Overview of Research
Individuals use brands to create and communicate their self-concepts, thereby creating self-brand connections. Although this phenomenon is well documented among adult consumers, we know very little about the role of brands in defining, expressing, and communicating self-concepts in children and adolescents. A number of questions remain unanswered, such as: When do children begin to make self-brand connections? What developmental factors precipitate the use of brands to define and express self-concepts? Are there differences in the types of self-brand connections made by younger versus older children?

In this research, we explore these questions by examining age differences in self-brand connections. In three studies with children 8 to 18 years of age, we find that self-brand connections develop in number and sophistication between middle childhood and early adolescence. Specifically, not only was the number of self-brand connections lower for 3rd versus 7th/8th graders and 11th/12th graders, but differences in the nature of these self-brand connections were apparent as well.

By middle childhood, around 7-8 years of age, children define themselves primarily in terms of concrete associations (e.g., physical attributes). However, they are beginning to think more abstractly, which opens up the possibility of defining themselves in more complex and psychological terms (e.g., happy, nerdy). Self-concepts also begin to include possessions, although the abstract and symbolic meanings of possessions (especially brands) are not well understood.

Comparisons of the self-concept with brands take place on a concrete level, without consideration of unobservable qualities such as brand personalities and user stereotypes. For example, when asked, “Why is ‘Gap’ you?” a 3rd grade girl responded, “My mom buys me things from there.” Thus, during middle childhood, children make a limited number of self-brand connections, which are based on concrete associations, such as owning or buying branded items.

As children move into adolescence, self-brand connections increase as brands are viewed as being connected to one’s self-concept because the brand has the same personality, user characteristics, or reference group affiliation. Adolescence brings an even greater appreciation of brand images along with an increased understanding on the role that brands play in defining the self for the outside world.

A greater understanding of the self, combined with social pressures to “fit in” and signal group membership, leads adolescents to be more vigilant about the social implications of owning certain brands. For example, when asked, “Why is ‘Gap’ you?” a 7th grade girl responded, “Gap has really clean, preppie clothes. I like to dress preppie so I like the clothes they make.” Replying to the same question, an 11th grade girl responded, “The clothes there are me because they are really nice and not so showy—real down-to-earth.”

What process accounts for these age-related trends? We propose that these age differences are associated with age-related developments in three areas—representations of brands, representation of self-concepts, and self-brand comparison processes.

First, consumers must possess brand associations that can be related to the self, such as user characteristics, personality traits, reference groups, and personal experiences. Second, consumers must possess a representation of their self-concept—such as the actual self, ideal self, or future self—that includes characteristics and traits that can be aligned with those possessed by brands. Third, consumers must engage in a comparison process to determine whether the perceived brand images are congruent or not with aspects of their self-concept.

Our findings provide preliminary support for this view, especially with regard to the influence the brand representation plays in the process. However, it would be premature to conclude that these three elements are the sole influences on children’s self-brand connections. It is likely that additional factors play a direct role or indirect role by affecting the three elements we have identified.

As children grow older, for example, they have more experience with brands and more exposure to branding campaigns, which provide strong cues about the brand’s personality, user group, or personal qualities. These cues provide fodder for the older child’s natural inclination to think about brands more conceptually, thereby producing a brand representation that is more conducive to the matching process with personal traits from one’s self-concept.

Significance of Research
Our findings provide a starting point for understanding how self-brand connections develop in children. Given the extent of cognitive and social changes that take place from early childhood to adolescence, one might intuitively expect that self-brand connections would become more evident sometime during this period. We find the period from middle childhood (ages 7-8) to early adolescence (ages 12-13) to be key in this regard. Not only do we see increases in the number of self-brand connections during this period, but also changes in the nature of the self-brand connections being made.

Our findings also suggest that older children have deeper self-brand connections because they think about brands in a very specific way—as having personalities and symbolizing group membership—that provide a natural link to their self-concepts.

Although our focus was on psychological processes that influence the development of self-brand connections, we acknowledge parents, peers, and media as important socialization agents in self-concept development and brand understanding. Children turn to these agents for information about social norms as well as confirmation about who they are. In fact, peers play an increasingly important role in this regard as children move from childhood into adolescence (McGuire and McGuire 1987).

Our research lays the groundwork for other socialization-related questions that should aid our understanding of the role of brand names in children’s self-concept development such as: How do parents, peers, and the media influence the alignment of self-concepts with brands? Do parents, peers, and the media exhibit the same degree of influence on self-brand connections across age groups and genders?

Selected References

Achenreiner, Gwen Bachmann and Deborah Roedder John (2003), “The Meaning of Brand Names to Children: A Developmental Investigation,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (3), 205-219.

Chaplin, Lan Nguyen and Deborah Roedder John (2005), “The Development of Self-Brand Connections in Children and Adolescents,” Journal of Consumer Research, in press.

Escalas, Jennifer Edson and James R. Bettman (2003), “You Are What They Eat: The Influence of Reference Groups on Consumers’ Connections to Brands,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (3), 339-348.

John, Deborah Roedder (1999), “Consumer Socialization of Children: A Retrospective Look at Twenty-Five Years of Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (December), 183-213.

McGuire, William and Claire McGuire (1987), “Developmental Trends and Gender Differences in the Subjective Experience of Self,” in Self and Identity: Perspectives Across the Lifespan, eds. Terry Honess and Krysia Yardley, New York: Wiley, 134-146.