2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176194 DECEMBER 2008 176 [605180]

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 176
www.palgrave-journals.com/bm Tjaco H. Walvis
THEY
Paul van Vlissingenstraat 6C
1096 BK Amsterdam
The Netherlands.
T el: + 31(0)20 4953200
Fax: + 31(0)20 4953210
E-mail: [anonimizat] seem to use the word ‘ laws ’ for rhetorical,
and not scientifi c reasons.
The value of branding laws — if they were
available — is quite evident. For example,
they would help practitioners make better branding decisions if they could rely on a set of solid principles and these could then provide fruitful hypotheses for academic research. So are there laws in branding? Are there universal, reliable principles marketers can use in their efforts to infl uence the
choice processes of customers and stake-holders in their own favour by building powerful brands? And if so, what do they look like? This is the central issue this paper aims to address.
The obvious fi rst remark is an argument
against such a claim. Social science — to INTRODUCTION
Marketers around the world spend billions
of dollars a year in the pursuit of building strong brands. Study after study demon-strates that strong brands create higher amounts of shareholder value, by increasing revenue and margin growth and decreasing the riskiness of a company ’ s cash fl ows,
more effectively than weak brands (see Millward Brown,
1 Interbrand 2 and
Madden et al. 3 ). According to some
authors of popular management books, building such brands requires the applica-tion of simple ‘ laws ’ of branding (see, eg
Alsop
4 and Ries and Ries 5 ). These books,
however, often claim to be based on prac-tical experience instead of on systematic research. Hence, writers of such books Three laws of branding:
Neuroscientifi c foundations
of effective brand building
Received (in revised form): 14 November, 2007
TJACO H. WALVIS
is a partner at THEY, a brand management consulting fi rm based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Before that,
he was with BBDO. Mr Walvis advises on (creative) brand and communication strategy issues, including brand positioning, extensions, portfolio management and location branding (eg nations). He has worked with brands in a broad range of industries, including fashion, fast mover consumer goods, fi nancial services, government, insurance, media, pharmaceuticals, private banking, postal services, publishing, retail, telecommunications and world expositions. Clients include Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, DaimlerChrysler, Dorito ’ s, Mars, McKinsey & Company, Robeco, Sanoma
Publishers and many others. Mr Walvis holds two Master degrees, in economics (MSc) and philosophy (MA), both from Erasmus University Rotterdam. He is married, with three children, and lives and works in Amsterdam.
Abstract
Commercial brands strive to be chosen by customers, and branding as an activity is aimed at
increasing the likelihood that they are. Almost all customer choices are at least partially memory-based. This paper begins with the assumption that as neuroscience is a ‘ hard ’ science studying
memory as a highly regular subject matter, it should be possible to deduce several laws from it for
the ‘ soft ’ fi eld of branding. Based on primary, empirical research in neuroscience, the author
synthesises three laws that govern the probability that a brand enters our awareness as a positive candidate for choice. Brands that have been built in accordance with these laws have a higher probability of being chosen than brands in the same category that have not.
Journal of Brand Management (2008) 16, 176 – 194. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550139 ;
published online 28 December 2007 Keywords
branding ; memory-based
brand choice ;
branding laws ;
neuroscience ;
neuromarketing Keywords
branding ; memory-based
brand choice ;
branding laws ;
neuroscience ;
neuromarketing

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 177 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
which the study of branding belongs — is
not characterised by the presence of rules and principles with the immutability of the laws we fi nd in the exact sciences.
Within the fi eld of economics, the most
exact of the social sciences, a number of ‘ laws ’ exist, such as the law of diminishing
returns, the law of supply and demand and the law of one price. Y et, they are law-like
regularities more than laws in the classical scientifi c sense. As Mark Blaug,
6 a prom-
inent economic methodologists, states, ‘ if
by a law we mean well-corroborated, universal relations between events deduced from independently tested initial condi-tions, few modern economists would claim that economics has so far produced more than one or two laws ’ .
Nevertheless, based on an extensive
study of the neurobiological literature, the author believes that it is possible to describe several robust, general fi ndings
from the ‘ hard ’ and exact fi eld of neuro-
science and deduce implications from them for the ‘ soft ’ fi eld of branding.
This paper describes this process, and results in the identifi cation of three
branding notions. These notions are rooted in highly regular neuroscientifi c
phenomena from which they acquire a law-like regularity , justifying the label
‘ branding laws ’ . This paper, then, makes
the claim that as these laws are deduced from neuroscience, which is an exact science, they bear a reliability that could not be attained previously by relying on traditional branding research and literature alone.
As such, this study contributes to the
integration of neurobiological research within the fi eld of brand management.
This development can be seen as a logical next step in the tendency to pay more attention to the role of memory in brand choice. After Lynch and Srull
7 made the
point that consumer choice is seldom purely stimulus-based, memory became a
topic in its own right. 8 With Fazio ’ s 9
model of attitude – behaviour relationships,
the accessibility of brand attitudes became an area of interest. Nedungadi and Hutch-inson
10 showed that brand recall is strongly
correlated with brand choice and Holden and Lutz
11 refi ned such analyses by
showing that brand recall is often set in motion by consumption goals and occa-sions. Later, the importance of implicit and unconscious factors in choice received attention (see, eg Lee
12 ). This paper
extends this literature with neurobio-logical fi ndings on memory formation
and retrieval, based on the literature review, and derives consequences for the practice of branding in the form of three branding laws.
T wo limitations of this study must be
acknowledged at the outset. The fi rst is
that the branding principles referred to are already known and have been sepa-rately and adequately documented before. As such, they do not represent radical new discoveries in themselves. The author contends, however, that, fi rst, by uncov-
ering and recognising these principles as laws and, secondly, by combining them, an interesting foundation arises that can benefi t both practitioners and academics.
Experience suggests that these laws hold a number of consequences that are not being implemented by planners, media strategists, marketers and brand managers with the rigour that they deserve.
The second limitation the author would
like to note is the fact that the fi eld of
neuroscience is in development and that some deeper aspects of the topics discussed — although they are not wild
speculations — have not been fi nally
resolved. The author, therefore, presents a ‘ branding law theorem ’ in this paper that
he believes is fruitful and that he would like to put forward for further debate and

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 178
research — given the current state of its
neurological foundation.
In presenting its thesis, this paper fi rst
looks at several current developments at the boundary between marketing and neuroscience to create a context. Next, it clarifi es the defi nitions of brands and
branding that it takes as a starting point. It then looks at the process of brand choice, more specifi cally the consideration
set model and neurobiological concepts that support it. From there, it identifi es
three propositions, supported by neuro-science research, from which it deduces three branding laws. Finally, it briefl y
discusses these fi ndings and draws several
conclusions.
THE CROSS-OVER BETWEEN
BRANDING AND NEUROSCIENCE
The aim of neuroscience is to understand
the biological mechanisms that underlie mental activity.
13 It seeks to comprehend
how the neural circuits in our brain allow us to perceive the world around us (eg brand communication), recall that percep-tion from memory and act on the memory of that perception. Neuroscience also studies the biological foundations of our emotional life. For instance, it seeks to determine how emotions infl uence our
thinking and how the regulation of emotion, thought and action goes astray in diseases such as depression, mania, schizophrenia and Alzheimer ’ s disease.
13
The complexity of these issues are
enormous and historically, neuroscientists have adopted one of two approaches to tackle them. The fi rst is the reductionist
strategy, which focuses on analysing the elementary units of the nervous system: a molecule, a cell or a circuit. This bottom-up approach examines how neurons communicate with one another and how interconnections are created during devel-opment, and modifi ed by experience,
especially seen through the study of simple animals. The second approach is the holistic strategy, which studies the mental functions in vivo , in human beings and
animals, in a top-down fashion — often
using neuroimaging techniques — seeking
to relate these behaviours to the higher-order features of large systems of neurons. Both avenues have had considerable successes.
13
The interest in neurobiological fi ndings
is growing rapidly, far beyond the bound-aries of the fi eld. For instance, there is a
growing range of studies that apply neuro-scientifi c knowledge and techniques to
marketing issues, with sometimes inter-esting results. For example, a study by Samanez Larkin et al .
14 showed that the
brain of older adults over 65 shows less activation as a result of the anticipation of losing money than youngsters between 19 and 27. This may be caused by a reduced experience of negative emotions with age, an insight that might be relevant for fi nan-
cial advisors.
Knutson et al .
15 presented respondents
with cash and then recorded their brain activity using functional magnetic reso-nance imaging (fMRI) when confronting them with different combinations of products and prices — some of good value,
others of unfair value. One fi nding was
that the price of a product or service almost literally produces a pain response in the brain. The researchers inferred by these fi ndings that credit cards may ‘ anaes-
thetise ’ consumers against the pain of
paying. A credit card alleviates this pain by postponing the physical payment — thus
decoupling the pain from the purchase moment. This explains the microeco-nomic anomaly that consumers tend to overspend and undersave when using credit cards instead of cash.

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 179 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
Moll et al . 16 found that altruistic
behaviour, such as making a charitable donation, generates the same brain response as obtaining a fi nancial reward
and that altruism tied to abstract moral beliefs relies on parts of the brain that are uniquely developed in humans (ie the anterior prefrontal cortex). Such studies explain why we perform such acts, even though they provide no direct personal benefi t and sometimes bear a
personal cost. Findings like these can be of interest to fundraisers at NGOs and charities. It is easy to extend the list of examples.
Although the contributions of such
studies are sometimes debated (see Rubenstein
17 ), internationally accredited
newspapers such as the Financial Times ,
The New York Times , The Wall Street Journal
and Time have all featured articles on the
results of such studies over the last few years, indicating public interest. Interest-ingly, though, these studies share the fact that they rely on the holistic route of investigation. Invariably, they make use of neuroimaging techniques to obtain data for their conclusions. It is fair to say that research in the reductionistic tradition, on the other hand, is underrepresented in the growing body of ‘ neuromarketing ’ litera-
ture, if not absent from it.
18 This should
be of little surprise. Human beings can be shown advertising campaigns or perform other tasks in experiments, but we cannot put their brain in a Petri dish under a microscope to study changes at the cellular and synaptic level caused by it without infl icting serious risks to their health.
Given our current technical possibilities, it is diffi cult to obtain empirical neuro-
biological results on marketing issues from human subjects using reductionistic research designs.
At the same time, however, reduction-
istic research in neuroscience has resulted in an enormous leap in our knowledge
of how learning takes place and how memory works. So much so that in 2000, three neuroscientists — Arvid Carlsson,
Paul Greengard and Eric Kandel — won
the Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology for their work within the reductionist ‘ paradigm ’ , especially on the
signal transmission at the cellular level of the nervous system.
19 Some writers,
notably Bickle, 20 even go so far as to state
that all phenomena addressed by psychology and cognitive science will in the end be explained at the molecular level, eliminating more holistic explana-tions (see also Looren de Jong and Schouten
21 ). As many brand decisions
are memory-based, 7,22 the marketing
literature and practice could potentially benefi t from the reductionist body of
knowledge. As Kandel
23 writes, elemen-
tary forms of learning are common to all animals with an evolved nervous system. Hence, learning at the cell and molecular level can be studied effectively even in simple invertebrate animals. There-fore, this paper aims to integrate reduc-tionistic fi ndings where appropriate and
obtain from them implications for branding, by deduction — which is the
only valid option as the empirical route is unavailable. As neurobiology — both
holistic and reductionstic — is an exact
science, the insight into the principles of memory storage and retrieval it has estab-lished so far could help us to identify laws in branding.
WHAT IS A BRAND AND WHAT IS
BRANDING?
In order to speak clearly about branding
laws, however, we must fi rst defi ne what
we mean when we talk about a ‘ brand ’
and about ‘ branding ’ .

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 180
Defi ning a brand
For our purpose, we will adopt a defi ni-
tion in line with Franzen and Bouwman, 24
and state that a brand is a network of asso-
ciations with a (brand) name in the brain of a person . Brands, according to this view, are
pieces of information, meanings, experi-ences, emotions, images, intentions, etc interconnected by neural links of varying strength.
The benefi t of this defi nition is that it
builds a bridge between branding and neuroscience, which is needed for our purpose. Brand associations are long known to infl uence consumer preference
and behaviour. In the case of supermar-kets, for example, research has shown a strong correlation between supermarket associations and supermarket choice. Woodside and Trappey
25 have shown that
the choice for a certain supermarket by consumers can be predicted on the basis of the associations people have in their minds about these places. Castleberry and Ehrenberg
26 have pointed
out that associations can show strong correlations with the market share of a brand. Also, numerous studies indicate that products from countries with certain associations are preferred above those produced in other nations — an observa-
tion known as the country-of-origin effect (see Verlegh
27 and Peterson and
Jolibert 28 ). In a neuroimaging study using
fMRI, McClure et al . 29 found that around
half of their respondents selected Pepsi over Coke in a blind tasting test. Y et when given the choice, around three quarters of the respondents preferred Coke — despite similar or even slightly
less liked taste. This latter preference correlated with strong activity, absent during the blind test, in the prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus — brain areas
where our higher cognitive and memory functions reside. McClure and colleagues gave respond-
ents no information about the Coke and Pepsi brands before or during the exper-iment. This means that their differing brain responses must have been entirely the result of information stored in their long-term memory, evoked at the moment of decision-making.
The experiment thus illustrates the
power of brand associations: functional preferences (taste) can be overridden by brand preferences, retrieved from long-term memory at the moment of choice, infl uencing the fi nal decision in favour of
one brand at the cost of another. This is of course exactly what marketers who are building brands aim for: creating consistent brand preference. The question is, then, whether delving deeper into the neuro-scientifi c underpinnings of brand associa-
tions can reveal reliable principles or laws that marketers can follow for creating this
kind of brand preference.
Defi ning branding
Our defi nition of branding will have to
take note of associations as well. Therefore, we will defi ne ‘ branding ’ as the activity
by brand owners of associating the brand name with those pieces of information, meanings, emotions, images, intentions, etc that are of key importance in the deci-sion-making process of customers and of stakeholders in general.
30 More specifi –
cally, we defi ne branding as establishing
effi cient, choice-shaping associations with the brand name (in the minds of members of
a target group). This defi nition fl ows from
the axiom that brands strive to be chosen and that branding as an activity, therefore, is aimed at increasing the likelihood that they are.
We must note that branding laws — in
the sense discussed here — would only be
applicable in situations wherein the brand

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 181 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
choice is at least partially based on asso-
ciations stored in long-term memory . Of
course it is possible, at least in theory, that choice is not infl uenced at all by brand
information stored in memory but is entirely stimulus-driven — for example in
the case of new, unknown or unfamiliar brands or through some form of highly effective point of sale communication. By defi nition, we cannot attribute the choice
for the brand in such ‘ perfect stimulus-
driven ’ instances to associations in the
customer ’ s brain established by prior
branding efforts. Such choices may be subject to principles of visual perception (see Lee
12 and Shindler and Berbaum 31 )
or on-the-spot persuasion (see Cialdini 32 ),
but not to branding or branding laws based on associations as discussed here. In other situations, decisions are mixed (ie
memory and stimulus-driven) in that they are founded on input from the environ-ment as well as on information retrieved from memory.
12 In the end, almost all
brand choices are at least partially memory-based,
7,22 and when long-term memory
plays a role, branding laws might apply.
THE PROCESS OF BRAND CHOICE
The question is, then, whether or not
neuroscience can help to identify regu-larities in the way branding can infl uence
the outcome of memory-based choice situations. Before we can turn to answering this question, it is fi rst necessary to look
in some more detail at the choice process itself. One broadly accepted and well-researched theory of the brand choice process, and one that draws considerable academic attention, is the consideration set model based on Howard and Sheth.
33
It distinguishes between two conceptually different phases,
34 namely that of evocation
(in which a set of brands to choose from is recalled from long-term memory) and evaluation (in which the fi nal choice is
made). The basic premise is that people do not make a choice out of all the brands they are aware of but from a smaller subset called the consideration set, which is often (goal) constructed (see Paulssen and Bagozzi
35 ). Moreover, it seems that the
consideration set is universal and found across national cultures.
36
In order for a brand to be chosen, the
consideration set model states that the brand must fi rst be recalled from memory
and then needs to be evaluated positively. It is important to note that in the majority of choice occasions, the largest part of this process may take place implicitly —
proceeding outside of our conscious
attention (see Coates et al .
37 and Shapiro
and Krishnan 38 ). Much of human behav-
iour in general appears to be shaped by factors beyond our awareness.
39 Bargh and
Chartrand 40 estimate that roughly 5 per
cent of the time, conscious deliberation plays a causal role in guiding our behav-iour. Persaud et al .
41 have elegantly proven
experimentally that we can make correct decisions without knowing why or how we make them. What is more, unconscious thought can even lead to better, more satisfying decisions, especially in the case of more complex product choices such as deciding between houses or cars.
42 Evoca-
tion , then, takes place largely outside our
awareness — a position supported by
neuroscience research, as we will see in a moment. Conscious evaluation , on the
other hand, does take place of course, but especially in the case of high-involvement products and services (eg mortgages, cars, television sets, photo cameras, etc) and always after evocation, so that evocation is arguably the more fundamental activity.
24
Our second axiom is, therefore, that
whether or not a brand is evoked at the buying moment is a key determinant of the ultimate choice. This axiom is not

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 182
random, but stems from a growing body
of research and literature that emphasises ‘ brand saliency ’ as the dominant factor in
fi nal choice.
11,24,38,43 – 48 Nedungadi, 48 for
example, has studied the phases of consid-eration and choice and has shown that brands that are more strongly associated with primary choice cues (ie brands that are more salient relative to those cues) have a higher chance of entering the consideration set and of being chosen. Brands that are recalled fi rst are more
likely to be chosen. Hence, we will state that branding exerts a crucial infl uence on
choice by intimately connecting the brand name with primary choice cues.
The fi nding that saliency — in the sense
of becoming top-of-mind at the moment of choice — is such a dominant factor in
brand choice and is supported by recent fi ndings in neuroscience. In an overview
article, Duncan
49 has shown that there is
a very general principle at work in our brain under which stimuli compete for ‘ cortical representation ’ . Visual and audi-
tory signals, for example, vie for our atten-tion. There is a constant battle going on in our brain, whereby cues compete for entry into our awareness.
This principle of competition for
awareness not only applies to external cues (eg visual or auditory stimuli coming from the environment) but also to thoughts, actions, goals, meanings and especially memories as well (eg cues emanating from inside the brain). Given the associative nature of memory, retrieving a goal-relevant memory (eg a brand name) often involves selecting it against several competing memories — a process some-
times called ‘ mnemonic competition ’ .
50
Only if a cue enters our awareness does it become available for report.
51
Given that brands are networks of asso-
ciations (see Franzen and Bouwman 24 ),
they must compete for cortical represen-tation as well, and the winner of this
competition — the most ‘ salient brand ’ — is
the most probable candidate for fi nal
choice (cf., Nedungadi 48 for example).
This latter fi nding is further supported by
the fact that awareness competition is resolved, unconsciously, largely on the basis of relevance.
49,50 This is much in line
with the fi nding of Kahneman et al . 52 and
Kahneman and Ritov 53 that automatic
affective valuation is the main determi-nant of many judgments and behaviours. Damasio ’ s
54 somatic marker theory
proposes a similar automatic evaluation of choice options, explicitly based on bodily sensations — although this latter aspect
has been challenged, for instance by Rolls.
55 Our view of the brand choice
process resembles Kahneman ’ s 56 System 1
process of intuitive judgment, in that brand choice tak es place largely outside
our consciousness and is rapid, automatic and effortless.
INCREASING A BRAND ’ S CORTICAL
REPRESENTATION PROBABILITY
Against this background, we can begin to
formulate several propositions that lay the foundation for the deduction of branding laws. So far, we have assumed that brands want to be chosen and that branding is focused on increasing the probability that they are. More specifi cally, branding aims
to infl uence choice behaviour by maxim-
ising the probability that the brand wins the (unconscious) competition for cortical representation — the battle for awareness.
57
Linking the brand to primary choice cues is paramount in achieving this.
11,48
Rephrased in neurological terms, this
means that branding seeks to increase the likelihood that the neuron-assembly or association network that represents the brand is activated and the brand name enters our awareness during the choice

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 183 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
process. Thus, we are interested in the
neurological rules that determine what we
will call a brand ’ s cortical representation prob-
ability . Once established, such rules would
give rise to branding laws that point towards actions we can take to increase the brand ’ s cortical representation proba-
bility and hence the chance it is chosen.
CORTICAL REPRESENTATION
PROPOSITIONS
Brands with a high cortical representation
probability can be called ‘ strong ’ brands
because, as we have seen, they are the most salient and hence have the largest infl u-
ence on choice. We will now formulate three propositions about the brain that govern a brand ’ s cortical representation
probability and hence strength: the rele-vance, coherence and richness theses.
Proposition 1: The Relevance Thesis.
The relevance thesis says that the cortical representation prob-ability of an associa-tion network (brand) depends on the degree to which it is connected with elements that are of personal importance in the choice process (ie ‘ salient choice cues ’ ).
The degree to which brand information
is of personal relevance to us strongly infl uences the degree to which this infor-
mation is stored in long-term memory and the ease with which it can be retrieved from it. Neurobiological studies show that relevant or emotionally charged phenomena are better remembered than irrelevant and neutral events.
58,59 For
example, biologically signifi cant informa-
tion about food or sex is stored more durably than insignifi cant information.
58 (Thus, there appears to be some truth in
the old advertising adage that ‘ sex sells ’ .)
Montague 60 states that brands are relevant
to the degree to which they create biolog-ical or psychological reward signals in our brains that activate the dopamine system (which is involved in creating feelings of pleasure and motivation). In an fMRI study of remembering word pairs, Kuhl et al .
50 showed that the brain chooses to
remember elements it thinks are most relevant to certain tasks and suppresses less relevant cues. Bartsch et al .
61 have found
that long-term memory formation requires, among others, the inactivation (or switching-
off) of memory ‘ suppressors ’ that provide a
threshold for memory formation. These suppressors ensure that only salient features are learned and thus allow for emotions to modulate memory storage.
23 In other
words, relevance relieves suppression, thus facilitating long-term memory formation.
Duncan
49 and others have demon-
strated that the competition for cortical representation is ‘ biased ’ towards elements
that are relevant for our situation or task. The higher the relevance of an element, the higher the chance it wins the battle for awareness. Brands that are linked to what is signifi cant for their customers or
stakeholders at the moment of decision (their ‘ primary, salient choice cues ’ ) have
a higher chance of being evoked, of entering our awareness and of being chosen (cf. Holden and Lutz,
11 Nedungadi 48 and
Wells and Fallon 62 ). Research shows
further that elements with identical features
engage in a more vigorous mutual compe-tition for awareness. That is, they repress each other forcefully and this reduces their combined inhibitory effect on a more distinctive cue. As a result, the distinctively relevant brand will be acti-vated more strongly, increasing the prob-ability that it will enter our awareness and receive our attention (see Duncan
49 and

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 184
Yantis 51 ). The imperative for brands,
therefore, is to be distinctively relevant.
The actual choice cues used by
customers can vary between individuals and for the same individual between different occasions.
11,43 Moreover, as these
primary choice cues differ per product or service category and per situation, brands only have a high cortical representation probability relative to a certain category or use occasion. Brand strength is there-fore category and situation-relative. It is important to note that it seems plausible that choice cues are not necessarily a given, but that brands may be able to infl uence them. There is practical evidence
for example that Nike was able to trans-form the sneaker category, by consistently communicating a spirit of ‘ irreverence ’ .
T oday, such a mentality seems relevant for a broad group of consumers whereas in the 1980s all that counted to its narrow client base was the ability to produce a good professional running shoe (see, eg Bedbury and Fenichell
63 ).
Proposition 2: The Coherence Thesis.
The coherence thesis states that the likeli-hood that a neuron or association network (ie brand) will win the battle for awareness is proportional to the number of times its connections with cells or association networks that are fi red during the
choice p rocess (ie choice
cues) have been acti-vated in the past. The most effi cient way
to externally induce these ‘ past fi rings ’ is
by repeating a (brand) message that is specifi c. The coherence thesis is based on a corner-
stone of our current neurobiological understanding of memory (see Matynia et al .
64 ). Coherence has two components:
repetition and specifi city. First, it was long
an important hypothesis in the neuro-science community that when one neuron A repeatedly or persistently takes part in fi ring another B, the effi ciency of A in
fi ring B increases. This is so, it was thought,
because repeated fi ring between A and B
causes a long-term strengthening of the synapses between the two neurons.
65 Bliss
and L ø mo 66 were the fi rst to confi rm this
phenomenon, called ‘ long-term potentia-
tion ’ (LTP), through research. They found
that repetition makes the communication between synapses more effi cient and leads
to a higher excitability of the cells involved. Kandel
23 and others later found
that repetition and the resulting long-term potentiation are the foundation of the process of memory. More specifi cally,
conversion of a transient memory into a longer-term memory requires ‘ spaced ’
repetition of that memory. This is true for primitive life-forms as well as for higher vertebrates and humans. As Kandel
23
writes: ‘ Practice makes perfect — even in
snails ’ . Repeated activation of one
memory also weakens competing memo-ries, thus facilitating the retrieval of repeated memories over nonrepeated memories.
50 Phenomena such as ‘ fl ash-
bulb ’ memories, in which very signifi cant
one-time personal events seem to etched
into memory (eg Kristallnacht experience, witnessing the JFK assassination, our own wedding, etc), and the ‘ famous overnight
effect ’ , in which people mistakenly think
that a presented name they have seen only once before belongs to a famous person, do not contradict this.
67-70
Secondly, empirical studies show that
the more identical the stimulus (eg the brand ’ s message or the choice cue) is to

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 185 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
the stimulus stored in memory, the
more likely the memory can be activated and retrieved
71,72 (see, eg Tulving and
Thomson 72 and Vaidya et al . 73 ). This
means that the more specifi c the brand ’ s
message over time, the more likely the orig-inal synaptic connections are reactivated and hence strengthened — thus improving
the brand ’ s cortical representation proba-
bility and its chance of being selected.
The consequence for branding is that
brands seeking to be chosen must constantly strengthen their links with customers ’ or stakeholders ’ choice criteria
by reactivating them. Even though choice criteria may vary across categories and situations, coherence in the branding policy
is compulsory from a neurological stand-point. In order to reactivate certain connections, the triggering stimulus must be as specifi c as possible over time and
across ‘ touch points ’ (eg ads, campaigns,
products, personnel, stores, websites, etc). Coherence, in other words, means repeated specifi city.
Proposition 3: The Richness Thesis.
The richness thesis states that the likeli-hood that a neuron or cell assembly (ie brand) will be acti-vated is proportional to the number of direct links it has with cells or cell assemblies that are activated during the choice process (ie cues).
Ebbinghaus
74 showed that the chance of
activation of a neuron B, by a neuron A, decreases with the number of intervening neurons between A and B. This means, generally stated, that the more incoming (dendritic) links a cell or cell assembly, B, has that are directly connected with often activate cell assemblies (ie cues), the more
likely B will be activated. We will call this degree of synaptic connectedness the ‘ richness ’ of the network.
In principle, every connection with
the choice cue can potentially activate the brand ’ s network. The more connec-
tions there are, the higher the likelihood that the whole network is evoked force-fully. The likelihood that individual neurons pass on a signal depends on the summation of the signals coming in. Gener-ally, more signals make a higher sum.
75
In case more than one choice cue is
used to evoke brands, which may often be the case, the ‘ net sum ’ of excitatory
signals will be higher in a richer network. This effect is further amplifi ed if the
elements of the network are also mutually interconnected, as this facilitates further activation cascades in an exponential fashion. This higher ‘ net sum ’ of excita-
tory signals results in a more forceful acti-vation of the brand name — a phenomenon
sometimes referred to as ‘ bottom-up
stimulus strength ’ (see Dehaene et al .
76 ).
Stronger activation increases the chance that the brand wins the competition for cortical representation when two or more brands are cued simultaneously and engage in a mutually inhibitory battle for aware-ness (see Duncan,
49 Yantis 51 and Dahaene
et al . 76 ).
Research shows that such richer asso-
ciation networks (ie higher numbers of synaptic links) are formed as a result of richer environments.
77,78 Virtual reality
environments are used, for example, to rehabilitate the memory performance of (elderly) people.
79 Environments are
richer when they provide higher quanti-ties of relevant stimulation, for example more opportunities for play, exercise, learning, social interaction, physical activity, etc.
80,81 Such environments
present more stimuli and induce more

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 186
elaborate processing by arousing curiosity
and stimulating exploratory behaviour or creating engagement, generally leading to rapid increases in synaptic connectivity (ie formation of new synapses and increase of synaptic density) and improved memory performance.
78,82,83 There is
much evidence that environmental enrich-ment can delay memory degeneration
77
and can sometimes repair memory defi cits
78,83 even after severe neuronal and
synaptic loss due to neurodegenerative diseases.
84
The branding consequence of the rich-
ness thesis is that brands seeking to be chosen must not only create strong links
between their customers ’ choice criteria
and the brand and interconnections between the other elements of the brand ’ s
association network but also create as many
of these (inter)connections as possible. They must seek to create a rich network of
internal and external synaptic links.
85 – 87
Contacting customers in ‘ richer brand
environments ’ does this. In practice, this
means using more engaging and intriguing communication forms and richer, more immersive communication media. One example of an engaging, participatory brand environment is toy manufacturer Lego ’ s experience store in Orlando, Florida,
USA and other places around the world. The designers created play spaces in the middle of the stores and dozens of cylinders containing the Lego bricks for grabs, thus encouraging a direct experience of its products instead of creating a passive display of closed boxes on long shelves.
In sum, the three theses provide a
neurological branding maxim: create as many synaptic connections as possible (richness) between the neural representa-tions of primary choice cues and the brand name (relevance), and reactivate these connections regularly through a specifi c message (coherence). COROLLARIES: THREE BRANDING
LAWS
From the propositions above, we can now
infer three branding laws as corollaries. They are the laws of distinctive relevance, coherence and participation. Whereas the three theses refer to robust characteristics of how the brain works, the three laws deduced from them stipulate what the aims of branding activities must be to act in accordance with these brain character-istics. How these aims are then actually reached in practice is a topic in itself, and is beyond the scope of this paper.
As the three laws are neurologically
founded, they possess a strong regularity that turns them into branding prerequi-sites. As stated in the introduction, these laws are no new discoveries. They are used, in varying degrees, as rules of thumb. This paper argues, however, that their status
must be raised to a higher level of impor-tance and reliability. Seen from a neuro-logical standpoint, they should be treated and followed as universal branding laws with a scientifi c foundation.
Law 1: The higher the distinctive
relevance of branding efforts, the more likely the brand will be chosen.
Increasing the probability a brand is
chosen requires associating it more strongly and uniquely with elements that are of personal signifi cance to the customer at
the moment of decision-making (ie primary choice cues). This is the law of distinctive relevance . An element is relevant
to the degree it is used by customers as a cue for activating brand names at the moment of choice and for evaluating brand performance.
Brands may also be able to infl uence
the cues people use. Empirical evidence shows that what is relevant for customers

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 187 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
can vary between individuals and, for the
same individual, between different occa-sions. T ypically, however, primary choice cues include product category, sub-cate-gory, functional and symbolic attributes, use occasion, self and user image and combinations of these.
11,24,43 The brand ’ s
core message and its propositions must be built around and distinguished within the range of cues that are important to customers in the specifi c environment the
brand operates in.
Law 2: The higher the coherence of
branding efforts across time and space, the more likely the brand will be chosen.
Ensuring a front position in the consid-
eration set requires repetition of a specifi c,
relevant core message for the brand. This is the law of coherence . Coherence
equals repetition multiplied by specifi city
(c = r.s). Repetition is needed to create
strong synaptic connections with choicecriteria, which in turn is required for increasing cortical representation proba-bility, which in turn is required for becoming top of mind at the moment of choice. Specifi city is necessary because
specifi c messages are much more likely to
repeatedly reactivate the same connec-tions and hence strengthen them — thus
improving the brand ’ s cortical representa-
tion probability. Moreover, communi-cating many messages at the same time or in subsequent campaigns over the years creates confusion at best and contradiction at worst, resulting in negative emotions such as aversion and dissonance (cf. Festinger
88 ). Negative emotions may
produce a cascade of inhibitory signals
across the association network, thus decreasing the probability that the brand is activated and evaluated positively. Even if such a brand is strongly activated, we
note that in the competition for awareness and a top position at the choice moment,
it is at a disadvantage versus brands that are less or not at all impeded by inhibiting
and memory-repressing inconsistencies (see Duncan
49 ).
Coherence in branding policy through
time and space (ie across physical touch points such as advertising, point-of-sale materials, products, new product develop-ment, packaging, websites, etc) is compul-
sory from a neurological standpoint. In
contrast, incoherence is a recipe for dimin-ishing the brand ’ s chance of being chosen
and for destroying its fi nancial value. Inco-
herence (whether purposefully, uninten-tionally or through the lack of leadership) is a ‘ Bonsai ’ strategy. It keeps the brand
small compared to its actual market poten-tial (like the Japanese art of tree minia-turisation).
It may seem from this account that
sticking to one theme is all a brand has to do. There is a difference, however, between the laws (branding aims ) and the
particular way in which one adheres to them in practice (branding activities ). For
example, in practice, repetition must be
combined with the opposite need for change, to maintain curiosity and prevent people from becoming bored by the brand. This is done, for example, through creating surprise and presenting the same brand message in ever-evolving inter-
pretations, forms and expressions . This
then puts a premium on high ‘ brand
orientation ’ and rich brand concepts
that can act as long-term ‘ business hubs ’
(cf. Gromark et al .
89 ). Coherent change
and variation around one brand theme (which only a rich brand concept allows) provides additional reinforcement of the brand ’ s cortical representation probability,
because it draws more attention and induces more active processing ( ‘ elabora-
tion ’ ), both of which increase memory
performance.
23,90,91

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 188
Similarly, specifi city must be combined
with the opposite need for broadness. After all, strong brands become more profi table when they are successfully
leveraged into other categories.
92 Of
course, surprise and broadness must be created without compromising repetition and specifi city (ie coherence), which is
precisely what Van der Vorst,
93,94 Loken
and Roedder 95 and others have shown.
Law 3: The more engaging the
branding environment that is created, the more likely the brand will be chosen.
T o win the battle for awareness, brands
must create as many synaptic connections
as possible between choice criteria and the brand name and within their own association network. We call this a rich
network of synaptic links. Richer associa-tion networks are formed in the brain as a result of richer, participatory environ-ments that induce a more elaborate or a more comprehensive processing of brand stimuli. Richer environments are settings with a higher propensity to arouse curi-osity and to create engagement and participation.
Brands that induce motivated attention
by making us curious or by better tempting their customers to try, play, prac-tice, learn, exercise, adapt, interact or socialise with them are more likely to win the battle for awareness and be chosen. This is the law of participation . Again, there
are many ways in which brands can create participation in practice. The law of participation does not stipulate what way should be chosen; it merely states that brands creating participation (in which-ever way) increase their chance of being chosen. For instance, brands may seek to reach customers with richer media and more intriguing, engaging forms that create interaction, involvement and dialogue (within constraints such as brand
fi t, budget, reach, etc). In practice, brands
must develop a participation strategy that balances richness with reach (the number of people contacted), as richness and reach often form a trade-off (cf. Evans and Wurster
96 ).
DISCUSSION
It is beyond the scope of this paper to
discuss all implications of these three branding laws for the practice of branding. In general, however, it is useful to distin-guish between the three theses (describing brain characteristics), the three laws (describing branding aims) and branding activities (things done by marketers to act in accordance with the laws). This paper has focused on the fi rst two. Several fi nal
remarks may be made about the laws.
Remarks on the law of
distinctive relevance
Regarding the fi rst law, at least two things
can be noted. We have seen that winning the competition for entry into customers ’
awareness is crucial for any brand. This selection process takes place largely outside our consciousness and is rapid, automatic and effortless (see Kahneman
56 ). This
means that it is crucial to study how effi –
ciently brands are evocated by customers ’
primary choice cues, instead of focusing exclusively on brand evaluation. More-over, if evaluation takes place it is happening
only after evocation. This may require
changes in standard research designs.
Operationalising brand awareness : First, in
the majority of commercial tracking studies, the focus seems to be on the product category as the only cue for measuring brand saliency (generally called ‘ top-of-mind awareness ’ ). Empirical
evidence suggests, however, that people

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 189 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
use many more cues for recalling brands.
It is important that the operationalisation of brand awareness is broadened, by not only measuring it relative to the product category but also against other primary choice cues.
43
Measuring relevance : Secondly, when
measuring brand relevance the focus is generally on brand image. That is, the brand to attribute connection is often measured, which is important in the eval-uation phase. What is often neglected is the attribute to brand connection, which is crucial for evocation and the likelihood of entering customer ’ s consideration sets
(cf. Holden and Lutz
11 ). Research designs
should start to incorporate this. 43
Remarks on the law of coherence
Maintaining coherence : Regarding the
second law one can observe that in prac-tice, coherence is often sacrifi ced due to
short-term economic pressures (see, eg Lodish and Mela
97 ). It seems that marketers
often fail to understand or nurture the brand ’ s deeper identity. Following the
craze of the day, sending confl icting
‘ interim ’ messages for sales purposes or
extending the brand with non-fi tting new
products and services are common causes that kill repetition and specifi city. Thus,
the major setbacks in a brand ’ s long-term
quest of being chosen are often self-infl icted handicaps created by disconti-
nuity, brand dilution and wavering leadership. While we may increase quar-terly sales, ‘ short-termism ’ can foster a
tendency for the brand to grow weaker, thus amplifying short-term sales pressures
in the future and creating a vicious circle. The second law invokes the repeat-surprise and the specifi city-broadness
trade-offs, and the need to combine these
opposing goals (cf. Walvis
98 and Collins
and Porras 99 ). Remarks on the law of participation
Participation is often neglected : Regarding the
third law, we can observe in practice that richness and participation are often not a focal point in media policy. The traditional focus of most media agencies and adver-tisers is on Gross Rating Points (a common measure of the average percentage of target group members contacted in a certain period) and hence on reach. As more reach means lower richness (cf. Evans and Wurster
96 ), conventional media
selection unwittingly sacrifi ces brand sali-
ency and hence long-term brand sales. The third branding law creates the imper-ative of optimising the richness-reach trade-off. Within the set of feasible media, richness and reach must be mutually served (of course given constraints such as medium fi t with the brand concept,
budget, media prices, etc).
CONCLUSIONS
Brands seek to be chosen by customers,
and branding as an activity is aimed at increasing the probability that they are. In order to reach this goal, brands must win the unconscious battle for awareness during the process of consideration set formation and choice. Brands that win the battle for awareness (ie the most salient brands) are more likely to be chosen. Based on neuroscientifi c insights, brands
following the three branding laws discussed in this paper have a higher chance of winning the competition for cortical representation and hence choice than a brand that does not. They are the laws of distinctive relevance, coherence and participation. In one sentence, the motto of these laws is: creating and repeating
relevant specifi city (over time and across touch points) around one central brand theme, using the richest and most engaging forms and media possible . This then is a general requirement

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 190
for an effective allocation of marketing
investments. Stated slightly more prag-matically in the form of key questions, the three laws of branding require that one asks of every branding act:
Is it distinctively relevant?
Is it a specifi c expression of the brand
theme? Is it delivered in the most engaging
form possible?
The above account and the deduction of
the three laws is an attempt to add to and elaborate upon existing work, to establish a stronger foundation for the fi eld and to
translate insights from neuroscience into empirical consequences for the activity of branding. It adds to a synthesis of disci-plines in which branding provides a framework of questions for which neuro-science could provide an insight into the biological underpinnings. The main purpose of this paper has been to draw attention to the idea that the proper status
of three branding principles known to most practitioners (distinctive relevance, coherence and participation) is not recog-nised and should be raised to a higher level: that of laws.
The branding law theorem is open for
further research, to fi ll in blanks, refi ne
and elaborate upon the above material, quite possibly to uncover more laws, etc. If strong brands are more valuable at the stock exchange
3,100 and the three branding
laws explain how to create such brands, then the theorem bears promise. With today ’ s rapid advances in neuroscience, it
may be possible in the coming years to ever more tightly link the micro level of the customer ’ s mental world (where neural
associations can be infl uenced by
marketers) to the macro level of compa-nies ’ fi nancial success and their share prices
on the stock exchange. —
—
— It may also mean that in the future,
marketing directors are not only judged by the results they deliver but also by the degree to which they have followed the laws of their profession in the process. These laws hint at the results one could
and therefore should have obtained, thus
providing a new type of benchmarks. This may improve the effectiveness of marketing investments and may prove to be a leap forward for the professionalism of our fi eld.
Acknowledgment
The article is the inspiration for the book ‘ Three Laws
of Branding ’ by the same author, forthcoming in the
fall of 2008.
References
( 1 ) Millward Brown , O . ( 2007 ) ‘ Brandz: T op 100 most
powerful brands ’ , Millward Brown, London .
( 2 ) Interbrand – BusinessWeek . ( 2007 ) ‘ Best Global
Brands 2006: A Ranking By Brand Value ’ , Inter-
brand, London .
( 3 ) Madden , T . J . , Fehle , F . and Fournier , S . M .
( 2006 ) ‘ Brands matter: An empirical demonstra-
tion of the creation of shareholder value through branding ’ , Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science , Vol. 34 , No. 2 , pp. 224 – 235 .
( 4 ) Alsop , R .
J . ( 2004 ) ‘ The 18 Immutable Laws of
Corporate Reputation: Creating, Protecting, and Repairing Y our Most Valuable Asset ’ , The
Free Press, New Y ork .
( 5 ) Ries , A . and Ries , L . ( 2002 ) ‘ The 22 Immutable
Laws of Branding: How to Build a Product Or Service Into a World-Class Brand ’ , Harper
Collins Publishers, New Y ork .
( 6 ) Blaug , M . ( 1992 ) ‘ The Methodology of
Economics or How Economists Explain ’ ,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge .
( 7 ) Lynch , J . G . and Srull , T . K . ( 1982 )
‘ Memory and attentional factors in consumer
choice: Concepts and research methods ’ ,
Journal of Consumer Research , Vol. 9
, No. 1 ,
pp. 18 – 37 .
( 8 ) Bettman , J . R . ( 1986 ) ‘ Consumer psychology ’ ,
Annual Review of Psychology , Vol. 37 ,
pp. 257 – 289 .
( 9 ) Fazio , R . H . ( 1986 ) ‘ How do attitudes guide
behavior ’ , in Sorrentino, R. M. and Higgins, E.
T. (eds.) ‘ Handbook of Motivation and Cogni-
tion: Foundations of Social Behavior ’ , Guilford
Press, New Y ork, NY , pp. 204 – 243 .

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 191 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
( 10 ) Nedungadi , P . and Hutchinson , J . W . ( 1985 ) ‘ The
prototypicality of brands: Relationships with brand awareness, preference and usage ’ , in Hirschman, E.
C. and Holbrook, M. B. (eds.) ‘ Advances in
Consumer Research ’ , Association for Consumer
Research, Provo, UT , Vol. 12 , pp. 498 – 503 .
( 11 ) Holden , S . J . S . and Lutz , R . J . ( 1992 ) ‘ Ask not
what the brand can evoke: Ask what can evoke the brand ’ , Advances in Consumer Research ,
Vol. 19 , No. 1 , pp. 101 – 107 .
( 12 ) Lee
, A . Y . ( 2002 ) ‘ Effects of implicit memory of
memory-based versus stimulus-based brand choice ’ , Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 39 ,
No. 4 , pp. 440 – 454 .
( 13 ) Albright , T . D . , Jessell , T . M . , Kandel , E . R . and
Posner , M . I . ( 2000 ) ‘ Neural science: A century
of progress and the mysteries that remain ’ , Cell ,
Vol. 100 , Neuron, Vol. 25, pp. S1 – S55 .
( 14 ) Samanez Larkin , G . R . ,
Gibbs , S . E . B . , Khanna ,
K . , Nielsen , L . , Carstensen , L . L . and Knutson ,
B . ( 2007 ) ‘ Anticipation of monetary gain but
not loss in healthy older adults ’ , Nature Neuro-
science , Vol. 10 , No. 6 , pp. 787 – 791 .
( 15 ) Knutson , B . , Rick , S . , Elliott Wimmer , G . ,
Prelec , D . and Loewenstein , G . ( 2007 ) ‘ Neural
predictors of purchases ’ , Neuron , Vol . 53 , No. 1 ,
pp. 147 – 156 .
( 16 ) Moll , J . , Krueger , F . , Zahn , R . , Pardini , M . , de
Oliveira-Souza , R . and Grafman , J . ( 2006 )
‘ Human fronto – mesolimbic networks guide
decisions about charitable donation ’ , Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences USA ,
Vol. 103 , No. 42 , pp. 15623 – 15628 .
( 17 ) Rubenstein , A . ( 2006 ) ‘ Discussion of ‘ behavioral
economics ’ ’ , in Blundell, R., Newey, W . K. and
Persson, T. (eds.) ‘ Advances in Economics and
Econometrics: Theory and Applications, Ninth World Congress — Volume II ’ , Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge , pp. 246 – 254 .
( 18 ) An extensive literature search by the author for
this paper, in journals such as Nature, Science, Cell, Neuron, etc returned no reductionistic
studies pertaining to marketing issues .
( 19 ) Ungerstedt , U . ( 2000 ) ‘ Presentation speech ’ ,
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
2000, The Nobel Foundation .
( 20 ) Bickle , J . ( 2003 ) ‘ Philosophy and Neuroscience:
A Ruthlessly Reductionist Account ’ , Kluwer
Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands .
( 21 ) Looren de Jong , H . and Schouten , M . K . D .
(
2005 ) ‘ Ruthless reductionism: A review essay
of John Bickle’s philosophy and neuroscience: A ruthlessly reductive account ’ , Philosophical
Psychology , Vol. 18 , No. 4 , pp. 473 – 486 .
( 22 ) Alba , J . W . , Hutchinson , J . W . and Lynch Jr , J . G .
( 1991 ) ‘ Memory and decision making ’ , in
Robertson, T.S. and Kassarijian, H.H. (eds.)
‘ Handbook of Consumer Behavior ’ , Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey , pp. 1 – 49 . ( 23 ) Kandel , E . R . ( 2001 ) ‘ The molecular biology
of memory storage: A dialogue between genes and synapses ’ ,
Science , Vol. 294 , No. 5544 ,
pp. 1030 – 1038 .
( 24 ) Franzen , G . and Bouwman , M . ( 2001 ) ‘ The
Mental World of Brands: Mind, Memory and Brand Success ’ , Oxfordshire World Advertising
Research Centre .
( 25 ) Woodside , A . G . and Trappey , R . J . ( 1992 )
‘ Finding out why customers shop your store
and buy your brand: Automatic cognitive processing models of primary choice ’ , Journal of
Advertising Research , Vol. 32 , No. 6 , pp. 59 – 78 .
( 26 ) Castleberry , B . S
. and Ehrenberg , A . S . C . ( 1990 )
‘ Brand usage: A factor in consumer beliefs ’ ,
Market Research , Vol. 27 , No. 4 , pp. 477 – 484 .
( 27 ) Verlegh , P . W . J . ( 2001 ) ‘ Country-of-origin
effects on consumer product evaluations ’ ,
Doctoral Thesis, Wageningen University .
( 28 ) Peterson , R . A . and Jolibert , A . J . P . ( 1995 ) ‘ A
meta-analysis of country-of-origin effects ’ ,
Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 26 ,
No. 4 , pp. 883 – 900 .
( 29 ) McClure , S . M . , Li , J . , T omlin , D . , Cypert , K . S . ,
Montague , L . M . and Montague , P . R . ( 2004 )
‘ Neural correlates of behavioural preference for
culturally familiar drinks ’ , Neuron , Vol. 44 ,
No. 2 , pp. 379 – 387 .
( 30 ) We will use the term ‘ customers ’ in the
remainder of the text, but note that our conclu-sions not only apply to customers and buying situations but more generally to all stakeholders and their brand decision-making situations .
( 31 )
Shindler , R . M . and Berbaum , M . ( 1982 ) ‘ The
infl uence of salience on choice ’ , Advances in
Consumer Research , Vol. 10 , pp. 416 – 418 .
( 32 ) Cialdini , R . B . ( 1984 ) ‘ Infl uence: The Psychology
of Persuasion ’ , William Morrow and Company,
New Y ork .
( 33 ) Howard , J . A . and Sheth , J . N . ( 1969 ) ‘ The
Theory of Buyer Behavior ’ , John Wiley & Sons,
New Y ork .
( 34 ) Ballantyne , R . , Warren , A . and Nobbs , K .
( 2006 ) ‘ The evolution of brand choice ’ ,
Journal of Brand Management , Vol. 13 , No. 4/5 ,
pp. 339 – 352 .
( 35 ) Paulssen , M . and Bagozzi , R . P . ( 2005 ) ‘ A self-
regulatory model of consideration set forma-tion ’ , Psychology & Marketing , Vol. 22 , No. 10 ,
pp. 785 – 812 .
( 36 ) LeBlanc , R . P . and Herndon
Jr , N . C . ( 2001 )
‘ Cross-cultural consumer decisions: Considera-
tion sets — A marketing universal ’ , Marketing
Intelligence & Planning , Vol. 19 , No. 7 ,
pp. 500 – 506 .
( 37 ) Coates , S . L . , Butler , L . T . and Berry , D . C . ( 2004 )
‘ Implicit memory: A prime example for brand
consideration and choice ’ , Applied Cognitive
Psychology , Vol. 18 , No. 9 , pp. 1195 – 1211 .

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 192
( 38 ) Shapiro , S . and Krishnan , H . S . ( 2001 ) ‘ Memory-
based measures for assessing advertising effects: A comparison of explicit and implicit memory effects ’ , Journal of Advertising , Vol. 30 , No. 3 ,
pp. 1 – 13 .
( 39 ) Loewenstein , G . ( 1996 ) ‘ Out of control: Visceral
infl uences on behavior ’ , Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes , Vol. 65 , No. 3 ,
pp. 272 – 292 .
( 40 ) Bargh , J . A . and Chartrand , T . L . ( 1999
) ‘ The
unbearable automaticity of being ’ , American
Psychologist , Vol. 54 , No. 7 , pp. 462 – 479 .
( 41 ) Persaud , N . , McLeod , P . and Cowey , A . ( 2007 )
‘ Post-decision wagering objectively measures
awareness ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 10 , No. 2 ,
pp. 57 – 261 .
( 42 ) Dijksterhuis , A . P . , Bos , M . W . , Nordgren , L . F .
and van Baaren , R . B . ( 2006 ) ‘ On making the
right choice: The deliberation-without-atten-tion effect ’ , Science , Vol. 311 , No. 5763 ,
pp. 1005 – 1007 .
( 43 ) Romaniuk , J . and Sharp , B . ( 2004 ) ‘ Conceptu-
alizing and measuring brand salience ’ , Marketing
Theory , Vol. 4 , No. 4 , pp. 327 – 342 .
( 44 ) Chandon , P . and Wansink , B . ( 2002 ) ‘ When are
stockpiled products consumed faster? a con –
venience-salience framework of postpurchase consumption incidence and quantity ’ , Journal of
Marketing Research
, Vol. 39 , No. 3 , pp. 321 – 335 .
( 45 ) Keller , K . L . ( 1998 ) ‘ Strategic Brand Manage-
ment: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity ’ , Prentice-Hall, New Jersey .
( 46 ) Ehrenberg , A . , Barnard , N . and Scriven , J . A .
( 1997 ) ‘ Differentiation or salience ’ , Journal of
Advertising Research , Vol. 37 , No. 6 , pp. 7 – 14 .
( 47 ) Holden , S . J . S .
( 1993 ) ‘ Understanding brand
awareness: Let me give you a C(l)ue ’ , Advances in
Consumer Research , Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 383 – 388 .
( 48 ) Nedungadi , P . ( 1990 ) ‘ Recall and consumer
consideration sets: Infl uencing choice without
altering brand associations ’ , Journal of Consumer
Research , Vol. 17 , No. 3 , pp. 263 – 276 .
( 49 ) Duncan , J . ( 2006 ) ‘ Brain mechanisms of
attention ’ , EPS Mid-Career Award 2004, The
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology ,
Vol. 59 , No. 1 , pp. 2 – 27 .
( 50 ) Kuhl , B . A . , Dudukovic , N . M . , Kahn , I . and
Wagner , A . D . ( 2007 ) ‘ Decreased demands on
cognitive control reveal the neural processing benefi ts of forgetting ’ , Nature Neuroscience ,
Vol. 10 , No. 7 , pp. 908 – 914 .
( 51 ) Yantis , S . ( 2005 ) ‘ How visual salience wins the
battle for awareness ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 8 ,
No. 8 , pp. 975 – 977 .

( 52 ) Kahneman , D . , Ritov , I . and Schkade , D . ( 1999 )
‘ Economic preferences or attitude expressions?
An analysis of dollar responses to public issues ’ ,
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty , Vol. 19 , No. 1 – 3 ,
pp. 203 – 235 . ( 53 ) Kahneman , D . and Ritov , I . ( 1994 ) ‘ Determi-
nants of stated willingness to pay for public goods: A study in the headline method ’ , Journal
of Risk and Uncertainty , Vol. 9 , No. 1 , pp. 5 – 37 .
( 54 ) Damasio , A . R .
( 1994 ) ‘ Descartes ’ Error:
Emotion, Reason, and The Human Brain ’ ,
Putnam Publishing, New Y ork .
( 55 ) Rolls , E . T . ( 1999 ) ‘ The Brain and Emotion ’ ,
Oxford University Press, Oxford .
( 56 ) Kahneman , D . ( 2003 ) ‘ Maps of bounded ration-
ality: Psychology for behavioral economics ’ ,
The American Economic Review , Vol. 93 , No. 5 ,
pp. 1449 – 1475 .
( 57 ) In case of high-involvement brands for which
conscious evaluation takes place, attributes that are deemed important must be linked to it so that the brand can activate them as Holden and Lutz
11 point out (ie ‘ the brand-to-cue link ’ ). In
other words, in this case not the brand name but specifi c attributes must enter our awareness.
The same rules and laws that govern the cortical representation probability of brands will also guide the cortical representation probability of attributes (cf. Duncan
49 ). Therefore, we will not
treat this topic separately .
( 58 ) Paz , R . , Guillaume Pelletier , J . , Bauer , E . P . and
Par é , D . ( 2006 ) ‘ Emotional enhancement of
memory via amygdaladriven facilitation of rhinal interactions ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 9 ,
No. 10 , pp. 1321 – 1329 .
( 59 ) Canli , T . , Zhao , Z . , Brewer , J . , Gabrieli , J . D . E .
and Cahill , L . ( 2000 ) ‘ Event-related activation
in the human amygdala associates with later
memory for individual emotional experience ’ ,
The Journal of Neuroscience , Vol. 20 , No. 19 , RC
99, pp. 1 – 5 .
( 60 ) Montague , R . ( 2006 ) ‘ Why Choose This
Book? — How We Make Decisions ’ , Dutton,
New Y ork .
( 61 ) Bartsch , D . , Ghirardi , M . , Skehel , P . A . , Karl , K .
A . , Herder , S . P . , Chen , M . , Bailey , C . H . and
Kandel , E . R . ( 1995 ) ‘ Aplysia CREB2 represses
long-term facilitation: Relief of repression converts transient facilitation into long-term functional and structural change ’ , Cell , Vol. 83 ,
No. 6 , pp. 979 – 992 .
( 62 ) Wells , D . G . and Fallon , J . R . ( 2000 ) ‘ Dendritic
mRNA translation: Deciphering the uncoded ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 3 , No. 11 ,
pp. 1062 – 1064 .
( 63 ) Bedbury , S . and Fenichell , S . ( 2002 ) ‘ A New
Brand World: Eight Principles for Achieving Brand Leadership in the 21st Century ’ , Viking
Penguin, New Y ork .
( 64 ) Matynia , A . , Kushner , S . A . and Silva , A . J . ( 2002 )
‘ Genetic approaches to molecular and cellular
cognition: A focus on LTP and learning and memory ’ , Annual Review of Genetics , Vol. 36 ,
pp. 687 – 720 .

© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX $30.00 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 193 THREE LAWS OF BRANDING
( 65 ) Hebb , D . O . ( 1949 ) ‘ The Organization of
Behavior: A Neuropsychological Theory ’ ,
Wiley-Interscience, New Y ork .
( 66 ) Bliss , T . V . P . and L ø mo , T . ( 1973 ) ‘ Long lasting
potentiation of synaptic transmission in the dentate area of the anaesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path ’ , Journal of Physiology , Vol. 232 , No. 2 ,
pp. 331 – 356 .
( 67 ) Sharot et al .
68 add new evidence to the existing
fi nding that fl ashbulb memories are not neces-
sarily remembered with a higher objective accuracy. Instead, they fi nd that strong emotions
associated with the original event enhance the subjective, reported feeling of remembering .
( 68 ) Sharot , T . , Delgado , M . R . and Phelps , E . A .
( 2004 ) ‘ How emotion enhances the feeling
of remembering ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 7 ,
No. 12 , pp. 1376 – 1380 .
( 69 ) Based on the principle of LTP , repeated asso-
ciation of the brand name with a primary choice cue increases the probability the brand wins the competition for awareness (and thus choice) when evoked by this choice cue. This may seem to be contradicted by the ‘ famous
overnight effect ’ .
70 This effect refers to the
fi nding that after a 24-hour delay between
reading a list of nonfamous names and making fame judgments, nonfamous names were more likely to be mistakenly judged as famous than they would have been had they not been read earlier. The names became famous overnight. Upon closer inspection, however, this effect is not based on cued evocation (ie spontaneous
recall) of brand names but on recognition of a name from a presented list (ie aided recall). It is not clear, however, that improving aided recog-
nition would necessarily improve a brand’s spon-
taneous recall , thus helping it win the competition
for cortical representation when the brain acti-vates a primary choice cue .
( 70 ) Jacoby , L . L . , Kelley , C . , Brown , J . and Jasechkjo ,
J . ( 1989 ) ‘ Becoming famous overnight: Limits
on the ability to avoid unconscious infl uences
of the past ’ , Journal of Personality & Social
Psychology , Vol. 56 , No. 3 , pp. 326 – 338 .
( 71 ) According to the ‘ encoding specifi city prin-
ciple ’ , the target item (eg brand attributes) must
be encoded in reference to the cue for the cue to be effective.
72 The brand’s message, therefore,
must emulate the choice cues stakeholders use to evoke brands .
( 72 ) Tulving , E . and Thomson , D . M . ( 1973 )
‘ Encoding specifi city and retrieval processes in
episodic memory ’ , Psychological Review , Vol. 80 ,
No. 5 , pp. 352 – 373 .
( 73 ) Vaidya , C . J . , Zhao , M . , Desmond , J . E . and
Gabrieli , J . D . ( 2002 ) ‘ Evidence for cortical
encoding specifi city in episodic memory: Memory-induced re-activation of picture
processing areas ’ , Neuropsychologia , Vol. 40 ,

No. 12 , pp. 2136 – 2143 .
( 74 ) Ebbinghaus , H . ( 1885 ) ‘ Memory: A Contribu-
tion to Experimental Psychology ’ , Chapter 9,
Section 37, T eachers College, Columbia
University .
( 75 ) Magee , J . C . ( 2000 ) ‘ Dendritic integration of
excitatory synaptic input ’ , Nature Reviews.
Neuroscience , Vol. 1 , No. 3 , pp. 181 – 190 .
( 76 ) Dehaene , S . , Changeux , J . -P . , Naccach , L . ,
Sackur , J . and Sergent , C . ( 2006 ) ‘ Conscious,
preconscious, and subliminal processing: A test-able taxonomy ’ , Trends in Cognitive Sciences ,
Vol. 10 , No. 5 , pp. 204 – 211 .
( 77 ) Van Dellen , A . , Blakemore , C . , Deacon , R . ,
Y ork , D . and Hannan , A . J . ( 2000 ) ‘ Delaying the
onset of Huntington’s in Mice ’ , Nature , Vol. 404 ,
No. 6779 , pp. 721 – 722 .
( 78 ) Rampon ,
C . , Tang , Y . -P . , Goodhouse , J . ,
Shimizu , E . , Kyin , M . and Tsien , J . Z . ( 2000 )
‘ Enrichment induces structural changes and
recovery from nonspatial memory defi cits
in CA1 NMDAR1-knockout mice ’ , Nature
Neuroscience , Vol. 3 , No. 3 , pp. 238 – 244 .
( 79 ) Optale , G . , Capodieci , S . , Pinelli , P . , Zara , D . ,
Gamberini , L . and Riva , G . ( 2001 ) ‘ Music-
enhanced immersive virtual reality in the reha-bilitation of memoryrelated cognitive processes and functional abilities: A case report ’ , Teleop-
erators & Virtual Environments , Vol. 10 , No. 4 ,
pp. 450 – 462 .
( 80 ) Narasimhan , K . ( 2006 ) ‘ More neurons may not
make you smarter ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 9 ,
No. 6 , p. 722 .
( 81 ) Van Praag , H . , Kempermann , G . and Gage , F .
H . ( 1999 ) ‘ Running increases cell proliferation
and neurogenesis in the adult mouse dentate gyrus ’ , Nature Neuroscience , Vol. 2 , No.
3 ,
pp. 266 – 270 .
( 82 ) Spedding , M . , Jay , T . , Costa e Silva , J . and Perret ,
L . ( 2005 ) ‘ A pathophysiological paradigm for
the therapy of psychiatric disease ’ , Nature
Reviews. Drug Discovery , Vol. 4 , No. 6 ,
pp. 467 – 476 .
( 83 ) Eichenbaum , H . and Harris , K . ( 2000 ) ‘ T oying
with memory in the Hippocampus ’ , Nature
Neuroscience , Vol. 3 , No. 3 , pp. 205 – 206 .
( 84 ) Fischer , A . , Sananbenesi , F . , Wang , X . , Dobbin ,
M . and Tsai , L . -H . ( 2007 ) ‘ Recovery of learning
and memory is associated with chromatin remodelling ’ , Nature , Vol. 447 , No. 7141 ,
pp. 178 – 183 .
( 85 ) In the conscious evaluation phase (eg for high-
involvement brands), richness could give rise to a phenomenon that Anderson
86 and others have
observed in certain very active searches of conscious memory and that he has called the ‘ fan effect ’ . The fan effect says that the more

WALVIS
© 2008 PALGRAVE MACMILLAN 1350-23IX BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 16, NO. 3, 176–194 DECEMBER 2008 194
elements a memory contains, the less accessible
it becomes. Anderson 87 also notes, however, that
such very active searches are uncommon in daily life and that repeated activation (by Law # 2) of such memories can neutralise it or even create a negative fan effect .
( 86 ) Anderson , J . R . ( 1974 ) ‘ Retrieval of pro –
positional information from long-term memory ’ , Cognitive Psychology , Vol. 5 , No. 4 ,
pp. 451 – 474 .
( 87 ) Anderson , J . R . ( 1983 ) ‘ Retrieval of informa-
tion from long-term memory ’ , Science , New
Series, Vol. 220 , No. 4592 , pp. 25 – 30 .
( 88 ) Festinger , L . ( 1957 ) ‘ A Theory of Cogni tive
Dissonance ’ ,
Stanford University Press,
Stanford, CA .
( 89 ) Gromark , J . , Astvik , T . B . and Melin , F . ( 2005 )
‘ Brand Orientation Index ’ , Label AG,
G ö tenborg .
( 90 ) Wagner , A . D . , Maril , A . , Bjork , R . A . and
Schacter , D . L . ( 2001 ) ‘ Prefrontal contributions
to executive control: fMRI evidence for func-tional distinctions within lateral prefrontal cortex ’ , Neuroimage , Vol. 14 , pp. 1337 – 1347 ,
quoted in: Sakai, K., Rowe, J. B. and Passingham,
R. E. (2002) ‘ Active maintenance in
prefrontal area 46 creates distractor-resistant memory ’ , Nature Neuroscience
, Vol. 5, No. 5, pp.
479 – 484 .
( 91 ) Craik , F . I . M . and Tulving , E . ( 1975 )
‘ Depth of processing and the retention of
words in episodic memory ’ , Journal of Experi-
mental Psychology (General) , Vol. 104 , No. 3 ,
pp. 268 – 294 . ( 92 ) Court , D . C . , Leiter , M . G . and Loch , M . A .
( 1999 ) ‘ Brand leverage ’ , The McKinsey Quarterly ,
Vol . 36 , No. 2 , pp. 101 – 110 .
( 93 ) Van der Vorst , R . R . R . ( 2004 ) ‘ Branding: A
systems theoretic perspective Doctoral Thesis,
Radboud University Nijmegen, The Nether-lands .
( 94 ) Van der Vorst , R . R . ( 2004 ) ‘ Uniciteit: Anders
Zijn Zonder Iets Anders T e Worden ’ , Holland
Management Review , Vol. 21 , No. 96 , pp. 69 –
81 .
( 95 ) Loken , B . and Roedder John , D . ( 1993 ) ‘ Diluting
brand beliefs: When do brand extensions have a negative impact ’ , Journal of Marketing , Vol. 57 ,
No.
3 , pp. 71 – 84 .
( 96 ) Evans , P . and Wurster , T . S . ( 2000 ) ‘ Blown to
Bits: How the New Economics of Information Transforms Strategy ’ , Harvard Business School
Press, Cambridge .
( 97 ) Lodish , L . M . and Mela , C . F . ( 2007 ) ‘ If brands
are built over years, why are they managed over quarters ’ , Harvard Business Review , Vol. 85 ,
No. 7 – 8 , pp. 104 – 112 .
( 98 ) Walvis , T . H . (
1995 ) ‘ De Prestatie Paradox:
Creatieve Spanning en Systematisch Boven-gemiddelde Bedrijfsprestaties ’ , unpublished
thesis (with a summary in English), Erasmus University Rotterdam .
( 99 ) Collins , J . C . and Porras , J . I . ( 1994 ) ‘ Build to
Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Compa-
nies ’ , Harper Collins, New Y ork .
( 100 ) Henderson , T . A . and Mihas , E . A . ( 2000 )
‘ Building retail brands ’ , The McKinsey Quarterly ,
Vol . 37 , No. 3 , pp. 110 – 117 .