Customer-based brand equity has many dimensions, however a general acceptance as to which dimensions to use when measuring customer-based brand equity has not being decided. This study reviews empirical results of literatures that utilized Aaker’s and Keller’s model in measuring brand equity and sum up the main or significant customer-based brand equity. The findings indicate that it is empirical difficult differentiating between brand awareness and brand association.

1. WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
International Journal of Marketing Research
JUNE 2013 VOL.1, No,4
The Significant Dimensions of Customer-Based
Brand Equity
Isaac Twum Asare
Glorious Sun School of Business and Management, Donghua University
West Yan An Road 1882
Accepted 15 June 2013
Abstract
Customer-based brand equity has many dimensions, however a general acceptance as to which
dimensions to use when measuring customer-based brand equity has not being decided. This study
reviews empirical results of literatures that utilized Aaker’s and Keller’s model in measuring brand
equity and sum up the main or significant customer-based brand equity. The findings indicate that it is
empirical difficult differentiating between brand awareness and brand association.
Keywords: customer-based brand equity, brand association, brand awareness
1. Introduction
In today’s competitive business environment, brand equity has been one of the core issues in most
marketing research since it has found to create value for both the firm and the customer (Aaker, 1991).
Value to the firm by enhancing efficiency and effectiveness of marketing programs, brand loyalty,
price premiums, brand extensions, trade leverage, etc. and value to the customer via enhanced
information interpretation and processing purchase decision confidence and satisfaction.
Brand Equity has many definitions and forms. Various authors are of the same notion that brand
equity can be created, maintained and intensified by strengthening one of its dimensions (Villarejo and
Sanchez-Franco, 2005). A brand with high quality perceptions, that customers have a strong and
positive associations related to and are loyal to is said to have high brand equity (Yoo, Donthu and Lee,
2000).
Yoo, Donthu and Lee (2000) define brand equity as the difference in consumer choice between the
focal branded product and an unbranded product given the same level of product features. Aaker (1991,
1996) proposes that brand equity is a multidimensional concept consisting of brand loyalty, brand
awareness, perceived quality, brand associations and other proprietary brand assets. The fifth brand asset,
other proprietary brand assets consists of patents, trademarks, etc and not too relevant in customer-based
brand equity. Therefore, we will not consider this in the dimensions of customer-based brand equity.
Keller (1993) however suggests brand knowledge, consisting brand awareness and brand image. Lasser,
Mittal and Sharma (1995) suggest brand equity is based on five underlying dimensions: performance,
value, social image, trustworthiness and commitment, whereas Srivastava and Shocker (1991) view
brand equity as consisting two components-brand strength and brand value. Over the years, Keller’s and
Aaker’s concepts have been the most used concepts in many academic research articles. A critical study
of these two models reveals Keller’s model is a subset of Aaker’s model.
This paper reviews scholarly articles in brand equity and from their findings draws a conclusion on
the main customer-based brand equity dimensions that really captures the brand equity or value a
branded product has over unbranded product. Since the main focus of the article is on the dimensions
of brand equity, less will be discussed about the antecedents (marketing activities) of brand equity. In
other words, these selected articles empirical results will be reviewed and analyzed, and the main
dimensions of brand equity will be made.
This paper begins with a revision of the brand equity dimensions of Aaker and Keller. Which items to to
capture the outlined dimensions will not be dealt with in this study. Next, the main dimensions will be
deducted from their models, which will be followed by articles that supports these main/significant
dimensions which are Brand Awareness/Association (Brand Knowledge), Perceived Quality and
90

2. WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
Brand Loyalty.
Brand Awareness with Association: Brand awareness relates to the likelihood that a brand name
easily comes to the mind of a consumer and it consists of brand recognition and brand recall (Keller,
1993). Similarly, Aaker (1991) defines brand awareness as the ability of a consumer to recognize or
recall that a brand is a member of a product category. In building brand equity, the first step is to create
brand awareness. It plays a critical role in consumer decision making for three major reasons: “It is
important that consumers think of a brand when they think about the product category, brand awareness
can affect decisions about brands in the consideration set, even if there are essentially no other brand
associations and brand awareness affects consumer decision making by influencing the formation and
strength of brand associations in the brand image”. Brand awareness is measured through brand
recognition and recall (Aaker, 1996; Keller, 2003)
Aaker (1991) defines brand association as “anything linked in memory to a brand”. Keller beliefs brand
association (or brand image, a dimension of brand knowledge) which are held in the minds of
consumers are the other informational nodes connected to the to the brand node in memory. The
meaning of the brand is stored in these consumers’ nodes in memory. Purchasing decisions are made
based on the images formed through brand associations and are related to a series of tangible and
intangible attributes associated with the brand (Villarejo and Sanchez-Franco, 2005). Brand associations
are very important to marketers (differentiation, positioning and brand extensions to create positive
attitudes and feelings towards the brand) and consumers (processing, organizing and information
retrieve to aid in making purchase decision) (Low and Lamb Jnr., 2000). Brand Association is closely
related to brand awareness since both brand equity dimensions arise from the consumer-brand contact
(Aaker, 1991) and are reported to precede perceived quality and brand loyalty in the hierarchy of effects
model (Levidge and Steiner, 1961).
These two dimensions (brand awareness and brand association) are highly correlated but not
synonymous since one can be aware of a brand without having any strong links in memory (Washburn
and Plank, 2002).
Perceived Quality: This is based on consumer’s subjective evaluations of a product’s quality. Zeithaml
(1988) defines perceived quality as the “consumer’s judgments about a products overall excellence or
superiority”. A consumer’s personal experience with a product, unique needs and expectations,
consumption condition may influence the consumer’s judgments of the product quality (Yoo, Donthu
and Lee, 2001). Perceived quality can also be seen as the quality perception of consumers comparing a
products quality or superiority of the product or service with respect to its intended purpose, relative to
alternative. A products performance, features, reliability, durability, serviceability are some factors that
influence its perceived quality. Perceived quality is regarded as a core Customer-Based Brand Equity
construct because of its association with the willingness to pay a price premium, intention to purchase a
brand and choice of brand (Netemeyer et. al, 2004). Brand equity is positively related to perceived
quality but that a high perceived quality does not necessarily mean high brand equity (Yoo, et al, 2001).
Brand loyalty: Creativity, building and maintaining brand loyalty has been an important issue for
most marketers in establishing sustainable competitive advantage. Brand loyalty, a reflection of brand
equity refers to the tendency to be committed to a focal brand demonstrated through the intention of
purchasing that brand as a primary choice (Oliver, 1997). Routine purchase of a brand without
switching to other brand is referred to as brand loyalty. This brand equity dimension is composed of two
different components; attitudinal (which includes cognitive, affective and behavioral intent dimensions)
and behavioral (repeat buying behavior) (Dick and Bass, 1994, Taylor et.al, 2004). This dimension plays
an outstanding role in creating brand equity. (Aaker, 1991; Grover and Srinivasan, 1992). There are
different levels of brand loyalty. Trust plays a vital role in augmenting both behavioral and attitudinal
loyalty which makes consumers purchase a brand routinely and resist switching to another brand.
2. Literature Review
As stated earlier, the main/significant dimensions of brand equity are Brand Awareness/Association
(Brand Knowledge), Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty. Developing the right items to measure these
three significant dimensions, the brand equity of a product can be well captured.
We begin by reviewing Yoo, Donthu and Lee (2000) paper, where they researched into how
marketing activities can increase and decrease brand equity. They employed perceived quality, brand
loyalty and brand awareness with strong associations as common dimensions of brand equity in their
research. They suggest by strengthening the dimensions of brand equity, brand equity can be created
maintained, and expanded. Villajero and Sanchez-Franco (2005) also agree with Yoo et al. (2000) that
brand equity can be created, maintained and intensified by strengthening one of its dimensions.
91

3. WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
Data from 569 respondents for twelve brands covering three product categories (athletic shoes,
camera film, and color television) were collected. Reliability and confirmatory analysis were performed
and was followed by Structural Equation Model (SEM). Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor analysis
resulted in only three brand equity dimensions (perceived quality, brand loyalty and brand awareness
with strong associations) and these were used as the endogenous mediating constructs which were
related to the last endogenous construct, overall brand equity in their SEM. Structural equation model
was used to estimate the parameters of their model. In their SEM results, brand equity was positively
related to perceived quality, brand loyalty and brand associations with awareness.
Yoo, Donthu and Lee (2000) analysis revealed that there are two types of marketing managerial
effort; brand building (high advertising, high price, high distribution through retailers with good store
image) and brand harming (frequent use of price promotion). They presented some limitations of their
research but the prominent one is looking at the interaction among the marketing efforts and how they
affect the brand equity through the dimensions.
To further support that brand knowledge, perceived quality and brand loyalty are the significant
dimensions of brand equity, Yoo and Donthu (2001) article titled “Developing and Validating a
Multidimensional Consumer-Based Brand Equity Scaled was reviewed.” This paper was selected to
show that these three dimensions can be used in cross cultural brand equity studies. Using the same
product category in their previous paper (Yoo et. al, 2000), due to its familiarity, difference in price
range, frequency of purchase, product involvement, consumption situation, they used an etic approach
in developing brand equity measure. The researchers analyzed data from a total of 1530 eligible
responses (633 Koreans, 320 Korean Americans and 577 Americans) on three levels: an individual
analysis (to determine common items across samples); a multi-group analysis to examine factorial
invariance; and an individual-level multicultural factor analysis (pooled analysis).
Reliability analysis were significant in all four brand dimensions (Aaker, 1991) however,
exploratory factor analysis resulted in three dimensions because of the inseparability of brand awareness
and brand association. Further confirmatory analysis supported the three-dimension model (model
comprised brand loyalty, perceived quality and brand awareness/association). The χ2 fit index for the
three-dimension model was better than any of the other model. Other values of fit (χ2 fit index,
goodness of fit index, comparative fit index, etc) were all significant in the three-dimension model.
The three-dimension model was then used for the multi group analysis then followed by the pooled
analysis.
Results from the pooled failed to produce the expected four dimensions of brand equity due to lack
of discriminant validity between brand awareness and associations. The three-dimension showed a
better fit (χ2 d.f=32=326.19, see Yoo and Donthu, 2001, pp.9).
Table 1: Intercorrelations among Brand dimensions
Source: B. Yoo and N. Donthu (2001), pg 8
To buttress the three-model dimension, Washburn and Plank (2002) paper was examined. The
reason for selecting this paper is to demonstrate that other product categories apart from what Yoo et. al,
(2000;2001) used in their research as well as co-branding can also be measured using these three brand
equity dimensions. Washburn and Plank investigated empirically the psychometric properties of Yoo
and Donthu’s (1997, 2001) customer-based brand equity scale within the context of a co-branding study.
Their analysis examined consumer-based brand equity in the context of co-branded products and
focused on the brand equity scale and its properties, not on the effects of co-branding. Due to this
purpose, they utilized the same scales as Yoo and Donthu (1997), questions used were identical but were
92

4. WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
evaluated on a seven point rather than the five –point response scale employed by Yoo and Donthu.
Using the CALIS procedure in SAS, both the four-factor and three factor models were analyzed on the
six samples (potato chip/barbecue sauce, towel/disinfectant, high equity, low equity and mixed
co-brands in both product classes, and combination of all brands) in their research. Their results
supported Yoo and Donthu’s that groups together brand awareness and brand association forming one
dimension called brand knowledge.
Furthermore, Gil et. al (2007) study results on the role played by the family on consumer-based
brand equity is examined. Their analysis was divided into three sections: effects of the information
provided by both family and firm through its marketing actions (they selected advertising, price and
promotion); relationships between dimensions of brand equity; and the relationship between each
dimension and overall brand equity. Random data were gathered from 360 young adults aged between
18 and 35 years from a major city in Spain for their empirical work. The highest and lowest brands
familiar to the sample in the three product categories (olive oil, toothpaste and milk) were selected and
used in their research. The reliability and dimensionality of the scales were tested and results were
above the values generally accepted. This was followed by confirmatory analysis of the scales through
the EQS software to study convergent and discriminant validity. Regarding convergent validity criteria,
items with factor loadings below 0.5 were removed. However discriminant validity results for
awareness and associations intervals contained the value 1. They considered two alternatives; joint
dimension and establishing a second order structure. Results indicated that joint dimension of brand
awareness and brand association, on the whole had a better fit. The three-dimension model was then
employed in the rest of their research in which they concluded that positive brand information by the
family has an important influence on brand equity formation process.
Steve Hoeffler and Kevin Keller (2002) describe six means by which corporate societal marketing
(CSM) programs can build brand equity and among the six is building brand awareness, which they
refer to the customer’s ability to recall and recognize the brand. They further states that brand awareness
also involves linking the brand (brand name, logo, symbol) to certain associations in memory. It can be
concluded that brand awareness and brand association are very highly correlated. They distinguish
brand awareness into two key dimensions; breadth and depth. From this perspective, the breadth can be
considered as being aware of the brand (example ikea) and the depth as linking the brand to certain
association (linking ikea to family). Consumers first need to be aware of a product before strong,
favorable and unique associations are created in their minds. These two actions often happen at the same
time but the level of association will determine how easily a brand is recognized or recalled from
memory.
Brand awareness is a fundamental attribute of customer brand equity. Macdonald and Sharp (2003)
describes it as being the essential for the communications process to occur as it precedes all brand
dimensions. Further, it is the vital step in creating brand association in memory with the brand and this
conceptualization has been suggested by other authors. In their study, the objective was to determine the
understanding level of brand awareness amongst marketing practitioners and how they use it to measure
the effect of their marketing activities. Their results show that a majority of marketing managers have
limited knowledge about brand awareness and how to measure it and often use sales figures to measure
brand awareness. They concluded that determining the breadth (in line with Hoeffler and Keller, 2002)
of brand’s awareness is quite easy, measuring the depth (nodes in memory which allows brand
information to be anchored to it-brand association) is extremely difficult. Macdonald and Sharp (2003)
final statements expresses the salience of a brand in the consumer’s mind (which involves both brand
awareness and brand association) as the most important factor in mature markets.
Table 2: Brand Awareness related researches
Joint Dimension of Brand Awareness and Brand
Association findings with other Brand
Author
Dimensions
Brand Knowledge (Brand Awareness & Brand
Keller, K.L., (1993)
Image)
Brand Awareness with strong association,
Yoo B., Donthu N. & Lee S., (2000)
Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty
Brand Awareness with strong association,
Yoo Boonghee & Donthu Naveen, (2001)
Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty
Gil R. Bravo, Andres E. Fraj & Salinas E. Brand Awareness with strong association,
Martinez, (2007)
Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty
93

5. WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
Washburn H. Judith & Plank E. Richard, (2002)
Hoeffler Steve & Keller K.L, (2002)
Macdonald Emma & Sharp Bryon, (2003)
Brand Awareness with strong association,
Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty
Very high correlation between Brand Awareness
and Brand Association
Very high correlation between Brand Awareness
and Brand Association
3. Discussion
Many authors have used different forms of brand equity dimensions in measuring customer – based
brand equity but this study focus on the brand equity models of Aaker and keller. Customer – based
brand equity is defined by Keller (1993) as the “differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer
response to the marketing of the brand.”
Building customer – based initially requires creating a familiar brand (create brand awareness) that
has favorable, strong and unique brand associations (Keller, 1993). When companies use advertising
and other marketing activities to create awareness of their brand, it increases consumer exposure to the
brand and in doing so, results in consumers forming associations with the brand. When familiarity of a
brand is increased, it leads to increase consumer ability to recognize and recall the brand (Keller, 1993).
The marketing programs by firms try to create awareness and associations simultaneously which makes
joining them as one construct/dimension when measuring customer – based brand equity very necessary.
Both Aaker and Keller (1996) agree that brand awareness have levels; recognition and Recall. However,
Aaker, (1996) add a third level, top – of – mind. These three levels are well connected with brand
associations. In other hands, a top of mind level of brand awareness means the brand has favorable,
strong and unique brand association, whereas a low level (recognition level) will not have a strong
association.
According to the literatures reviewed, the three-model dimension, that is brand awareness/association,
perceived quality and brand loyalty produced very good fit values. These three dimensions can be
utilized in different cultures (Yoo et. al, 2001), it can also be employed in the context of co-branding
(Washburn and Plank, 2002) and across product categories (Yoo et. al, 2001; Washburn and Plank, 2002;
and Gil et. al, 2007). The fit values for the three-model dimension in all these studies were are
significant, that is generally above the acceptance value.
4. Conclusion
The issue of whether or not brand awareness and brand association should be combined is critical.
Both Aaker and Keller distinguish between the two constructs, nonetheless from authors like Yoo et. Al
(2000; 2001) and Washburn (2002) reported it is difficult to separate brand awareness from brand
association.
Both dimensions are linked to the memory nodes of consumers’ differently. A brand with a good level of
associations can be easily recalled from memory. A brand with top-of-mind awareness will promptly
come to mind because of the very strong associations linked in consumers’ mind when given the
product category. On the other hand, a brand with weak (or no associations) can be (or not) recognized
when given a cue. These two dimensions are very well inter-correlated as awareness is reflected in
association which makes it empirically difficult to separate and measure. Future research should
concentrate more on these two constructs examining more on whether they are both synonymous or not
as well as the relationship between them. Also the three-dimension model should be used to examine
more product categories as well as in different regions to see if this model is enough to measure brand
equity from the consumers’ perspective.
However, in the situations where the need to separate theses two dimensions is vital, then brand
awareness and brand association should be separated and measured by designing better items to capture
these two dimensions more accurately. When the above situation is not required, the three-dimension
model will be well suited to measure customer-based brand equity.
References
Aaker, David A., (1991), Maintaining Brand Equity, New York: The Free Press
Aaker, David A. (1992), Managing the most important Asset: Brand Equity, Planning Review, pp. 56-58
Aaker, David A, (1996), Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets, California Management
Review, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp.102-120
94

6. WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
Bonghee Yoo & Naveen Donthu, (2001), Developing and Validating a Multidimensional
Consumer-Based Brand Equity Scale, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 52, pp. 1-14
Dick, A. & Basu, K., (1994), Customer Loyalty: Towards an Integrated Conceptual Framework, Journal
of the Academic Marketing Science, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 99-114
Dyson Paul, Farr Andy & Hollis S. Nigel, (1996), Understanding, Measuring and Using Brand Equity,”
Journal of Advertising Research, November/December, pp. 9-21
Gil R. Bravo, Andres E. Fraj & Salinas E. Martinez, (2007), Family as a Source of Consumer-Based
Brand Equity, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 188-199
Low S. George & Lamb Charles W. Jnr., (2000), The Measurement and Dimensionality of Brand
Associations, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp.350-368
Grover R. and Srinivasan V., (1992), Evaluating the Multiple Effects of Retail Promotions on Brand
Loyalty and Brand Switching Segments, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XXIX, pp. 76-89
Keller, K.L., (1993), Conceptualizing, Measuring and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 53, pp 1-22
Keller, K. L., (2002), Strategic Brand Management; Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity,
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J
Keller, K.L., (2003), Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ
Lasser Walfried, Mittal Banwari & Sharma Arun, (1995), Measuring Customer-Based Brand Equity,
The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 11-19
Levidege R.J. and Steiner G.A., (1961), A Model of Predictive Measurement of Advertising
Effectiveness, J Mark, Vol. 25, pp. 59-62
Macdonald Emma & Sharp Bryon, (2003), Management Perceptions of the Importance of Brand
Awareness as an Indication of Advertising Effectiveness, Marketing Bulletin, 14, Article 2, Reprinted
from Marketing Research On-Line, 1996, 1, pp. 1-15
Marcel Gommans, Krish S. Krishnan, & Katrin B. Scheffold, (2001), From Brand Loyalty to E-Loyalty:
A Conceptual Framework, Journal of Economic and Social Research, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 43 -58
Oliver L. Richard, (1997) Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, New York:
McGraw-Hill
Pappu R., Quester P.G. & Cooksey R.W., (2005), Consumer-Based Brand Equity: Improving the
Measurement-empirical evidence, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 14, No. 2/3, pp.
143-155
Srivastava, R.K. & Shocker, A.D., (1991), Brand Equity: A Perspective on Its Meaning and
Measurement”, Report Number 91-124, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA
Hoeffler Steve & Keller K.L, (2002), Building Brand Equity Through Corporate Societal
Marketing,”Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 21 (1), pp. 78-89
Taylor S.A., Goodwin S. & Celuch K., (2004) “The Relative Importance of Brand Equity to Customer
Loyalty in an Industrial Setting,” Journal Product and Brand Management, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 217-227
Villarejo-Ramos A. F. & Manuel J. Sanchez-Franco, (2005), The Impact of Marketing and
Communication and Price Promotion on Brand Equity, Brand Management, Vol. 12, No 6, pp. 431-444
Washburn H. Judith & Plank E. Richard, (2002), Measuring Brand Equity: An Evaluation of a
Consumer-Based Brand Equity Scale, Journal of Marketing, Theory and Practice, pp.46-61
Yoo Boonghee & Donthu Naveen, (1997), Developing and Validating a Consumer-Based Overall Brand
Equity Scale for Americans and Koreans: An Extension of Aaker’s and Keller’s Conceptualization,
Paper presented at 1997 AMA Summer Educators Conference, Chicago
Yoo B., Donthu N. & Lee S., (2000), An Examination of Selected Marketing Mix Elements and Brand
Equity, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, pp. 195-211
Yoo Boonghee & Donthu Naveen, (2001), Developing and Validating a Multidimensional
Consumer-Based Brand Equity Scale, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 52, pp. 1-14
Zeithaml A. Valarie, (1988), Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-End Model
Synthesis of Evidence, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, pp. 2-22
95