摘要 : An increasingly common strategy when naming new brands is to use an unconventional spelling of an otherwise familiar word (e.g., “Lyft” rather than “Lift”). However, little is known about how this brand naming strategy impacts con... 展开 An increasingly common strategy when naming new brands is to use an unconventional spelling of an otherwise familiar word (e.g., “Lyft” rather than “Lift”). However, little is known about how this brand naming strategy impacts consumers’ beliefs about the brand and, ultimately, their willingness to support it. Eight experimental studies demonstrate that, in general, consumers are less likely to support unfamiliar brands whose names are spelled unconventionally compared with brands that use the conventional spelling of the same word. This occurs because consumers perceive the choice of an unconventionally spelled name as an overt persuasion attempt by the marketer and thus view the brand as less sincere. Using mediation and moderation, the authors demonstrate that these effects are driven by persuasion knowledge and show robustness by employing different types of unconventional spellings. The studies suggest that although marketers may choose unconventional spellings for new brands with the goal of positively influencing consumers’ perceptions, doing so may backfire. However, unconventionally spelled names do not produce a backfire effect when the motive for selecting the name is seen as sincere. Further, unconventionally spelled brand names may even be desirable when consumers are seeking a memorable experience. 收起