Two-Stage Categorization in Brand Extension Evaluation: Electrophysiological Time Course Evidence

<div><p>A brand name can be considered a mental category. Similarity-based categorization theory has been used to explain how consumers judge a new product as a member of a known brand, a process called brand extension evaluation. This study was an event-related potential study conducted in two experiments. The study found a two-stage categorization process reflected by the P2 and N400 components in brand extension evaluation. In experiment 1, a prime–probe paradigm was presented in a pair consisting of a brand name and a product name in three conditions, i.e., in-category extension, similar-category extension, and out-of-category extension. Although the task was unrelated to brand extension evaluation, P2 distinguished out-of-category extensions from similar-category and in-category ones, and N400 distinguished similar-category extensions from in-category ones. In experiment 2, a prime–probe paradigm with a related task was used, in which product names included subcategory and major-category product names. The N400 elicited by subcategory products was more significantly negative than that elicited by major-category products, with no salient difference in P2. We speculated that P2 could reflect the early low-level and similarity-based processing in the first stage, whereas N400 could reflect the late analytic and category-based processing in the second stage.</p></div

Grand-average ERPs elicited by Subcategory versus Major-category product names with prime effect of brand name at Fz, Cz, and Pz electrodes.

<p>Time window of 140 ms to200 ms for P2 quantification and time window of 200 ms to400 ms for N400 quantification marked in light gray, respectively.</p

Electrode groups.

<p>Electrode groups.</p

Three Azamacrocycle-Based Coordination Complexes Bearing a New Triazine Derived Carboxylic Ligand <i>Via In Situ</i> Ligand Hydrolysis: The Trap of Resonance Structure

<p>The <i>in situ</i> ligand hydrolysis reaction of 2,4,6-tris-(4-carboxyphenoxy)-1,3,5-triazine and macrocyclic complexes yields three coordination complexes bearing new triazine derived carboxylic ligands, namely, {(NiL₁)(L₀)·DMF}_n (<b>1</b>), {(NiL₂)(L₀)·DMF·H₂O}_n (<b>2</b>), and [NiL₃][(NiL₃)(L₀)₂]·2H₂O (<b>3</b>) (L_o = 4-(6-Hydroxy-4-oxo-4,5-dihydro-[1,3,5]triazine-2-yloxy)-benzoic acid, L₁ = 1,4,8,11-tetraazacyclotetradecane, L₂ = 1,8-dimethyl-1,3,6,8,10,13-hexaazacyclotetradeca and L₃ = 1,3,6,9,11,14-hexaazatricyclooctadecane). Single-crystal X-ray diffraction analyses reveal that <b>1</b> and <b>2</b> exhibit a one-dimensional (1D) chain structure, which is further connected into a three-dimensional (3D) supramolecular structure by hydrogen bonds. In complex <b>2</b>, π···π stacking interaction is observed. In contrast, <b>3</b> shows a ion-pair structure, which is connected into a 2D <b>4⁴</b> hydrogen bonded supramolecular structure. The results indicate the subtle difference of azamacrocycle may lead to diverse structures. Importantly, in complexes <b>1–3</b>, the resonance structure is trapped in crystals 1–3.</p

The Mean AR and RT (M±SD) in the experiment 2.

<p>The Mean AR and RT (M±SD) in the experiment 2.</p

Topographic distribution of three product categories (beverage, snack, and household appliance).

<p>Topographic distribution of three product categories (beverage, snack, and household appliance).</p

Experiment 1 procedure.

<p>Experiment 1 procedure.</p

Grand-average ERPs elicited by three product categories with prime effect of beverage brand name at 15 electrodes in frontal, central, and parietal areas.

<p>Time window of 150 ms to250 ms for P2 quantification at F3, Fz, F4, FC3, FCz, FC4, C3, Cz, and C4, and time window of 300 ms to450 ms for N400 quantification at F3, Fz, F4, FC3, FCz, FC4, C3, Cz, C4, CP3, CPz, CP4, P3, Pz and P4 marked in light gray, respectively.</p

Description of samples used in this study.

<p>Description of samples used in this study.</p

The 28S phylogeny of Bethylidae.

<p>The tree was derived using the maximum likelihood method.</p