&K模型等经典延伸评估理论为出发点,在研究方法上,以决策科学、消费者行为学和认知神经科学所共通的关联记忆网络为基础理论,并整合了品牌延伸理论、决策科学、认知科学、ERP研究以及最新的决策神经科学成果,从“认知—情感;自动—受控”四维度的决策加工处理视角,提出阶段性假设;并根据消费者通常进行延伸评估决策的过程特点设计了“刺激1启动(品牌名称)-刺激2目标(产品名称)”(prime—probe)的实验研究范式,通过ERP的过程测量来检验各阶段的评估决策变量,进而结合神经机制建立描述性评估决策模型,并以传统的消费者决策研究方法来对此进行检验;在内容上,建立了以母品牌“感知质量”为启动效应,通过“相似性匹配”的闸门作用来引导两类“分类处理”机制,再由“契合性判断”来完成协调与整合,最后进一步在“延伸态度”中完成情感评估,输出消费决策行为结果的阶段模型。
本研究利用国际标准ERP/认知实验室,针对评估决策各阶段,历时2年,共设计并开展了包含不同控制条件的四项实验研究,找到了品牌延伸评估决策各阶段关键变量的脑电成分依据,从而支持了假设;并根据这些成分随各阶段时间进程的变化以及它们之间的数量关系,结合行为学数据,进一步探讨了品牌延伸评估决策的过程机制,最后形成了基于神经科学的品牌延伸五阶段评估决策模型。本研究还运用焦点小组座谈内容分析法在现实适用性上支持了“五阶段模型”;并用2448个样本规模的问卷数据对“五阶段模型”进行基于OLS回归和SEM路径分析的检验,发现不仅有较A&K模型更好的解释力,而且对于过去争论的焦点,如母品牌“感知质量”对品牌延伸评估决策的影响、“相似性”的作用、适度不“契合”更有利于评估、“契合性”与“延伸态度”如何导致最终决策等问题,给出统一的解释。在最后的展望中,本研究还分析了最近几年决策神经科学在国际顶级管理和科学期刊上的表现,并结合本研究提出的研究框架,设计了一些在该领域未来有望取得重大突破的研究方案。
本研究提出的“五阶段模型”,包含的主要结论如下:
(1)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在母品牌感知质量的启动效应(阶段一)。它可由接受品牌名称刺激后诱发的LPC(晚期正成分复合波)脑电成分来表征,与记忆获取和情感(affect)处理有关;知名品牌能引起更大且偏脑区左侧化的LPC,说明营销中的品牌效应来源于知名品牌对正性情绪的激活。
(2)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在相似性匹配过程(阶段二)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的N270(270毫秒负波)脑电成分来表征,与基本属性的失匹配(mismatch)和冲突处理有关;与母品牌产品基本属性联系越少,N270越大。
(3)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在分类处理过程(阶段三)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的P300(300毫秒正波)脑电成分来表征。P300与类别处理、记忆更新、注意等有关;类别一致性延伸可以诱发更大的P300。
(4)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在契合性判断过程(阶段四)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的N400(400毫秒负波)脑电成分来表征,与大脑对冲突控制和高级协调有关;类别不一致性延伸可以诱发更大的N400。N400可由N270和P300振幅的线性函数来表示,表明契合性判断是一个由相似性匹配所引导(闸门作用),依靠分类处理机制所完成的一个自动加工处理结果。
(5)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在两种分类机制。N270对不同产品类别描述无显著差异,说明相似性匹配与分类处理是两个不同的过程;而P300和N400则均对产品类别描述敏感,且大类描述导致更大的P300,细类描述导致更大的N400,前者支持第一类基于类别的分类处理(category-based processing),而后者支持了第二类基于片断的分类处理(piecemeal integration processing)。
(6)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在延伸态度形成过程(阶段五)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的LPP(晚期正电位)脑电成分来表征,与情感评估有关;不一致性延伸可以诱发更大的LPP。同时品牌延伸接受率只有在控制了N400后才与LPP显著偏相关,且行为结果可由N400和LPP振幅的线性函数来表示,表明最终的决策行为可以通过契合性判断和延伸态度两个独立的系统共同作用而产生;前者以认知和自动加工过程为主,后者以情感和受控加工过程为主。
本研究是决策神经科学研究的一次探索,在研究方法、研究范式、研究内容和结论上均具有交叉学科的创新之处,也具有较强的现实意义。主要有如下三个创新点:
(1)紧跟当前国际上决策神经科学的发展趋势,采用脑扫描技术(事件相关脑电位,ERP)研究消费者决策问题。其意义有二:目前运用ERP研究决策问题较少,本研究是对近年来决策神经科学前沿研究成果的验证和补充;用ERP在毫秒级测量决策全过程的行为和脑电信号变化,从而在时间进程上研究品牌延伸评估决策机制,揭示传统研究难以涉及的决策过程黑箱。
(2)在神经机制上支持了品牌延伸领域经典理论的基础假设,并完善了延伸评估决策模型。本研究以传统决策科学、行为决策和认知神经科学所共通的关联记忆网络理论作基础,针对以A&K模型(1990)为代表主流研究的核心问题,找到在决策过程中存在“感知质量”、“契合性”和“延伸态度”等关键变量的神经学证据;进一步通过对脑电信号动态变化的分析,提出了较A&K模型有更高解释力的“五阶段模型”。其中,“感知质量”的启动效应;以“相似性匹配”的闸门作用来引导两类“分类处理”机制并最终通过“契合性判断”完成冲突处理与协调;通过“契合性判断”的自动处理和“延伸态度”的受控处理双系统作用形成消费决策;等内容,均是对传统理论的有益补充。
(3)“五阶段”模型针对理论争论焦点给出了基于神经机制的统一解释。本研究从决策神经科学的“认知—情感;自动—受控”四维视角出发,融合了消费者决策研究中长期对立并存的基于认知过程和基于情感过程的两大流派:而以神经机制为基础的阶段评估决策模型,对一些经典争论给出新的解释。如,发现母品牌的记忆和情感启动效应,解释了Aaker and Keller(1990)和后来Sunde and Brodie(1993)等研究关于实证中为何品牌感知质量不起作用的争论;通过对分类机制的探讨支持了Tauber(1988)情感迁移模型中以契合性作关键中介的假设,也强调了Bhat and Reddy(2001)属性联想模型中以认知评价为中介的合理性;以感知质量的启动效应和契合性判断的冲突处理机制来解释倒“U”型评估现象,支持了Mandler(1982)的图式调适解释和Martin andStewart(2001)的实证结果,也阐明了其他研究没有发现该现象的原因。
Decision Neuroscience is a fast - growing interdisciplinary research area, including in management science. It can extend managemenr science into neural aspect with the studying of "black box" theory in traditional decision science, especially in consumer decision-making. Event-related Potential (ERP) is a mature brain scan technology in Cognitive Neuroscience. Its endogenous neural indicator is superior to explicit evaluation techniques in cognitive processing studies.
Brand extension is one of common marketing methods and is used to reduce the cost of new products and the risk new brands. Over the past two decades and more, scholars made attempts at expounding the process of brand extension evaluation and consumer decision - making. Aaker and Keller's model (1990) and the succession, the leading theory in brand extension, focused in the variables of "Brand Quality", "Fit", "Category" and so on, but little in the process of cognitive and affective processing of evalustion and decision-making. It is an urgent issue for many disputes in this area and a task to test the classic model, revamp the defects of leading theory and explain the conflict.
In research methodology, this study based on the comman theory of associative memory model in decision science, consumer behavior and congnitive neuroscience, designed an experimental paradigms of "Stimulus 1brand name- Stimulus 2 product name" (prime-probe) , and build multistage hypothesis. With the process-based measurement of ERP, we test the the relationships of variables in the hypothesis and build a decriptive evalution and decision-making model and tested it with traditional methods. In research content, this study build a five-stage model: the priming of "brand quality", a dual process mechanism for "categorization" with the valve effect of "similarity" and be congruous in "fittness", be affective evaluated in "attitude" and get the decision output of behavior.
With the ERP laboratory of international standard, this study designed and conducted four laboratorial study in two years, and found the ERP evidences for the critical variables in every stage of the brand extension evaluation and decision -making, so to support the hypothesis. What's more, we analysised the ERP and behavior data in the time interval between stages and build "five-stage model " of brand extension evaluation and decision-making based on the neural mechanism. We also used focus-groups to get the practical support and used surveies with 2448 cases scale to test the model. With the analysis of OLS and SEM Path analysis, we found the "five-stage model" had a better explanatory ability than A&K model, and can also give a unified explaination to many disputes. In the last, this study also analysised the trends of decision neuroscience in top journals of management and science, and designed several study program which can get breakthrough of the frond domain.
The conclusion of this study is as following:
(1) There is a priming of "brand quality" (Stage 1). It can be indexed by LPC, which can be elicited by memory retrieval and incidental affect processing.
(2) There is a "similarity match"(Stage 2). It can be indexed by N270, which can be elicited by mismatch processing.
(3) There is a "categorization"(Stage 3). It can be indexed by P300, which can be elicited by categorization, working memory update and attention.
(4) There is a "fit"(Stage 4). It can be indexed by N400, which can be elicited by conflict processing. N400 can also be regressed by N270 and P300. It means that "fit" is an automatic processing with the homing of "similarity match" and performing of "categorization".
(5) There is a dual categorization process mechanism (category-based processing and piecemeal integration processing) for attitude formation for brand extension and only "categorization" and "fit" relate to it.
(6) There is an "Attitude"(Stage 5). It can be indexed by LPP, which can be elicited by affective evaluation processing. The behavior result can be regressed by N400 and LPP. It means that there is a dual-attitude system in brand extension evaluation and decision-making: "fittness" is cognitive and automatic processing and "attitude" is affective and controlled processing.
The innovation of this study is as following:
(1) Following the trend of decision neuroscience, we used brain scan technology (ERP) to study consumer decision-making.
(2) We supported the classic theory by neural evidence, and perfect the model of brand extension evaluation and decision-making.
(3) "Five-stage model" gave a uniform explaination to the literatural disputes by neural mechanism. For example, the priming effect of brand can explain why "brand quality" was not be supported in A&K model; the categorization supports "fit" (Tauber, 1988) and "evaluation" (Bhat and Reddy, 2001) as the intervening variable; the interaction of the priming effect of brand and conflict congruent effect of "fit" can support the schema theory of Mandler (1982) and explain why Martin and Stewart(2001) could find the inverse "U" in brand extension evaluation but most literatures not.
品牌延伸是常见的营销手段,主要用来降低推出新产品的成本,以及避免新品牌失败的风险。在过去二十多年里,学者们致力于探讨品牌延伸的评估决策过程,形成了围绕A&K模型(Aaker and Keller,1990)的主流学派,研究主题主要围绕影响品牌延伸态度形成的感知质量、契合性、类别相似性等变量;但是品牌延伸评估决策过程中的“黑箱”,即延伸评估的认知处理过程和伴随它的情感迁移过程却讨论不多,并由此带来一些学术争论。检验经典评估模型,弥补理论缺口,对关键性的学术争论给出解释,这是当前品牌延伸研究的主要任务。
本研究以A&K模型等经典延伸评估理论为出发点,在研究方法上,以决策科学、消费者行为学和认知神经科学所共通的关联记忆网络为基础理论,并整合了品牌延伸理论、决策科学、认知科学、ERP研究以及最新的决策神经科学成果,从“认知—情感;自动—受控”四维度的决策加工处理视角,提出阶段性假设;并根据消费者通常进行延伸评估决策的过程特点设计了“刺激1启动(品牌名称)-刺激2目标(产品名称)”(prime—probe)的实验研究范式,通过ERP的过程测量来检验各阶段的评估决策变量,进而结合神经机制建立描述性评估决策模型,并以传统的消费者决策研究方法来对此进行检验;在内容上,建立了以母品牌“感知质量”为启动效应,通过“相似性匹配”的闸门作用来引导两类“分类处理”机制,再由“契合性判断”来完成协调与整合,最后进一步在“延伸态度”中完成情感评估,输出消费决策行为结果的阶段模型。
本研究利用国际标准ERP/认知实验室,针对评估决策各阶段,历时2年,共设计并开展了包含不同控制条件的四项实验研究,找到了品牌延伸评估决策各阶段关键变量的脑电成分依据,从而支持了假设;并根据这些成分随各阶段时间进程的变化以及它们之间的数量关系,结合行为学数据,进一步探讨了品牌延伸评估决策的过程机制,最后形成了基于神经科学的品牌延伸五阶段评估决策模型。本研究还运用焦点小组座谈内容分析法在现实适用性上支持了“五阶段模型”;并用2448个样本规模的问卷数据对“五阶段模型”进行基于OLS回归和SEM路径分析的检验,发现不仅有较A&K模型更好的解释力,而且对于过去争论的焦点,如母品牌“感知质量”对品牌延伸评估决策的影响、“相似性”的作用、适度不“契合”更有利于评估、“契合性”与“延伸态度”如何导致最终决策等问题,给出统一的解释。在最后的展望中,本研究还分析了最近几年决策神经科学在国际顶级管理和科学期刊上的表现,并结合本研究提出的研究框架,设计了一些在该领域未来有望取得重大突破的研究方案。
本研究提出的“五阶段模型”,包含的主要结论如下:
(1)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在母品牌感知质量的启动效应(阶段一)。它可由接受品牌名称刺激后诱发的LPC(晚期正成分复合波)脑电成分来表征,与记忆获取和情感(affect)处理有关;知名品牌能引起更大且偏脑区左侧化的LPC,说明营销中的品牌效应来源于知名品牌对正性情绪的激活。
(2)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在相似性匹配过程(阶段二)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的N270(270毫秒负波)脑电成分来表征,与基本属性的失匹配(mismatch)和冲突处理有关;与母品牌产品基本属性联系越少,N270越大。
(3)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在分类处理过程(阶段三)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的P300(300毫秒正波)脑电成分来表征。P300与类别处理、记忆更新、注意等有关;类别一致性延伸可以诱发更大的P300。
(4)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在契合性判断过程(阶段四)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的N400(400毫秒负波)脑电成分来表征,与大脑对冲突控制和高级协调有关;类别不一致性延伸可以诱发更大的N400。N400可由N270和P300振幅的线性函数来表示,表明契合性判断是一个由相似性匹配所引导(闸门作用),依靠分类处理机制所完成的一个自动加工处理结果。
(5)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在两种分类机制。N270对不同产品类别描述无显著差异,说明相似性匹配与分类处理是两个不同的过程;而P300和N400则均对产品类别描述敏感,且大类描述导致更大的P300,细类描述导致更大的N400,前者支持第一类基于类别的分类处理(category-based processing),而后者支持了第二类基于片断的分类处理(piecemeal integration processing)。
(6)品牌延伸评估决策过程中存在延伸态度形成过程(阶段五)。它可由接受产品名称刺激后诱发的LPP(晚期正电位)脑电成分来表征,与情感评估有关;不一致性延伸可以诱发更大的LPP。同时品牌延伸接受率只有在控制了N400后才与LPP显著偏相关,且行为结果可由N400和LPP振幅的线性函数来表示,表明最终的决策行为可以通过契合性判断和延伸态度两个独立的系统共同作用而产生;前者以认知和自动加工过程为主,后者以情感和受控加工过程为主。
本研究是决策神经科学研究的一次探索,在研究方法、研究范式、研究内容和结论上均具有交叉学科的创新之处,也具有较强的现实意义。主要有如下三个创新点:
(1)紧跟当前国际上决策神经科学的发展趋势,采用脑扫描技术(事件相关脑电位,ERP)研究消费者决策问题。其意义有二:目前运用ERP研究决策问题较少,本研究是对近年来决策神经科学前沿研究成果的验证和补充;用ERP在毫秒级测量决策全过程的行为和脑电信号变化,从而在时间进程上研究品牌延伸评估决策机制,揭示传统研究难以涉及的决策过程黑箱。
(2)在神经机制上支持了品牌延伸领域经典理论的基础假设,并完善了延伸评估决策模型。本研究以传统决策科学、行为决策和认知神经科学所共通的关联记忆网络理论作基础,针对以A&K模型(1990)为代表主流研究的核心问题,找到在决策过程中存在“感知质量”、“契合性”和“延伸态度”等关键变量的神经学证据;进一步通过对脑电信号动态变化的分析,提出了较A&K模型有更高解释力的“五阶段模型”。其中,“感知质量”的启动效应;以“相似性匹配”的闸门作用来引导两类“分类处理”机制并最终通过“契合性判断”完成冲突处理与协调;通过“契合性判断”的自动处理和“延伸态度”的受控处理双系统作用形成消费决策;等内容,均是对传统理论的有益补充。
(3)“五阶段”模型针对理论争论焦点给出了基于神经机制的统一解释。本研究从决策神经科学的“认知—情感;自动—受控”四维视角出发,融合了消费者决策研究中长期对立并存的基于认知过程和基于情感过程的两大流派:而以神经机制为基础的阶段评估决策模型,对一些经典争论给出新的解释。如,发现母品牌的记忆和情感启动效应,解释了Aaker and Keller(1990)和后来Sunde and Brodie(1993)等研究关于实证中为何品牌感知质量不起作用的争论;通过对分类机制的探讨支持了Tauber(1988)情感迁移模型中以契合性作关键中介的假设,也强调了Bhat and Reddy(2001)属性联想模型中以认知评价为中介的合理性;以感知质量的启动效应和契合性判断的冲突处理机制来解释倒“U”型评估现象,支持了Mandler(1982)的图式调适解释和Martin andStewart(2001)的实证结果,也阐明了其他研究没有发现该现象的原因。
Decision Neuroscience is a fast - growing interdisciplinary research area, including in management science. It can extend managemenr science into neural aspect with the studying of "black box" theory in traditional decision science, especially in consumer decision-making. Event-related Potential (ERP) is a mature brain scan technology in Cognitive Neuroscience. Its endogenous neural indicator is superior to explicit evaluation techniques in cognitive processing studies.
Brand extension is one of common marketing methods and is used to reduce the cost of new products and the risk new brands. Over the past two decades and more, scholars made attempts at expounding the process of brand extension evaluation and consumer decision - making. Aaker and Keller's model (1990) and the succession, the leading theory in brand extension, focused in the variables of "Brand Quality", "Fit", "Category" and so on, but little in the process of cognitive and affective processing of evalustion and decision-making. It is an urgent issue for many disputes in this area and a task to test the classic model, revamp the defects of leading theory and explain the conflict.
In research methodology, this study based on the comman theory of associative memory model in decision science, consumer behavior and congnitive neuroscience, designed an experimental paradigms of "Stimulus 1brand name- Stimulus 2 product name" (prime-probe) , and build multistage hypothesis. With the process-based measurement of ERP, we test the the relationships of variables in the hypothesis and build a decriptive evalution and decision-making model and tested it with traditional methods. In research content, this study build a five-stage model: the priming of "brand quality", a dual process mechanism for "categorization" with the valve effect of "similarity" and be congruous in "fittness", be affective evaluated in "attitude" and get the decision output of behavior.
With the ERP laboratory of international standard, this study designed and conducted four laboratorial study in two years, and found the ERP evidences for the critical variables in every stage of the brand extension evaluation and decision -making, so to support the hypothesis. What's more, we analysised the ERP and behavior data in the time interval between stages and build "five-stage model " of brand extension evaluation and decision-making based on the neural mechanism. We also used focus-groups to get the practical support and used surveies with 2448 cases scale to test the model. With the analysis of OLS and SEM Path analysis, we found the "five-stage model" had a better explanatory ability than A&K model, and can also give a unified explaination to many disputes. In the last, this study also analysised the trends of decision neuroscience in top journals of management and science, and designed several study program which can get breakthrough of the frond domain.
The conclusion of this study is as following:
(1) There is a priming of "brand quality" (Stage 1). It can be indexed by LPC, which can be elicited by memory retrieval and incidental affect processing.
(2) There is a "similarity match"(Stage 2). It can be indexed by N270, which can be elicited by mismatch processing.
(3) There is a "categorization"(Stage 3). It can be indexed by P300, which can be elicited by categorization, working memory update and attention.
(4) There is a "fit"(Stage 4). It can be indexed by N400, which can be elicited by conflict processing. N400 can also be regressed by N270 and P300. It means that "fit" is an automatic processing with the homing of "similarity match" and performing of "categorization".
(5) There is a dual categorization process mechanism (category-based processing and piecemeal integration processing) for attitude formation for brand extension and only "categorization" and "fit" relate to it.
(6) There is an "Attitude"(Stage 5). It can be indexed by LPP, which can be elicited by affective evaluation processing. The behavior result can be regressed by N400 and LPP. It means that there is a dual-attitude system in brand extension evaluation and decision-making: "fittness" is cognitive and automatic processing and "attitude" is affective and controlled processing.
The innovation of this study is as following:
(1) Following the trend of decision neuroscience, we used brain scan technology (ERP) to study consumer decision-making.
(2) We supported the classic theory by neural evidence, and perfect the model of brand extension evaluation and decision-making.
(3) "Five-stage model" gave a uniform explaination to the literatural disputes by neural mechanism. For example, the priming effect of brand can explain why "brand quality" was not be supported in A&K model; the categorization supports "fit" (Tauber, 1988) and "evaluation" (Bhat and Reddy, 2001) as the intervening variable; the interaction of the priming effect of brand and conflict congruent effect of "fit" can support the schema theory of Mandler (1982) and explain why Martin and Stewart(2001) could find the inverse "U" in brand extension evaluation but most literatures not.
引文
[1] Aaker, D.A.& Keller, K.L. Consumer Evaluation of Brand Extension [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1990 (54): 27-41
[2] Aaker, J. L. The Malleable Self: The Role Of Self-Expression In Persuasion[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1999, 36(2): 45- 57
[3] Ahluwalia, R.& Gu¨rhan-Canli, Z. The Effects Of Extensions On The Family Brand Name: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000,27(3): 371-381
[4] Allard C R van Riel, Jos L., Hans O. Consumer Evaluation of Service Brand Extension[J]. Journal of Service Research, 2001, 3(3): 220-231
[5] Alba, J. W. & Hutchinson, W. J. Dimensions Of Consumer Expertise[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1987,13(4): 411-454
[6] Alpert, F.& Kamins, M. A. Pioneer Brand Advantage And Consumer Behavior: A Conceptual Framework And Propositional Inventory [J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1994,22(2): 244-253
[7] Ambler, T, Braeutigam, S., Stins, J., et al. Salience and Choice: Neural Correlates of Shopping Decisions[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2004, 21 (4): 247-66
[8] Amodio, M.D, Harmon-Jones, E, Devine G.P., et al. Covert E.A. Neural Signals for the Detection of Unintentional Race Bias[J]. Psychological Science, 2004, 15(11): 88-93
[9] Bargh, J.A., Chaiken S., Raymond P., et al. The Automatic Evaluation Effect: Unconditional Automatic Attitude Activation with a Pronunciation Task[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1996, 32: 104-128
[10]Barone, M. J., Miniard, P. W., & Romeo, J. B. The Influence Of Positive Mood On Brand Extension Evaluations [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000, 26(4): 386-400
[11]Barsalou, L. Ideals Central Tendency and Frequency of Instantiation As Determinants of Graded Structure Categories [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1985, 11(4): 629-654
[12]Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., et al. Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy[J]. Science, 1997,275(28): 1293-1295
[13]Bechara, A., Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy[J]. Science, 1997, 275(28): 1294
[14]Bentin, S., Kutas, M., Hillyard, S.A. Semantic Processing And Memory For Attended And Unattended Words In Dichotic Listening: Behavioral And Electrophysiological Evidence[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1995,24: 54-67
[15]Bentin, S., Peled, B.S. The Contribution Of Task-Related Factors to ERP Repetition Effects as Short and Long Lags[J]. Memory & Cognition, 1990, 18: 359-366
[16]Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. Constructive Consumer Choice Processes[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1998,25(3): 187-218
[17]Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. Investigating the Dimensions of Fit Between a Brand and Its Extension[A]. In D. T. Leclerc, & M. Hartline (Eds.), Proceedings of the American Marketing Association Winter Educators' Conference, 1997: 186- 194. Chicago: American Marketing Association
[18]Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. The Impact of Parent Brand Attribute Associations and Affect on Brand Extension Evaluation[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2001, 53:111-112
[19]Bottomley, P.A., & Doyle, J.R. The Formation of Attitudes Towards Brand Extensions: Testing and Generalising Aaker And Keller's Model[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1996, 13(4): 365-377
[20]Bottomley, P.A., & Holden, S.J.S. Do We Really Know How Consumers Evaluate Brand Extensions? Empirical Generalizations Based on Secondary Analysis of Eight Studies[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, 38(4): 494-500
[21]Botvinick M., Nystrom L.E., Flssell K., et al. Conflict Monitoring Versus Selection-for-Action in Anterior Cingulate Cortex[J]. Nature, 1999,402: 179
[22]Boush, D.M. How Advertising Slogans Can Prime Evaluations of Brand Extensions[J]. Psychology and Marketing, 1993,10(1):, 67-78
[23]Boush, D.M., & Loken, B.A Process-Tracing Study of Brand Extension Evaluation[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1991,28(1): 16-28
[24]Boush, D.M., Shipp, S., Loken, B., et al. Affect Generalization to Similar and Dissimilar Brand Extensions [J]. Psychology and Marketing, 1987,4(3): 225-237
[25]Braun, O.L., & Wicklund, R.A. Psychological Antecedents of Conspicuous Consumption [J]. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1989, 10: 161-187
[26] Bridges, S. A categorization model of brand extensions[D]. Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1990
[27]Bridges, S., Keller, K.L., & Sood, S. Communication Strategies for Brand Extensions: Enhancing Perceived Fit by Establishing Explanatory Links[J]. Journal of Advertising, 2000,29(4): 1-11
[28]Broniarczyk, S.M., & Alba, J.W. The Importance of The Brand in Brand Extension [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1994,31(2): 214-228
[29] Cacioppo, J. T, Gardner, W. L., What underlies medical donor attitudes and behavior?[J]. Health Psychology, 1993,4(12): 269-271
[30]Camerer C., Loewenstein G., Prelec D. Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience Can Inform Economics [J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 2005, XLIII (March): 6-94.
[31]Caramazza & Mahon. The Organization of Conceptual Knowledge: The Evidence From Category-Specific Semantic Deficits[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2003, 7: 354-361
[32] Carter C.S., Braver T.S., Barch D.M., et al. Anterior Cingulated Cortex, Error Detection, And The Online Monitoring of Performance [J]. Science, 1998, 280: 747-749
[33]Chasseigne, G., Mullet, E., & Stewart, T. R. (1997). Aging and Multiple Cue Probability Learning: The Case Of Inverse Relationships [J]. Acta Psychologica, 97(3): 235-252
[34] Chen, A.C.H. & Chen, S.K. Brand Dilution Effect of Extension Failure-A Taiwan Study[J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 2000, 9(4): 243-254
[35] Choi, J. P. Brand Extension as Informational Leverage [J]. Review of Economic Studies, 1998, 65: 655-669
[36]Coates S., Butler L., Berry D., Implicit Memory: A Prime Example for Brand Consideration and Choice [J]. Applied cognitive Psychology, 2004, 18(9): 1195-1211
[37] Cohen, J.B. The Role of Affect in Categorization: Towards a Reconsideration of The Concept of Attitude[J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 1982, 9: 94-100
[38] Colin M., The Hidden Power Of Advertising: How Low Involvement Processing Influences The Way in Which We Choose Brands [J]. International Journal of Market Research, 2002.1.44(1): 121-122
[39]Crites, S L Jr; Cacioppo, J T; Gardner, W L; et al., Bioelectrical echoes from evaluative categorization: II. A late positive brain potential that varies as a function of attitude registration rather than attitude report[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1995,6(68): 997-1013
[40]Cui LL, Wang YP, et al. Human brain subsystems for discrimination of visual shapes[J]. Neuroreport, 2000,11:2415-2418
[41] Cunninghaml, W. A.& Zelazo P. D. Attitudes and evaluations: a social cognitive neuroscience perspective [J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2007,11(3): 97-103
[42]Cuthbert B N , Schupp H T , Bradley M M , et al. Brain potentials in affective picture processing: covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report [J]. Biological Psychology, 2000,52(2) :95
[43]Czellar, S. Consumer attitude toward brand extensions: An integrative model and research propositions[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2003,20:97-115
[44]Dacin, P.A., & Smith, D.C. The effect of brand portfolio characteristics on consumer evaluations of brand extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1994,31(2): 229-242
[45]Daniel.C., Smith, Park, C.W., The Effects of Brand Extensions on Market Share and Advertising Efficiency[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1992, 129: 296-313
[46] Davidson R J. What does the prefrontal cortex "do" in affect: perspectives on frontal EEG asymmetry research [J]. Biological Psychology, 2004,67: 219-233
[47]Deacon D., Breton F., Ritter W., et al. The relationship between N2 and N400: scalp distribution, stimulus probability, and task relevance [J]. Psychophysiology, 1991,28: 185-200
[48]DeBono, K. G. Investigating the social adjustive and value expressive functions of attitudes: implications for persuasion processes[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1987, 52(2): 279-287
[49]DeBono, K.G., & Harnish, R.J. The role of source expertise and source attractiveness in the processing of persuasive messages: a functional approach[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 55(4): 541-546
[50]Dillon, W.R., Madden, T.J., Kirmani, A., et al. Understanding what's in a brand rating: a model for assessing brand and attribute effects and their relationship to brand equity[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, 38(4): 415-429
[51]Dolan, R.J., Fletcher, P.C. Dissociating prefrontal and hippocamp al function in episodic memory encoding[J]. Nature, 1997,388: 582-585
[52]Dominique J.F. de Quervain, Urs Fischbacher, Valerie Treyer, et al, The Neural Basis of Altruistic Punishment[J]. Science, 2004 305,27 (August): 1254-1258
[53]Eagly, A. H. Uneven progress: social psychology and the study of attitudes [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992, 63(5): 693-710
[54]Echambadi et al, Empirical generalizations from brand extension research: How sure are we? [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2006, 23: 253-261
[55]Erdem, T. An empirical analysis of umbrella branding[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1998, 35(3), 339-351
[56]Faircloth, J. B., Capella. L. M., Alford, B. L. The Effect of Brand Attitude and Brand Image on Brand Equity[J]. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 2001, 9(3): 61-75
[57]Falkenstein, M., Hohnsbein, J. & Hoormann, J. Effects of choice complexity on different subcomponents of the late positive complex of the event-related potential [J]. Electroencephalogram Clinical Neurophysiology, 1994, 92: 148-160
[58] Fazio, R.H. & Olson, M.A. Attitudes: foundations, functions, and consequences[M]. In The Handbook of Social Psychology (Hogg, M.A. and Cooper, J., eds), 2003: 139-160, Sage
[59] Fazio, R.H. et al. On the automatic activation of attitudes[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 50: 229-238
[60]Fishbein, M., & Middlestadt, S. Noncognitive effects on attitude formation and change: fact or artifact? [J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1995, 4(2): 181-202
[61]Fiske, S. T. Schema-triggered affect: applications to social perception[M]. In M. S. Clark, & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and Cognition, 1982: 55-77. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
[62]Fiske, S. T. and M. A. Pavelchak, Category-based versus Piecemeal-based Affective Responses: Development in Schema-triggered Affect[M]. Richard M. Sorrentiono and E.T. Higgins eds., The Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, 1986, New York: Cuilford Press
[63] Flaherty, K.E., & Pappas, J.M. Implicit personality theory in evaluation of brand extensions[J]. Psychological Reports, 2000, 86: 807-818
[64] Fournier, S. Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1998, 24(4): 343-373
[65]Fournier, S. & Mick, D.G. Rediscovering satisfaction[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1999, 63(4): 5-24
[66] Franziska, V., Henrik, S., Consumer perception of brand extensions: An investigation of the generalizability of key brand extension research results[J]. Journal of brand management, 2002,32(April):234-241
[67] Gangestad, S.W., & Snyder, M. Self-monitoring: appraisal and reappraisal [J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2000,126: 530-555
[68]Garvin, D. A. What does product quality reality mean? [J]. Sloan Business Review, 1984,50:41-52
[69]Gatignon, H., & Robertson, T. S. A propositional inventory for new diffusion research[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1985,11(4): 849-868
[70]Gehring J.W, Willoughby R.A, The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses[J]. Science, 2002, 295(5563): 2279 -2282
[71] Gilbert, D.T. & Gill, M.J. The momentary realist[J]. Psychological Science, 2000,11:394-398
[72]Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. The importance of brand-specific associations in brand extension: further empirical results[J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 1998, 7(6): 509-518
[73] Goldstein A, Spencer KM & Donchin E. The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and Novelty P3[J]. Psychophysiology, 2002, 39: 781-790.
[74]Greenwald, A.G et al. A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept[J]. Psychological Review, 2002,109: 3-25
[75]Grewal, D. R., Krishnan, B. J., Borin, N., The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers evaluations and purchase intentions[J]. Journal of Retailing, 1998, 74(3): 331-352
[76] Gu¨rhan-Canli, Z., & Maheswaran, D. The effects of extensions on brand name dilution and enhancement[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1998, 35(4): 464-473
[77]Heinze H.J., Luck S.J., Mangun G.R., et al. Visual event-related potentials index focused attention within bilateral stimulus arrays. I. Evidence for early selection[J]. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol, 1990, 75: 511-527
[78]Hogg, M.K., Cox, A.J., & Keeling, K. The impact of selfmonitoring on image congruence and product/brand evaluation [J]. European Journal of Marketing, 2000, 34(5/6): 641-666
[79]Holden, S. J. S., & Barwise, P. An empirical investigation of what it means to generalize[A]. In M. Bergadaa' (Ed.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the European Marketing Academy. 1995, Cergy-Pontoise, France: ESSEC
[80] Hong, Y., Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., & Sacks, R. Implicit theories and evaluative processes in person cognition[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1997, 33(3): 296-323
[81] Hsu, M., Bhatt, M., Adolphs, R., et al. Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making[J]. Science, 2005,310(5754): 1680-1683
[82] Ito T A, Cacioppo J T. Electrophysiological evidence of implicit and explicit categorization processes[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2000, 36: 660-676
[83] Ito, T.A, Larsen, J.T, Smith, N.K., et al. Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1998, 75(4): 887-900
[84]Jacoby, J. Stimulus- organism-response reconsidered: an evolutionary step in modeling (consumer) behavior[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2002, 12(1): 51-58
[85]Jacoby, J., Speller, D.E. & Berning, C.K. Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load - Replication and Extension [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1974,1(1): 33-42
[86]Jacoby, J., Johar, G.V., & Morrin, M. Consumer behavior: a quadrennium [J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 1998,49: 319-344
[87] John, D.R., Loken, B., & Joiner, C. The negative impact of brand extensions: can flagship products be diluted? [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1998, 62(1): 19-32
[88] Jun, S.Y., Mazumdar, T., & Raj, S.P. Effects of technological hierarchy on brand extension evaluations [J]. Journal of Business Research, 1999,46: 31-43
[89]Kapferer, J.N. Strategic brand management (2nd ed.)[M]. 1997, London: Kogan Page
[90] Keller, K. L. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1993, 57(1): 1-22
[91] Keller, K.L. Strategic brand management: building, measuring, and managing brand equity[M]. 1998, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
[92] Keller, K.L., & Aaker, D.A. The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1992,29(2): 35-50
[93]Kerby, J.K., Semantic Generalization in the Formation of Consumer Attitudes[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1967,4(3): 314-317
[94]Kiefer, M., Perceptual, and semantic sources of category-specific effects in object categorization: event-related potentials during picture and word categorization[J]. Memory Cognitive, 2001,29: 100-116
[95]Kiefer, M., Repetition priming modulates category-related effects on event-related potentials: further evidence for multiple cortical semantic systems [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2005, 2: 1-13
[96]Kim, C.K., Lavack, A.M., & Smith, M. Consumer evaluation of vertical brand extensions and core brands[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2001, 52: 211-222
[97]Klink, R.R., & Smith, D.C. Threats to the external validity of brand extension research [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001,38(3): 326-335
[98]Knutson, B., Rick, S., Wimmer, G.E., et al., Neural Predictors of Purchases[J]. Neuron, 2007,4(53): 147-156
[99]Kok, A, Looren de Jong H. Components of the event-related potential following degraded and undegraded visual stimuli [J]. Biological Psychology, 1980, 11: 117-133
[100]Kong, J., Wang, Y.P., Zhang, W.T., et al. Event-related brain potentials elicited by a number discrimination task[J]. Neuroreport, 2000,11: 1195-1197
[101]Kopp, B., Rist, F. & Mattler, U. N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigation executive control [J]. Psychophysiology, 1996, 33: 282-294
[102]Kosslyn, S.M., & Intriligator, J.M., Is cognitive neuropsychology plausible? The perils of sitting on a one-legged stool [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1992,4: 96-106
[103]Krolak-Salmon, P. et al. Early amygdala reaction to fear spreading in occipital,temporal, and frontal cortex: a depth electrode ERP study in human [J]. Neuron, 2004,42: 665-676
[104]Kuhnen, C.M. & Knutson, B., The neural basis of financial risk taking [J]. Neuron. 2005,47(5): 763-70
[105]Kutas M.& Hillyard S.A. Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity [J]. Science, 1980,207: 203-205
[106]Kutas M. & Hillyard SA. Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association [J]. Nature, 1984,307: 161-163
[107]Kutas M. & Hillyard SA. Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity [J]. Science, 1980; 207: 203-205
[108]Laforet, S., Corporate brand hierarchies[D]. Loughboruogh University of Technology, 1995
[109] Lane, V. R.. The impact of ad repetition and ad content on consumer perceptions of incongruent extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2000, 64(2): 80-91
[110]Lehmann, D.R. Consumer behavior and Y2K [Special issue] [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1999,63:14-18
[111]Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. Naturalistic inquiry [M]. 1985, Newbury Park, CA: Sage
[112]Lo A. W. & Repin D.V.,. The Psychophysiology of Real-Time Financial Risk Processing[OL]. NBER Working Papers, 2001, 8508, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc
[113]Loken, B. & John, D.R. Diluting brand beliefs: when do brand extensions have a negative impact? [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1993, 57(3): 71-84
[114]Ma QG, Wang XY, Dai SY, et al., Event-related potential N270 correlates of brand extension[J]. Neuroreport, 2007,10(18): 1031-1034
[115]Ma QG, Wang XY, Shu LC, et al., P300 and categorization in brand extension[J]. Neuroscience Letters, 2008, 68(6):57-61
[116]Mandler. G., The Structure of Value: Accounting for Taste[A], Affect and Cognition: The 17th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Margaret S. Clark and Susan T. Fiske, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982: 3-36
[117]Mao, H. & Krishnan, H. S., Effects of Prototype and Exemplar Fit on Brand Extension Evaluations: A Two-Process Contingency Model[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2006,33: 41-49
[118]Martin A, Wiggs C.L., Ungerleider L.G., et al. Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge [J]. Nature, 1996, 379: 679-652
[119]Martin, I.M., & Stewart, D.W. The differential impact of goal congruency on attitudes, intentions, and the transfer of brand equlity [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, 38(4): 471-484
[120]McCarthy, M.S., Heath, T.B. & Milberg, S. J. New brands versus brand extensions, attitudes versus choice: experimental evidence for theory and practice [J]. Marketing Letters, 2001,12(1): 75-90
[121]McClure, SM, Li, J, Tomlin, D, et al. Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks [J]. Neuron 2004,44: 379-387
[122]Medin, D. L. Concepts and conceptual structure [J]. American Psychologist, 1989,44:1469-1481
[123]Mewis, C.B., Rosch E.H., Categorization of Natural Objects[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 1981, 32: 89-115
[124]Meyers-Levy, J., Louie, T. A., Curren, M. T., How Does the Congruity of Brand Names Affect Evaluations of Brand Name Extensions?[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1994, 79(1): 46-53
[125]Meyvis, T. and Janiszewski C., When are broader brands stronger brands? An accessibility perspective on the success of brand extensions [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2004,31(2): 346-357
[126]Milberg, S.J., Park, C.W., McCarthy, M.S. Managing negative feedback effects associated with brand extensions: the impact of alternative branding strategies [J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1997,6(2): 119-140
[127]Miller, G. A., Lenneberg, E. (Eds.) Psychology and biology of language and thought: Essays in honor of Eric Lenneberg[M], 1978, New York: Academic Press
[128]Miyamoto T., Katayama J. & Koyama T. ERPs, semantic processing and age [J]. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 1998,29: 43-51
[129]Monroe. K. B., & Krishnan, R. The effect of price on subjective product evaluations in perceived quality[M]. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 1985: 209-232
[130] Montague P.R., Berns G.S., Cohen J.D. Hyperscanning: Simultaneous fMRI During Linked Social Interactions [J]. Neuroimage 2002, 16: 1159-1164
[131]Morrin, M. The impact of brand extensions on parent brand memory structures and retrieval processes [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1999, 36(4): 517-525.
[132] Morris, J.S. et al. A differential neural response in the human amygdala to fearful and happy facial expressions [J]. Nature, 1996, 383: 812-815
[133]Niznikiewicz M. & Squires N.K. Phonological processing and the role of strategy in silent reading: Behavioral and electrophysological evidence [J].. Brain Lang., 1996, 52: 342-364
[134]Novak GP, Ritter W, Vaughan HG, et al. Differentiation of negative event-related potentials in an auditory discrimination task. Electroencephal [J]. Clinical Neurophysiology, 1990,75: 255-275
[135]Olichney J.M, Van Petten C., PallerKA, et al. Word repetition in amnesia: Electrophysiological measures of impaired and spared memory [J]. Brain, 2000, 123: 1948-1963
[136]Park, C.W., & McCarthy, M.S. The effects of direct and associative brand extension strategies on consumer responses to brand [J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993,20:28-33
[137] Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J., & McInnis, D.J. Strategic brand concept-image management [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1986, 50(3): 135-145
[138]Park, C.W., Milberg, S., & Lawson, R. Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product-level similarity and brand concept consistency [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1991,18(2): 185-193
[139]Percy, L. & Rossiter, J.R., A Model of Brand Awareness and Brand Attitude Advertising Strategies. Psychology & Marketing, 1992,9(4): 263-274
[140]Pfefferbaum, A., Ford, J.M., Welle,r B.J., et al. ERPs to response production and inhibition. Electroencephal [J], Clin Neurophysiol, 1985,60: 423-434
[141] Phillips, J.A., Noppeney, U., Humphreys, G.W., et al. Can segregation within the semantic system account for category-specific deficits? [J]. Brain, 2002, 125: 2067-2080
[142]Pizzagalli, D., Lehmann, D., Koenig, T. et al. Face-elicited ERPs and affective attitude: brain electric microstate and tomography analyses [J]. Clinical Neurophysiology, 2000, 111(3): 521-531
[143]Posner, I.M, DiGirolamo, J.G, Cognitive Neuroscience: Origins and Promise [J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2000,126(6): 873-889
[144]Pryor, K. & Brodie, R. J. How advertising slogans can prime evaluations of brand extensions: further empirical results [J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 1998, 7(6): 497-508
[145]Rangaswamy, A., Burke, R. R., Oliva, T. A. Brand equity and the extendibility of brand names[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1993,10(3): 61-75
[146]Reddy, S.K., Holak, S.L., & Bhat, S. To extend or not to extend: success determinants of line extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1994, 31(2): 243-262
[147]Ritter, W., Paavilainen, P., Lavikainen, J., et al. Event-related potentials to repetition and change of auditory stimuli [J]. Electroencephal Clinical Neurophysiology, 1992, 83: 306-321
[148]Ritter, W., Simson, R., Vaughan, H.G. Jr, et al. A brain event related to the making of a sensory discrimination [J]. Science, 1979,203: 1358 — 1361
[149]Ritter, W., Simson, R., Vaughan, H.G. Jr. Event-related potential correlates of two stages of information processing in physical and semantic discrimination tasks [J]. Psychophysiology, 1983,20: 168-179
[150] Robinson, W. & Fornell, C., Sources of Market Pioneer Advantages in Consumer Goods Industries [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1985, 22: 305-317
[151]Romeo, J.B. The effect of negative information on the evaluations of brand extensions and the family brand [J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 1991, 18: 399-406
[152]Ruchkin D.S, Munson R, Sutton S. P300 and slow wave to a message consisting of two events [J]. Psychophysiology, 1982,19: 629-642
[153]Rugg M.D, Doyle M.C.& Wells T. Word and nonword repetition within- and across-modality: An event-related potential study [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1995,7: 209-227
[154]Salthouse, T. A. Theoretical perspectives on cognitive aging [M]. 1991, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
[155] Ellis, S. You've seen the movie, now take the brainscan [EB / OL], The Guardian, 2004.7 from http://film.guardian.co.Uk/news/story/0,12589,1230225,00.html
[156] Sams, M., Paavilainen, P., Alho K., et al. Auditory frequency discrimination and event-related potentials [J]. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol, 1985, 62: 437-448
[157]Sanfey G.A., Rilling K.J., Aronson A.J., Nystrom E.L., Cohen D.J., The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game [J]. Science, 2003, 300(13): 1755-1758
[158]Schultz & Wolfram, Getting formal with Dopamine and reward [J]. Neuron, 2002, 36(2): 241-263
[159]Schupp, H T, Cuthbert, B N, Bradley, M M, et al. Affective picture processing: the late positive potential is modulated by motivational relevance [J]. Psychological physiology, 2000, 37 (2): 257
[160]Schupp H T, J unghofer M, Weike A I, et al. Emotional facilitation of sensory processing in the visual cortex [J]. Psychological Science, 2003,14 (1): 7
[161]Semlitch HV, Anderer P, Schuster P, Presslich O. A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts applied to the P300 ERP [J]. Psychophysiology, 1986,23: 695-703
[162]Sheinin, D. A. Positioning brand extensions: implications for beliefs and attitudes [J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 1998, 7(2): 137-149
[163]Sheinin, D.A. The effects of experience with brand extensions on parent brand knowledge [J]. Journal of Business Research, 2000,49: 47-55
[164]Shiffrin, R.M. & Walter S. Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: II Perceptual Learning, Automatic Attending and a General Theory [J]. Psychol. Rev, 1977, 84(2): 127-190
[165]Shiv, B., Bechara, A., Levin, I., et al. Decision Neuroscience[J]. Marketing Letters, 2005,16(3/4): 375-386
[166]Simson, R., Vaughan, H.G. Jr., Ritter, W. The scalp topography of potentials in auditory and visual discrimination tasks [J]. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol, 1977,42:528-535
[167]Smid, H., Jakob, A., Heinze, H.J. An event-related brain potential study of visual selective attention to conjunctions of color and shape [J]. Psychophysiology, 1999, 36: 264-279
[168] Smith, E. E., Shoben E. J., Rips L. J. Structure and Process in Semantic Memory: A Featural Model for Semantic Decisions[J]. Psychological Review, 1974, 81 (3): 214-241
[169] Smith, D. C., & Park, C. W. The effects of brand extensions on market share and advertising efficiency [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1992, 8(29): 296-313
[170]Snyder, M. Self-monitoring of expressive behavior [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 30(4): 526-537
[171]Solomon, M. R. The role of products as social stimuli: a symbolic interactionism perspective [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1983, 10(3): 319-329
[172]Stuss, D.T., Picton, T.W. & Cerri, A.M., Searching for the names of pictures: An event-related potential study [J]. Psychophysiology, 1986,23: 215-223
[173]Sullivan, M.W. Brand extensions: when to use them [J]. Management Science, 1992, 38(6): 793-806
[174]Sunde, L., & Brodie, R.J. Consumer evaluations of brand extensions: further empirical results [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1993, 10(1): 47-53
[175]Sutton S., Braren M., Zubin J., et al. Evoked potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty [J]. Science, 1965,196: 64-67
[176]Swaminathan, V., Fox, R.J., & Reddy, S.K. The impact of brand extension introduction on choice [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2001, 65(4), 1-15
[177]Sz"ucs, D., Solt'esz, F., Czigler, I., et al. Electroencephalography effects to semantic and non-semantic mismatch in properties of visually presented single-characters: The N2b and the N400 [J]. Neuroscience Letters, 2007, 412: 18-23
[178] Seymour, T.S.B., O'Doherty, J.P., Stephan, K.E., et al. Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness of others [J]. Nature 439, 2006, 1(26): 466-469
[179]Tanaka, J.W., Luu, P., Weisbrod, M., et al. Tracking the time course of object categorization using event-related potentials [J]. NeuroReport, 1999, 10: 829-835
[180]Tauber E.M. Brand franchise extensions: new products benefit from existing brand names [J]. Business Horizons 1981; 24(2): 36 - 41
[181]Tauber, E. M. Brand leverage: Strategy for growth in a cost control world[J]. Journal of Advertising Research, 1988, 31 (4): 26-30
[182]Taylor, S.A. & Hunter G.., An Exploratory Investigation into the Antecedents of Satisfaction, Brand Attitude, and Loyalty within the (B2B) eCRM Industry[J]. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 2003(16): 19-35
[183]Tian S.J., Wang Y.P., Wang, et al. Interstimulus interval effect on event-related potential N270 in color matching task [J]. Clinical EEG, 2001, 32: 82-86
[184]Tiltman, D., Mind reading [J]. Marketing (London), 2005.11(23): 37-39
[185]Tversky, A., Features of Similarity[J]. Psychological Review, 1977, 84 (July), 327-352.
[186]Ungerleider, LG. Functional brain imaging studies of cortical mechanisms for memory [J]. Science, 1995,270:769-775
[187]Van, O. SMJ, Alba JW. Consumer Learning and Brand Equity [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000,27 (1):1-16
[188]Vaughan, H G Jr. The Relationship Of Brain Activity To Scalp Recordings Of Event-Related Potentials [M]. In: Donchin E, Lindsley D (eds), Average Evoked Potentials. Washington, DC: NASA, 1969: 45-94
[189]Volckner, F., Sattler, H. Empirical Generalizability Of Consumer Evaluations Of Brand Extensions [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2007, (24): 149-162
[190]Vuilleumier, P. How brains beware: neural mechanisms of emotional attention [J]. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005, 9: 585-594
[191] Wang, H.J., Wang, Y.P., Kong, J., et al. Enhancement of conflict processing activity in human brain under task relevant condition [J]. Neuroscience letters, 2001,298: 155-158
[192] Wang, Y.P., Cui, L.L., Wang, H., et al. The sequential processing of visual feature conjunction mismatches in the human brain [J]. Psychophysiology, 2004, 41:21-29
[193] Wang, Y.P., Kong, J., Tang, X.F., et al. Event-related potential N270 is elicited by mental conflict processing in human brain [J]. Neuroscience letters, 2000, 293: 17-20
[194] Wang, Y.P., Tang, X.F., Kong, J., et al. Different systems in human brain are involved in presemantic discrimination of pictures as revealed by event-related potentials[J].Neuroscience letters,1998,257:143-146
[195]Wang,Y.P.,Tian,S.J.,Wang,H.J.,et al.Event-related potentials evoked by multi-feature conflict under different attentive conditions[J].Experimental Brain Research,2003;148:451-457
[196]Wanke,B.M.Lobster,wine and cigarettes:ad hoc categorizations and the emergence of context effects[J].Marketing Bulletin,1999,10:52-56
[197]Warrington,E.K.,McCarthy,R.,Categories of knowledge[J].Brain,1987,110:1273-1296
[198]Warrington,E.K.,Shallice T.,Category specific semantic impairments[J].Brain,1984,107:829-854
[199]Warlop,L.,Ratneshwar,S.,van Osselaer MJS.Distinctive Brand Cues and Memory for Product Consumption Experiences[J].International Journal of Research in Marketing,2005,22(1):27-45
[200]Wemerfelt,B.Umbrella branding as a signal of new product quality:an example of signaling by posting a bond[J].Rand Journal of Economics,1988,19(3):458-466
[201]Woods,D.L.,Alho,K.& Algazi,A.Intermodal selective attention.Ⅰ.Effects on event-related potentials to lateralized auditory and visual stimuli[J].Electroencephal Clinical Neurophysiol,1992,82:341-355
[202]Yoon,C.,Gutchess,A.H.,Feinberg,F.,Polka,T.A.,Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Neural Dissociations between Brand and Person Judgments[J].Journal of Consumer Research,2006,33:31-40
[203]Zald,D.H.The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli[J].Brain Research Review.2003,41:88-123
[204]Zeithaml,V.A.Consumer perceptions of price,quality,and value:A means end model and synthesis of evidence[J].Journal of Marketing,1988,52:2-22
[205]Zhang Y.Y.,Wang YP,Wang HJ,et al.Different processes are involved in human brain for shape and face comparisons[J].Neuroscience letters,2001,303:157-160
[206]大卫·A·艾克,爱里克·乔瑟米赛勒.品牌领导[M].中译本,北京:新华出版社,2001:5-15
[207]符国群.品牌延伸研究:回顾与展望[J].中国软科学,2003,1:75-81
[208]符国群.约翰·桑德斯.中、美、新三国消费者对品牌延伸的评价[J],经济评论,1995,4:65-69
[209]黄合水.品牌建设精要[M].厦门大学出版社,2004
[210]雷莉,马谋超.品牌延伸评价中的学习机制[J].心理科学,2003,2:360-361
[211]刘凤军.品牌运营论[M].经济科学出版社,2000
[212]刘勇.品牌延伸的评价模型及决策研究[M].上海财经大学出版社,2007.4:15
[213]卢泰宏,谢飙.品牌延伸的评估模型[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),1997,6:8-13
[214]罗跃嘉,魏景汉,中西文的事件相关电位N400研究现状[J].心理学动态,1998,6(3):1-5
[215]罗跃嘉,魏景汉,翁旭初等.汉字视听再认的ERP效应与记忆提取脑机制[J].心理学报,2001,33(6):489-494
[216]马庆国.“管理科学与工程”的学科定位与人才培养[A].《中国管理科学与工程发展报告》,陈宏民主编,2005年3月,三联出版社:14-29
[217]马庆国.管理科学研究方法与研究生学位论文的评判参考标准[J].管理世界,2004.12:99-108
[218]马庆国.中国管理科学研究面临的几个关键问题[J].管理世界,2002.08:105-117
[219]马庆国,王小毅.认知神经科学,神经经济学与神经管理学[J].管理世界,2006(10):139-149
[220]斯科特·普劳斯.决策与判断[M].人民邮电出版社,2007
[221]汪丁丁,叶航,罗卫东.神经元经济学--实证与挑战[M].上海:上海世纪出版集团,2007
[222]薛可,余明阳.品牌延伸资产价值转移与理论模型创建[J].南开管理评论,2003,3:54-60
[223]杨海波.不同类别品牌延伸认知效果的眼动评估[J].心理与行为研究,2006,4(3):194-199
[224]杨青松,钟毅平.事件相关电位与态度研究[J].心理科学,2008,31(2):415-417
[225]杨文俊.大脑高级功能的神经电生理[M].第一版.北京:中国科学技术出版社,1998:102-135
[226]叶航,汪丁丁,贾拥民.科学与实证--一个基于“神经元经济学”的综述[J].经济研究,2007,1:132-142
[227]余明阳.论品牌延伸的评估模型.特区经济,2003.03:13-18
[2] Aaker, J. L. The Malleable Self: The Role Of Self-Expression In Persuasion[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1999, 36(2): 45- 57
[3] Ahluwalia, R.& Gu¨rhan-Canli, Z. The Effects Of Extensions On The Family Brand Name: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000,27(3): 371-381
[4] Allard C R van Riel, Jos L., Hans O. Consumer Evaluation of Service Brand Extension[J]. Journal of Service Research, 2001, 3(3): 220-231
[5] Alba, J. W. & Hutchinson, W. J. Dimensions Of Consumer Expertise[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1987,13(4): 411-454
[6] Alpert, F.& Kamins, M. A. Pioneer Brand Advantage And Consumer Behavior: A Conceptual Framework And Propositional Inventory [J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1994,22(2): 244-253
[7] Ambler, T, Braeutigam, S., Stins, J., et al. Salience and Choice: Neural Correlates of Shopping Decisions[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2004, 21 (4): 247-66
[8] Amodio, M.D, Harmon-Jones, E, Devine G.P., et al. Covert E.A. Neural Signals for the Detection of Unintentional Race Bias[J]. Psychological Science, 2004, 15(11): 88-93
[9] Bargh, J.A., Chaiken S., Raymond P., et al. The Automatic Evaluation Effect: Unconditional Automatic Attitude Activation with a Pronunciation Task[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1996, 32: 104-128
[10]Barone, M. J., Miniard, P. W., & Romeo, J. B. The Influence Of Positive Mood On Brand Extension Evaluations [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000, 26(4): 386-400
[11]Barsalou, L. Ideals Central Tendency and Frequency of Instantiation As Determinants of Graded Structure Categories [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1985, 11(4): 629-654
[12]Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., et al. Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy[J]. Science, 1997,275(28): 1293-1295
[13]Bechara, A., Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy[J]. Science, 1997, 275(28): 1294
[14]Bentin, S., Kutas, M., Hillyard, S.A. Semantic Processing And Memory For Attended And Unattended Words In Dichotic Listening: Behavioral And Electrophysiological Evidence[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1995,24: 54-67
[15]Bentin, S., Peled, B.S. The Contribution Of Task-Related Factors to ERP Repetition Effects as Short and Long Lags[J]. Memory & Cognition, 1990, 18: 359-366
[16]Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. Constructive Consumer Choice Processes[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1998,25(3): 187-218
[17]Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. Investigating the Dimensions of Fit Between a Brand and Its Extension[A]. In D. T. Leclerc, & M. Hartline (Eds.), Proceedings of the American Marketing Association Winter Educators' Conference, 1997: 186- 194. Chicago: American Marketing Association
[18]Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. The Impact of Parent Brand Attribute Associations and Affect on Brand Extension Evaluation[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2001, 53:111-112
[19]Bottomley, P.A., & Doyle, J.R. The Formation of Attitudes Towards Brand Extensions: Testing and Generalising Aaker And Keller's Model[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1996, 13(4): 365-377
[20]Bottomley, P.A., & Holden, S.J.S. Do We Really Know How Consumers Evaluate Brand Extensions? Empirical Generalizations Based on Secondary Analysis of Eight Studies[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, 38(4): 494-500
[21]Botvinick M., Nystrom L.E., Flssell K., et al. Conflict Monitoring Versus Selection-for-Action in Anterior Cingulate Cortex[J]. Nature, 1999,402: 179
[22]Boush, D.M. How Advertising Slogans Can Prime Evaluations of Brand Extensions[J]. Psychology and Marketing, 1993,10(1):, 67-78
[23]Boush, D.M., & Loken, B.A Process-Tracing Study of Brand Extension Evaluation[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1991,28(1): 16-28
[24]Boush, D.M., Shipp, S., Loken, B., et al. Affect Generalization to Similar and Dissimilar Brand Extensions [J]. Psychology and Marketing, 1987,4(3): 225-237
[25]Braun, O.L., & Wicklund, R.A. Psychological Antecedents of Conspicuous Consumption [J]. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1989, 10: 161-187
[26] Bridges, S. A categorization model of brand extensions[D]. Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1990
[27]Bridges, S., Keller, K.L., & Sood, S. Communication Strategies for Brand Extensions: Enhancing Perceived Fit by Establishing Explanatory Links[J]. Journal of Advertising, 2000,29(4): 1-11
[28]Broniarczyk, S.M., & Alba, J.W. The Importance of The Brand in Brand Extension [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1994,31(2): 214-228
[29] Cacioppo, J. T, Gardner, W. L., What underlies medical donor attitudes and behavior?[J]. Health Psychology, 1993,4(12): 269-271
[30]Camerer C., Loewenstein G., Prelec D. Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience Can Inform Economics [J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 2005, XLIII (March): 6-94.
[31]Caramazza & Mahon. The Organization of Conceptual Knowledge: The Evidence From Category-Specific Semantic Deficits[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2003, 7: 354-361
[32] Carter C.S., Braver T.S., Barch D.M., et al. Anterior Cingulated Cortex, Error Detection, And The Online Monitoring of Performance [J]. Science, 1998, 280: 747-749
[33]Chasseigne, G., Mullet, E., & Stewart, T. R. (1997). Aging and Multiple Cue Probability Learning: The Case Of Inverse Relationships [J]. Acta Psychologica, 97(3): 235-252
[34] Chen, A.C.H. & Chen, S.K. Brand Dilution Effect of Extension Failure-A Taiwan Study[J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 2000, 9(4): 243-254
[35] Choi, J. P. Brand Extension as Informational Leverage [J]. Review of Economic Studies, 1998, 65: 655-669
[36]Coates S., Butler L., Berry D., Implicit Memory: A Prime Example for Brand Consideration and Choice [J]. Applied cognitive Psychology, 2004, 18(9): 1195-1211
[37] Cohen, J.B. The Role of Affect in Categorization: Towards a Reconsideration of The Concept of Attitude[J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 1982, 9: 94-100
[38] Colin M., The Hidden Power Of Advertising: How Low Involvement Processing Influences The Way in Which We Choose Brands [J]. International Journal of Market Research, 2002.1.44(1): 121-122
[39]Crites, S L Jr; Cacioppo, J T; Gardner, W L; et al., Bioelectrical echoes from evaluative categorization: II. A late positive brain potential that varies as a function of attitude registration rather than attitude report[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1995,6(68): 997-1013
[40]Cui LL, Wang YP, et al. Human brain subsystems for discrimination of visual shapes[J]. Neuroreport, 2000,11:2415-2418
[41] Cunninghaml, W. A.& Zelazo P. D. Attitudes and evaluations: a social cognitive neuroscience perspective [J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2007,11(3): 97-103
[42]Cuthbert B N , Schupp H T , Bradley M M , et al. Brain potentials in affective picture processing: covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report [J]. Biological Psychology, 2000,52(2) :95
[43]Czellar, S. Consumer attitude toward brand extensions: An integrative model and research propositions[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2003,20:97-115
[44]Dacin, P.A., & Smith, D.C. The effect of brand portfolio characteristics on consumer evaluations of brand extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1994,31(2): 229-242
[45]Daniel.C., Smith, Park, C.W., The Effects of Brand Extensions on Market Share and Advertising Efficiency[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1992, 129: 296-313
[46] Davidson R J. What does the prefrontal cortex "do" in affect: perspectives on frontal EEG asymmetry research [J]. Biological Psychology, 2004,67: 219-233
[47]Deacon D., Breton F., Ritter W., et al. The relationship between N2 and N400: scalp distribution, stimulus probability, and task relevance [J]. Psychophysiology, 1991,28: 185-200
[48]DeBono, K. G. Investigating the social adjustive and value expressive functions of attitudes: implications for persuasion processes[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1987, 52(2): 279-287
[49]DeBono, K.G., & Harnish, R.J. The role of source expertise and source attractiveness in the processing of persuasive messages: a functional approach[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 55(4): 541-546
[50]Dillon, W.R., Madden, T.J., Kirmani, A., et al. Understanding what's in a brand rating: a model for assessing brand and attribute effects and their relationship to brand equity[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, 38(4): 415-429
[51]Dolan, R.J., Fletcher, P.C. Dissociating prefrontal and hippocamp al function in episodic memory encoding[J]. Nature, 1997,388: 582-585
[52]Dominique J.F. de Quervain, Urs Fischbacher, Valerie Treyer, et al, The Neural Basis of Altruistic Punishment[J]. Science, 2004 305,27 (August): 1254-1258
[53]Eagly, A. H. Uneven progress: social psychology and the study of attitudes [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992, 63(5): 693-710
[54]Echambadi et al, Empirical generalizations from brand extension research: How sure are we? [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2006, 23: 253-261
[55]Erdem, T. An empirical analysis of umbrella branding[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1998, 35(3), 339-351
[56]Faircloth, J. B., Capella. L. M., Alford, B. L. The Effect of Brand Attitude and Brand Image on Brand Equity[J]. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 2001, 9(3): 61-75
[57]Falkenstein, M., Hohnsbein, J. & Hoormann, J. Effects of choice complexity on different subcomponents of the late positive complex of the event-related potential [J]. Electroencephalogram Clinical Neurophysiology, 1994, 92: 148-160
[58] Fazio, R.H. & Olson, M.A. Attitudes: foundations, functions, and consequences[M]. In The Handbook of Social Psychology (Hogg, M.A. and Cooper, J., eds), 2003: 139-160, Sage
[59] Fazio, R.H. et al. On the automatic activation of attitudes[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 50: 229-238
[60]Fishbein, M., & Middlestadt, S. Noncognitive effects on attitude formation and change: fact or artifact? [J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1995, 4(2): 181-202
[61]Fiske, S. T. Schema-triggered affect: applications to social perception[M]. In M. S. Clark, & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and Cognition, 1982: 55-77. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
[62]Fiske, S. T. and M. A. Pavelchak, Category-based versus Piecemeal-based Affective Responses: Development in Schema-triggered Affect[M]. Richard M. Sorrentiono and E.T. Higgins eds., The Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, 1986, New York: Cuilford Press
[63] Flaherty, K.E., & Pappas, J.M. Implicit personality theory in evaluation of brand extensions[J]. Psychological Reports, 2000, 86: 807-818
[64] Fournier, S. Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1998, 24(4): 343-373
[65]Fournier, S. & Mick, D.G. Rediscovering satisfaction[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1999, 63(4): 5-24
[66] Franziska, V., Henrik, S., Consumer perception of brand extensions: An investigation of the generalizability of key brand extension research results[J]. Journal of brand management, 2002,32(April):234-241
[67] Gangestad, S.W., & Snyder, M. Self-monitoring: appraisal and reappraisal [J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2000,126: 530-555
[68]Garvin, D. A. What does product quality reality mean? [J]. Sloan Business Review, 1984,50:41-52
[69]Gatignon, H., & Robertson, T. S. A propositional inventory for new diffusion research[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1985,11(4): 849-868
[70]Gehring J.W, Willoughby R.A, The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses[J]. Science, 2002, 295(5563): 2279 -2282
[71] Gilbert, D.T. & Gill, M.J. The momentary realist[J]. Psychological Science, 2000,11:394-398
[72]Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. The importance of brand-specific associations in brand extension: further empirical results[J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 1998, 7(6): 509-518
[73] Goldstein A, Spencer KM & Donchin E. The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and Novelty P3[J]. Psychophysiology, 2002, 39: 781-790.
[74]Greenwald, A.G et al. A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept[J]. Psychological Review, 2002,109: 3-25
[75]Grewal, D. R., Krishnan, B. J., Borin, N., The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers evaluations and purchase intentions[J]. Journal of Retailing, 1998, 74(3): 331-352
[76] Gu¨rhan-Canli, Z., & Maheswaran, D. The effects of extensions on brand name dilution and enhancement[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1998, 35(4): 464-473
[77]Heinze H.J., Luck S.J., Mangun G.R., et al. Visual event-related potentials index focused attention within bilateral stimulus arrays. I. Evidence for early selection[J]. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol, 1990, 75: 511-527
[78]Hogg, M.K., Cox, A.J., & Keeling, K. The impact of selfmonitoring on image congruence and product/brand evaluation [J]. European Journal of Marketing, 2000, 34(5/6): 641-666
[79]Holden, S. J. S., & Barwise, P. An empirical investigation of what it means to generalize[A]. In M. Bergadaa' (Ed.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the European Marketing Academy. 1995, Cergy-Pontoise, France: ESSEC
[80] Hong, Y., Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., & Sacks, R. Implicit theories and evaluative processes in person cognition[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1997, 33(3): 296-323
[81] Hsu, M., Bhatt, M., Adolphs, R., et al. Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making[J]. Science, 2005,310(5754): 1680-1683
[82] Ito T A, Cacioppo J T. Electrophysiological evidence of implicit and explicit categorization processes[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2000, 36: 660-676
[83] Ito, T.A, Larsen, J.T, Smith, N.K., et al. Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1998, 75(4): 887-900
[84]Jacoby, J. Stimulus- organism-response reconsidered: an evolutionary step in modeling (consumer) behavior[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2002, 12(1): 51-58
[85]Jacoby, J., Speller, D.E. & Berning, C.K. Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load - Replication and Extension [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1974,1(1): 33-42
[86]Jacoby, J., Johar, G.V., & Morrin, M. Consumer behavior: a quadrennium [J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 1998,49: 319-344
[87] John, D.R., Loken, B., & Joiner, C. The negative impact of brand extensions: can flagship products be diluted? [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1998, 62(1): 19-32
[88] Jun, S.Y., Mazumdar, T., & Raj, S.P. Effects of technological hierarchy on brand extension evaluations [J]. Journal of Business Research, 1999,46: 31-43
[89]Kapferer, J.N. Strategic brand management (2nd ed.)[M]. 1997, London: Kogan Page
[90] Keller, K. L. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1993, 57(1): 1-22
[91] Keller, K.L. Strategic brand management: building, measuring, and managing brand equity[M]. 1998, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
[92] Keller, K.L., & Aaker, D.A. The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1992,29(2): 35-50
[93]Kerby, J.K., Semantic Generalization in the Formation of Consumer Attitudes[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1967,4(3): 314-317
[94]Kiefer, M., Perceptual, and semantic sources of category-specific effects in object categorization: event-related potentials during picture and word categorization[J]. Memory Cognitive, 2001,29: 100-116
[95]Kiefer, M., Repetition priming modulates category-related effects on event-related potentials: further evidence for multiple cortical semantic systems [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2005, 2: 1-13
[96]Kim, C.K., Lavack, A.M., & Smith, M. Consumer evaluation of vertical brand extensions and core brands[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2001, 52: 211-222
[97]Klink, R.R., & Smith, D.C. Threats to the external validity of brand extension research [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001,38(3): 326-335
[98]Knutson, B., Rick, S., Wimmer, G.E., et al., Neural Predictors of Purchases[J]. Neuron, 2007,4(53): 147-156
[99]Kok, A, Looren de Jong H. Components of the event-related potential following degraded and undegraded visual stimuli [J]. Biological Psychology, 1980, 11: 117-133
[100]Kong, J., Wang, Y.P., Zhang, W.T., et al. Event-related brain potentials elicited by a number discrimination task[J]. Neuroreport, 2000,11: 1195-1197
[101]Kopp, B., Rist, F. & Mattler, U. N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigation executive control [J]. Psychophysiology, 1996, 33: 282-294
[102]Kosslyn, S.M., & Intriligator, J.M., Is cognitive neuropsychology plausible? The perils of sitting on a one-legged stool [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1992,4: 96-106
[103]Krolak-Salmon, P. et al. Early amygdala reaction to fear spreading in occipital,temporal, and frontal cortex: a depth electrode ERP study in human [J]. Neuron, 2004,42: 665-676
[104]Kuhnen, C.M. & Knutson, B., The neural basis of financial risk taking [J]. Neuron. 2005,47(5): 763-70
[105]Kutas M.& Hillyard S.A. Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity [J]. Science, 1980,207: 203-205
[106]Kutas M. & Hillyard SA. Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association [J]. Nature, 1984,307: 161-163
[107]Kutas M. & Hillyard SA. Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity [J]. Science, 1980; 207: 203-205
[108]Laforet, S., Corporate brand hierarchies[D]. Loughboruogh University of Technology, 1995
[109] Lane, V. R.. The impact of ad repetition and ad content on consumer perceptions of incongruent extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2000, 64(2): 80-91
[110]Lehmann, D.R. Consumer behavior and Y2K [Special issue] [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1999,63:14-18
[111]Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. Naturalistic inquiry [M]. 1985, Newbury Park, CA: Sage
[112]Lo A. W. & Repin D.V.,. The Psychophysiology of Real-Time Financial Risk Processing[OL]. NBER Working Papers, 2001, 8508, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc
[113]Loken, B. & John, D.R. Diluting brand beliefs: when do brand extensions have a negative impact? [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1993, 57(3): 71-84
[114]Ma QG, Wang XY, Dai SY, et al., Event-related potential N270 correlates of brand extension[J]. Neuroreport, 2007,10(18): 1031-1034
[115]Ma QG, Wang XY, Shu LC, et al., P300 and categorization in brand extension[J]. Neuroscience Letters, 2008, 68(6):57-61
[116]Mandler. G., The Structure of Value: Accounting for Taste[A], Affect and Cognition: The 17th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Margaret S. Clark and Susan T. Fiske, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982: 3-36
[117]Mao, H. & Krishnan, H. S., Effects of Prototype and Exemplar Fit on Brand Extension Evaluations: A Two-Process Contingency Model[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2006,33: 41-49
[118]Martin A, Wiggs C.L., Ungerleider L.G., et al. Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge [J]. Nature, 1996, 379: 679-652
[119]Martin, I.M., & Stewart, D.W. The differential impact of goal congruency on attitudes, intentions, and the transfer of brand equlity [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, 38(4): 471-484
[120]McCarthy, M.S., Heath, T.B. & Milberg, S. J. New brands versus brand extensions, attitudes versus choice: experimental evidence for theory and practice [J]. Marketing Letters, 2001,12(1): 75-90
[121]McClure, SM, Li, J, Tomlin, D, et al. Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks [J]. Neuron 2004,44: 379-387
[122]Medin, D. L. Concepts and conceptual structure [J]. American Psychologist, 1989,44:1469-1481
[123]Mewis, C.B., Rosch E.H., Categorization of Natural Objects[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 1981, 32: 89-115
[124]Meyers-Levy, J., Louie, T. A., Curren, M. T., How Does the Congruity of Brand Names Affect Evaluations of Brand Name Extensions?[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1994, 79(1): 46-53
[125]Meyvis, T. and Janiszewski C., When are broader brands stronger brands? An accessibility perspective on the success of brand extensions [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2004,31(2): 346-357
[126]Milberg, S.J., Park, C.W., McCarthy, M.S. Managing negative feedback effects associated with brand extensions: the impact of alternative branding strategies [J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1997,6(2): 119-140
[127]Miller, G. A., Lenneberg, E. (Eds.) Psychology and biology of language and thought: Essays in honor of Eric Lenneberg[M], 1978, New York: Academic Press
[128]Miyamoto T., Katayama J. & Koyama T. ERPs, semantic processing and age [J]. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 1998,29: 43-51
[129]Monroe. K. B., & Krishnan, R. The effect of price on subjective product evaluations in perceived quality[M]. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 1985: 209-232
[130] Montague P.R., Berns G.S., Cohen J.D. Hyperscanning: Simultaneous fMRI During Linked Social Interactions [J]. Neuroimage 2002, 16: 1159-1164
[131]Morrin, M. The impact of brand extensions on parent brand memory structures and retrieval processes [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1999, 36(4): 517-525.
[132] Morris, J.S. et al. A differential neural response in the human amygdala to fearful and happy facial expressions [J]. Nature, 1996, 383: 812-815
[133]Niznikiewicz M. & Squires N.K. Phonological processing and the role of strategy in silent reading: Behavioral and electrophysological evidence [J].. Brain Lang., 1996, 52: 342-364
[134]Novak GP, Ritter W, Vaughan HG, et al. Differentiation of negative event-related potentials in an auditory discrimination task. Electroencephal [J]. Clinical Neurophysiology, 1990,75: 255-275
[135]Olichney J.M, Van Petten C., PallerKA, et al. Word repetition in amnesia: Electrophysiological measures of impaired and spared memory [J]. Brain, 2000, 123: 1948-1963
[136]Park, C.W., & McCarthy, M.S. The effects of direct and associative brand extension strategies on consumer responses to brand [J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993,20:28-33
[137] Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J., & McInnis, D.J. Strategic brand concept-image management [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1986, 50(3): 135-145
[138]Park, C.W., Milberg, S., & Lawson, R. Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product-level similarity and brand concept consistency [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1991,18(2): 185-193
[139]Percy, L. & Rossiter, J.R., A Model of Brand Awareness and Brand Attitude Advertising Strategies. Psychology & Marketing, 1992,9(4): 263-274
[140]Pfefferbaum, A., Ford, J.M., Welle,r B.J., et al. ERPs to response production and inhibition. Electroencephal [J], Clin Neurophysiol, 1985,60: 423-434
[141] Phillips, J.A., Noppeney, U., Humphreys, G.W., et al. Can segregation within the semantic system account for category-specific deficits? [J]. Brain, 2002, 125: 2067-2080
[142]Pizzagalli, D., Lehmann, D., Koenig, T. et al. Face-elicited ERPs and affective attitude: brain electric microstate and tomography analyses [J]. Clinical Neurophysiology, 2000, 111(3): 521-531
[143]Posner, I.M, DiGirolamo, J.G, Cognitive Neuroscience: Origins and Promise [J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2000,126(6): 873-889
[144]Pryor, K. & Brodie, R. J. How advertising slogans can prime evaluations of brand extensions: further empirical results [J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 1998, 7(6): 497-508
[145]Rangaswamy, A., Burke, R. R., Oliva, T. A. Brand equity and the extendibility of brand names[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1993,10(3): 61-75
[146]Reddy, S.K., Holak, S.L., & Bhat, S. To extend or not to extend: success determinants of line extensions [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1994, 31(2): 243-262
[147]Ritter, W., Paavilainen, P., Lavikainen, J., et al. Event-related potentials to repetition and change of auditory stimuli [J]. Electroencephal Clinical Neurophysiology, 1992, 83: 306-321
[148]Ritter, W., Simson, R., Vaughan, H.G. Jr, et al. A brain event related to the making of a sensory discrimination [J]. Science, 1979,203: 1358 — 1361
[149]Ritter, W., Simson, R., Vaughan, H.G. Jr. Event-related potential correlates of two stages of information processing in physical and semantic discrimination tasks [J]. Psychophysiology, 1983,20: 168-179
[150] Robinson, W. & Fornell, C., Sources of Market Pioneer Advantages in Consumer Goods Industries [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1985, 22: 305-317
[151]Romeo, J.B. The effect of negative information on the evaluations of brand extensions and the family brand [J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 1991, 18: 399-406
[152]Ruchkin D.S, Munson R, Sutton S. P300 and slow wave to a message consisting of two events [J]. Psychophysiology, 1982,19: 629-642
[153]Rugg M.D, Doyle M.C.& Wells T. Word and nonword repetition within- and across-modality: An event-related potential study [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1995,7: 209-227
[154]Salthouse, T. A. Theoretical perspectives on cognitive aging [M]. 1991, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
[155] Ellis, S. You've seen the movie, now take the brainscan [EB / OL], The Guardian, 2004.7 from http://film.guardian.co.Uk/news/story/0,12589,1230225,00.html
[156] Sams, M., Paavilainen, P., Alho K., et al. Auditory frequency discrimination and event-related potentials [J]. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol, 1985, 62: 437-448
[157]Sanfey G.A., Rilling K.J., Aronson A.J., Nystrom E.L., Cohen D.J., The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game [J]. Science, 2003, 300(13): 1755-1758
[158]Schultz & Wolfram, Getting formal with Dopamine and reward [J]. Neuron, 2002, 36(2): 241-263
[159]Schupp, H T, Cuthbert, B N, Bradley, M M, et al. Affective picture processing: the late positive potential is modulated by motivational relevance [J]. Psychological physiology, 2000, 37 (2): 257
[160]Schupp H T, J unghofer M, Weike A I, et al. Emotional facilitation of sensory processing in the visual cortex [J]. Psychological Science, 2003,14 (1): 7
[161]Semlitch HV, Anderer P, Schuster P, Presslich O. A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts applied to the P300 ERP [J]. Psychophysiology, 1986,23: 695-703
[162]Sheinin, D. A. Positioning brand extensions: implications for beliefs and attitudes [J]. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 1998, 7(2): 137-149
[163]Sheinin, D.A. The effects of experience with brand extensions on parent brand knowledge [J]. Journal of Business Research, 2000,49: 47-55
[164]Shiffrin, R.M. & Walter S. Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: II Perceptual Learning, Automatic Attending and a General Theory [J]. Psychol. Rev, 1977, 84(2): 127-190
[165]Shiv, B., Bechara, A., Levin, I., et al. Decision Neuroscience[J]. Marketing Letters, 2005,16(3/4): 375-386
[166]Simson, R., Vaughan, H.G. Jr., Ritter, W. The scalp topography of potentials in auditory and visual discrimination tasks [J]. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol, 1977,42:528-535
[167]Smid, H., Jakob, A., Heinze, H.J. An event-related brain potential study of visual selective attention to conjunctions of color and shape [J]. Psychophysiology, 1999, 36: 264-279
[168] Smith, E. E., Shoben E. J., Rips L. J. Structure and Process in Semantic Memory: A Featural Model for Semantic Decisions[J]. Psychological Review, 1974, 81 (3): 214-241
[169] Smith, D. C., & Park, C. W. The effects of brand extensions on market share and advertising efficiency [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1992, 8(29): 296-313
[170]Snyder, M. Self-monitoring of expressive behavior [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 30(4): 526-537
[171]Solomon, M. R. The role of products as social stimuli: a symbolic interactionism perspective [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1983, 10(3): 319-329
[172]Stuss, D.T., Picton, T.W. & Cerri, A.M., Searching for the names of pictures: An event-related potential study [J]. Psychophysiology, 1986,23: 215-223
[173]Sullivan, M.W. Brand extensions: when to use them [J]. Management Science, 1992, 38(6): 793-806
[174]Sunde, L., & Brodie, R.J. Consumer evaluations of brand extensions: further empirical results [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1993, 10(1): 47-53
[175]Sutton S., Braren M., Zubin J., et al. Evoked potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty [J]. Science, 1965,196: 64-67
[176]Swaminathan, V., Fox, R.J., & Reddy, S.K. The impact of brand extension introduction on choice [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2001, 65(4), 1-15
[177]Sz"ucs, D., Solt'esz, F., Czigler, I., et al. Electroencephalography effects to semantic and non-semantic mismatch in properties of visually presented single-characters: The N2b and the N400 [J]. Neuroscience Letters, 2007, 412: 18-23
[178] Seymour, T.S.B., O'Doherty, J.P., Stephan, K.E., et al. Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness of others [J]. Nature 439, 2006, 1(26): 466-469
[179]Tanaka, J.W., Luu, P., Weisbrod, M., et al. Tracking the time course of object categorization using event-related potentials [J]. NeuroReport, 1999, 10: 829-835
[180]Tauber E.M. Brand franchise extensions: new products benefit from existing brand names [J]. Business Horizons 1981; 24(2): 36 - 41
[181]Tauber, E. M. Brand leverage: Strategy for growth in a cost control world[J]. Journal of Advertising Research, 1988, 31 (4): 26-30
[182]Taylor, S.A. & Hunter G.., An Exploratory Investigation into the Antecedents of Satisfaction, Brand Attitude, and Loyalty within the (B2B) eCRM Industry[J]. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 2003(16): 19-35
[183]Tian S.J., Wang Y.P., Wang, et al. Interstimulus interval effect on event-related potential N270 in color matching task [J]. Clinical EEG, 2001, 32: 82-86
[184]Tiltman, D., Mind reading [J]. Marketing (London), 2005.11(23): 37-39
[185]Tversky, A., Features of Similarity[J]. Psychological Review, 1977, 84 (July), 327-352.
[186]Ungerleider, LG. Functional brain imaging studies of cortical mechanisms for memory [J]. Science, 1995,270:769-775
[187]Van, O. SMJ, Alba JW. Consumer Learning and Brand Equity [J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000,27 (1):1-16
[188]Vaughan, H G Jr. The Relationship Of Brain Activity To Scalp Recordings Of Event-Related Potentials [M]. In: Donchin E, Lindsley D (eds), Average Evoked Potentials. Washington, DC: NASA, 1969: 45-94
[189]Volckner, F., Sattler, H. Empirical Generalizability Of Consumer Evaluations Of Brand Extensions [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2007, (24): 149-162
[190]Vuilleumier, P. How brains beware: neural mechanisms of emotional attention [J]. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005, 9: 585-594
[191] Wang, H.J., Wang, Y.P., Kong, J., et al. Enhancement of conflict processing activity in human brain under task relevant condition [J]. Neuroscience letters, 2001,298: 155-158
[192] Wang, Y.P., Cui, L.L., Wang, H., et al. The sequential processing of visual feature conjunction mismatches in the human brain [J]. Psychophysiology, 2004, 41:21-29
[193] Wang, Y.P., Kong, J., Tang, X.F., et al. Event-related potential N270 is elicited by mental conflict processing in human brain [J]. Neuroscience letters, 2000, 293: 17-20
[194] Wang, Y.P., Tang, X.F., Kong, J., et al. Different systems in human brain are involved in presemantic discrimination of pictures as revealed by event-related potentials[J].Neuroscience letters,1998,257:143-146
[195]Wang,Y.P.,Tian,S.J.,Wang,H.J.,et al.Event-related potentials evoked by multi-feature conflict under different attentive conditions[J].Experimental Brain Research,2003;148:451-457
[196]Wanke,B.M.Lobster,wine and cigarettes:ad hoc categorizations and the emergence of context effects[J].Marketing Bulletin,1999,10:52-56
[197]Warrington,E.K.,McCarthy,R.,Categories of knowledge[J].Brain,1987,110:1273-1296
[198]Warrington,E.K.,Shallice T.,Category specific semantic impairments[J].Brain,1984,107:829-854
[199]Warlop,L.,Ratneshwar,S.,van Osselaer MJS.Distinctive Brand Cues and Memory for Product Consumption Experiences[J].International Journal of Research in Marketing,2005,22(1):27-45
[200]Wemerfelt,B.Umbrella branding as a signal of new product quality:an example of signaling by posting a bond[J].Rand Journal of Economics,1988,19(3):458-466
[201]Woods,D.L.,Alho,K.& Algazi,A.Intermodal selective attention.Ⅰ.Effects on event-related potentials to lateralized auditory and visual stimuli[J].Electroencephal Clinical Neurophysiol,1992,82:341-355
[202]Yoon,C.,Gutchess,A.H.,Feinberg,F.,Polka,T.A.,Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Neural Dissociations between Brand and Person Judgments[J].Journal of Consumer Research,2006,33:31-40
[203]Zald,D.H.The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli[J].Brain Research Review.2003,41:88-123
[204]Zeithaml,V.A.Consumer perceptions of price,quality,and value:A means end model and synthesis of evidence[J].Journal of Marketing,1988,52:2-22
[205]Zhang Y.Y.,Wang YP,Wang HJ,et al.Different processes are involved in human brain for shape and face comparisons[J].Neuroscience letters,2001,303:157-160
[206]大卫·A·艾克,爱里克·乔瑟米赛勒.品牌领导[M].中译本,北京:新华出版社,2001:5-15
[207]符国群.品牌延伸研究:回顾与展望[J].中国软科学,2003,1:75-81
[208]符国群.约翰·桑德斯.中、美、新三国消费者对品牌延伸的评价[J],经济评论,1995,4:65-69
[209]黄合水.品牌建设精要[M].厦门大学出版社,2004
[210]雷莉,马谋超.品牌延伸评价中的学习机制[J].心理科学,2003,2:360-361
[211]刘凤军.品牌运营论[M].经济科学出版社,2000
[212]刘勇.品牌延伸的评价模型及决策研究[M].上海财经大学出版社,2007.4:15
[213]卢泰宏,谢飙.品牌延伸的评估模型[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),1997,6:8-13
[214]罗跃嘉,魏景汉,中西文的事件相关电位N400研究现状[J].心理学动态,1998,6(3):1-5
[215]罗跃嘉,魏景汉,翁旭初等.汉字视听再认的ERP效应与记忆提取脑机制[J].心理学报,2001,33(6):489-494
[216]马庆国.“管理科学与工程”的学科定位与人才培养[A].《中国管理科学与工程发展报告》,陈宏民主编,2005年3月,三联出版社:14-29
[217]马庆国.管理科学研究方法与研究生学位论文的评判参考标准[J].管理世界,2004.12:99-108
[218]马庆国.中国管理科学研究面临的几个关键问题[J].管理世界,2002.08:105-117
[219]马庆国,王小毅.认知神经科学,神经经济学与神经管理学[J].管理世界,2006(10):139-149
[220]斯科特·普劳斯.决策与判断[M].人民邮电出版社,2007
[221]汪丁丁,叶航,罗卫东.神经元经济学--实证与挑战[M].上海:上海世纪出版集团,2007
[222]薛可,余明阳.品牌延伸资产价值转移与理论模型创建[J].南开管理评论,2003,3:54-60
[223]杨海波.不同类别品牌延伸认知效果的眼动评估[J].心理与行为研究,2006,4(3):194-199
[224]杨青松,钟毅平.事件相关电位与态度研究[J].心理科学,2008,31(2):415-417
[225]杨文俊.大脑高级功能的神经电生理[M].第一版.北京:中国科学技术出版社,1998:102-135
[226]叶航,汪丁丁,贾拥民.科学与实证--一个基于“神经元经济学”的综述[J].经济研究,2007,1:132-142
[227]余明阳.论品牌延伸的评估模型.特区经济,2003.03:13-18
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |