The dynamic nature of brand authenticity for a new brand: Creating and maintaining perceptions through iconic, indexical, and existential cues
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although brand authenticity has been studied across multiple domains, the development and maintenance of brand authenticity in new brands has never been explored. This study provides the first evidence of the evolving nature of brand authenticity (i.e., the creation and maintenance phases) through the interplay of iconic (impression‐based brand characteristics), indexical (evidence‐based brand characteristics), and existential (self‐referential brand characteristics) cues for a new brand. Sixteen season ticket holders for a new sports team brand were interviewed two times each (during and after the team's inaugural season). The analysis shows the interplay of authenticity cues in the development and maintenance of authenticity perceptions, such that indexical and existential cues replace iconic cues as the consumer‐brand relationship evolves. The results reveal the critical roles of existential cues in creating a self‐relevant relationship with consumers as well as the underlying dimensions (i.e., virtuousness, proximity, and transparency) and outcomes (e.g., brand attitude and emotional brand attachment) of authenticity for a new brand. This study provides evidence that new brands can benefit from authenticity perceptions and offers insights into the underlying process in terms of antecedents and outcomes, contributing to authenticity and branding literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it