Cargando…

Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos

Companies and products are identified by their brand names, which are typically written with a specific letter style, color, and design (i.e., logos). This graphical information offers a distinctive image that facilitates their recognition. However, the uniqueness of these configuration cues may mak...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Perea, Manuel, Baciero, Ana, Rocabado, Francisco, Marcet, Ana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7872310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33565044
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01863-z
_version_ 1783649164600541184
author Perea, Manuel
Baciero, Ana
Rocabado, Francisco
Marcet, Ana
author_facet Perea, Manuel
Baciero, Ana
Rocabado, Francisco
Marcet, Ana
author_sort Perea, Manuel
collection PubMed
description Companies and products are identified by their brand names, which are typically written with a specific letter style, color, and design (i.e., logos). This graphical information offers a distinctive image that facilitates their recognition. However, the uniqueness of these configuration cues may make brand names more vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling. We examined whether the confusability at detecting misspelled brand names is higher when embedded in the full logo than when presented in plain format (Experiment 1), when removing all graphical information of the logo other than typeface (Experiment 2), and when only modifying the typeface (Experiment 3). Participants had to decide whether the presented item was a correctly spelled brand name. The misspelled stimuli were created by either transposing or replacing two internal letters of popular brand names (amazon → amzaon vs. amceon), thus allowing us to have a measure of the transposed-letter confusability effect. Results showed a sizeable transposed-letter confusability effect for all types of brand names, but the effect was greatest for the misspelled full logos. Thus, the distinctiveness of the graphical information in logos has a deleterious side effect: logos are quite vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling branding.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7872310
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78723102021-02-10 Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos Perea, Manuel Baciero, Ana Rocabado, Francisco Marcet, Ana Psychon Bull Rev Brief Report Companies and products are identified by their brand names, which are typically written with a specific letter style, color, and design (i.e., logos). This graphical information offers a distinctive image that facilitates their recognition. However, the uniqueness of these configuration cues may make brand names more vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling. We examined whether the confusability at detecting misspelled brand names is higher when embedded in the full logo than when presented in plain format (Experiment 1), when removing all graphical information of the logo other than typeface (Experiment 2), and when only modifying the typeface (Experiment 3). Participants had to decide whether the presented item was a correctly spelled brand name. The misspelled stimuli were created by either transposing or replacing two internal letters of popular brand names (amazon → amzaon vs. amceon), thus allowing us to have a measure of the transposed-letter confusability effect. Results showed a sizeable transposed-letter confusability effect for all types of brand names, but the effect was greatest for the misspelled full logos. Thus, the distinctiveness of the graphical information in logos has a deleterious side effect: logos are quite vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling branding. Springer US 2021-02-09 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7872310/ /pubmed/33565044 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01863-z Text en © The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2021 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Brief Report
Perea, Manuel
Baciero, Ana
Rocabado, Francisco
Marcet, Ana
Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
title Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
title_full Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
title_fullStr Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
title_full_unstemmed Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
title_short Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
title_sort does the cowl make the monk? detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos
topic Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7872310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33565044
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01863-z
work_keys_str_mv AT pereamanuel doesthecowlmakethemonkdetectingcounterfeitsinbrandnamesversuslogos
AT bacieroana doesthecowlmakethemonkdetectingcounterfeitsinbrandnamesversuslogos
AT rocabadofrancisco doesthecowlmakethemonkdetectingcounterfeitsinbrandnamesversuslogos
AT marcetana doesthecowlmakethemonkdetectingcounterfeitsinbrandnamesversuslogos