Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 Internacional License institutua enpresa Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión journal homepage: http://www.ehu.eus/cuadernosdegestion/revista/es/ ISSN: 1131-6837 / e-ISSN: 1988-2157 Management Letters Cuadernos de Gestión Enpresa Institutua, UPV/EHU Conocimiento en Gestión/Management Knowledge Volume 23 / Number 2 (2023) • ISSN: 1131-6837 / e-ISSN: 1988-2157 http://www.ehu.eus/cuadernosdegestion/revista/es/ Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector Antecedentes y consecuencias de la confianza como un constructo multidimensional. Análisis transnacional en el sector minorista del lujo Enrique Marinao-Artigas*, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández a , Coro Chasco b,c , Denise Laroze-Prehn d a Departamento de Administración, Facultad de Economía y Negocios. Universidad de Chile (Chile). Diagonal Paraguay, 257. Santiago - l[email protected]hile.cl - https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5817-1879 b Department of Applied Economics, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain). C/ Francisco Tomás y Valiente 5, 28049 Madrid - coro.chasc[email protected]s - https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8098-9979 c ECEMIN Research Group, Nebrija University (Spain). C/ Santa Cruz de Marcenado, 27, 28015 Madrid d Departamento de Administración, Facultad de Administración y Economía. Universidad de Santiago de Chile (Chile). Avda. Libertador Bernardo O`Higgins, 3363. Santiago - [email protected] - https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6138-2570 * Corresponding author: Departamento de Administración, Facultad de Administración y Economía, Universidad de Santiago de Chile (Chile). Avda. Libertador Bernardo O`Higgins, 3363. Santiago–enrique.marin[email protected]l–https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1588-5011 ARTICLE INFO Received 9 May 2021, Accepted 14 March 2022 Available online 3 May 2022 DOI: 10.5295/cdg.211490em JEL: M31 ABSTRACT The objective of this study is to understand the role of the multidimensional trust of a luxury brand as an antecedent of consumer satisfaction and a consequence of reputation and familiarity, considering -in turnthat reputation and familiarity can be a consequence of the consumer’s cognitive and affective experiences. A cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector was carried out. Association relationships between variables are tested by a model of structural equations. For this, a transnational analysis has been carried out in the luxury retail sector. A non-probabilistic sample was used in this study. 1058 people were interviewed, 608 consumers in Santiago (Chile) and 450 in Madrid (Spain). The key role played by the multidimensional trust of a luxury brand as an antecedent of satisfaction and consequence of reputation and familiarity is confirmed. When observing the reputation and familiarity of a luxury brand as a result of the cognitive and affective experiences of the consumer, differences between Chile and Spain have been discovered. Managers can not only use the brand’s own characteristics to differentiate themselves from the competition, but they can also do so through the multi-dimensional trust of the luxury brand. Keywords: Brand Luxury, Trust, Satisfaction, Reputation, Familiarity, Cross-cultural Analysis. RESUMEN El objetivo de este estudio es comprender el papel de la confianza multidimensional de una marca de lujo como antecedente de la satisfacción del consumidor y consecuencia de la reputación y de la familiaridad, teniendo en cuenta —a su vez— que la reputación y la familiaridad pueden ser consecuencia de las experiencias cognitivas y afectivas del consumidor. Se llevó a cabo un análisis comparativo de países en el sector minorista de lujo. Las relaciones de asociación entre variables se prueban mediante un modelo de ecuaciones estructurales. Para ello, se ha realizado un análisis transnacional en el sector del retail de lujo. En este estudio fue utilizada una muestra no probabilística. Se entrevistó a 1058 personas, 608 consumidores en Santiago (Chile) y 450 en Madrid (España). Se confirma el papel clave que juega la confianza multidimensional de una marca de lujo como antecedente de la satisfacción y consecuencia de la reputación y la familiaridad. Al observar la reputación y la familiaridad de una marca de lujo como resultado de las experiencias cognitivas y afectivas del consumidor, se descubren diferencias entre Chile y España. Los gerentes no solo pueden utilizar las características propias de la marca para diferenciarse de la competencia, sino que también pueden hacerlo a través de la confianza multidimensional de la marca de lujo. Palabras clave: Marca de Lujo, Confianza, Satisfacción, Reputación, Familiaridad, Análisis Intercultural. Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 52 Enrique Marinao-Artigas, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández, Coro Chasco, Denise Laroze-Prehn 1. INTRODUCTION Despite the global health crisis produced by COVID-19, it is expected that in the period between 2020 and 2025, the global luxury market will grow annually by 7.4%. The consumption of luxury brands is constantly expanding worldwide affecting either developing or developed countries as it is the case of Chile and Spain, respectively. In this context, it is expected that by 2025 the consumption of luxury brands in Chile will be approximately 689 million US dollars, which is 0.25% its gross domestic product (GDP), while forecasts point to the consumption of luxury brands in Spain approaching 10,744 million dollars in 2025, a 0.77% of its GDP (Statista, 2022; The World Bank, 2022). Chile and Spain could be considered as a paradigmatic case. They are similar countries sharing a common history and cultural background, as Spanish-speaking and Christian-Catholic nations (Hofstede, 2001). However, they also have different economic and market characteristics (Villegas-Pinuer etal., 2021), mainly due to the economic gap still present between both countries (Chile’s GDP is only 20% the Spanish one). In this sense, it is not only cultural differences (Kapferer & Valette-Florence, 2021), but also the characteristics of the markets that affect the perception and consumption of luxury brands (Kootenaie & Kootenaie, 2021). And this is what it is highlighted in this paper with this specific cross-country analysis between Chile and Spain. The literature defines luxury brands as based on consumer perception of high price, superior quality, and aesthetic value, being rare and extraordinary, with a high degree of non-functional associations (Heine, 2012; Ko etal., 2019). Given these characteristics, it is easy to maintain its resale value (Turunen & Pöyry, 2019) and establish scarcity strategies to influence consumer purchasing decisions (Wu etal., 2012). One of the aims of this paper is, firstly, to highlight that luxury brands are not only acquired for their exclusivity but also for the trust they offer to their consumers (Kauppinen-Räisänen etal., 2020), because it is an important precedent for customer satisfaction (Chaudhuri & Holbrook 2001; Kim, 2019; Kim & Kim, 2020), and it is also considered as one of the most important antecedents of propensity to buy (Delgado-Ballester, 2004). Secondly, we also propose trust as a multidimensional construct, in the sense that to improve purchasing options, not only is trust in luxury brands important (Chae etal., 2020), but trust in the sales force is also key (Chung etal., 2020). From this perspective, there are few findings that have integrated trust in the brand (Ebrahim, 2020) with trust in the sales force for analysis in the luxury market (Chiu etal., 2010). Thirdly, we propose that trust in the brand is a consequence of two constructs: on the one hand, the corporate reputation of the store (Keh & Xie, 2009), which has also been considered as an intangible asset directly associated with the prestige of the brand (Batat, 2019), and on the other hand, the customer’s familiarity with the brand (Kuo & Nagasawa, 2020), which can be understood as the sum of direct or indirect customer experiences with the brand (Klein etal., 2016). Fourthly, we also found evidence of consumer experience as a key initial antecedent of the consumer’s bond with the brand (Ahn & Back, 2020). Thus, the cognitive style and affective intensity of the consumer experience play an important role as determinants of the brand’s reputation (Ozyer, 2016) and of the client’s familiarity with the brand (Kim etal., 1998). Finally, as stated in Bian and Forsythe (2012), most crosscountry studies simply analyze the impact of cultural differences on purchase intention for luxury brands. Our paper also aims at a deeper understanding of purchase intention formation for luxury goods as an outcome of satisfaction, which in turn is predicted by a multidimensional construct of trust for both within and across countries. Next, the theoretical framework that supports the hypotheses of this study is presented. Then the methodology is developed, and the main results are argued. Finally, the conclusions supported by a discussion are reported. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Satisfaction with luxury brands The satisfaction of a consumer with a luxury brand generates a strong cognitive and affective link in the long term (Shimul & Phau, 2018). Consumer satisfaction has been defined as a polysemic concept resulting from the cognitive and / or affective experience that the consumer performs after purchase (Danesh etal., 2012). It has also been defined as a state obtained through the consumer’s specific experience with a specific attribute of the product or service (Taylor etal., 2004) or as a global experience with the brand through each purchase or consumption event (Kuikka & Laukkanen, 2012). Another definition includes the alignment between service failure and the consequent recovery efforts accomplished by the brand (Sinha & Lu, 2019). Specifically, customer satisfaction with luxury brands is seen rather as the result of a global experience accumulated by the consumer from a general overall assessment of the brand (Kim etal., 2009; Pappu & Quester, 2006). 2.2. Multidimensional concept of trust in a luxury brand Consumer trust in a luxury brand increases the probability of being selected among the purchase options (Chae etal., 2020). As in interpersonal relationships, trust also plays an especially important role in generating a long-term link between the consumer and a brand, acting as a concept meso between both parties (Marinao etal., 2017). Therefore, consumer trust in a brand, being part of its credibility, plays a key role as a marketing tool (Reast, 2005). In general, trust in a relationship between two parties is defined as the certainty perceived by one side that their interlocutor will act with integrity and reliability (Sirdeshmukh etal., 2002). On a structural level, trust between consumers and brands can also be considered as a multidimensional construct composed of elements such as honesty, benevolence, and competence of the second towards the first (Wang etal., 2014). In the luxury brand sector, in addition to consumer trust in the brand, the strategic role of the store’s sales force is particularly relevant (Hughes & Ahearne, 2010). Indeed, despite the rapid development of online technologies and social networks that facilitate e-commerce, there are many Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector 53 buyers who still value the in-store shopping experience because they gain relevant power from seeing and touching the product, as well as from interacting with the store sales force (Liu etal., 2013). Luxury brand stores therefore must provide hedonic and special aesthetic interactions through their environment. This may include the use of rituals employed by staff to encourage consumers that the brand luxury store is a place of privilege (Lunardo & Mouangue, 2019). Greater customer trust in the sales force, together with the design of the store, will generate in the consumer positive emotions, a higher level of trust and even a better image of the luxury brand (Jiang etal., 2014). Consequently, consumer trust in the luxury brand and its store sales force is made up of the perception of honesty, benevolence and competence that is possessed by both the brand itself and its associated sales force. 2.3. Reputation of luxury brands The reputation of a luxury brand from collective trials, will have long-term social and environmental impacts (Lies, 2020). The reputation of a brand is a historical and intangible asset capable of assisting in the strategic corporate leadership of a company at an international level (Han etal., 2015). The reputation of a brand has been defined as the goodwill that consumers attribute to it from their previous positive experiences (Dahlén etal., 2009) or as the guarantee that an integral service is offered, comparable to the philosophy of zero defects (Casalo etal., 2007). Therefore, it is an important component of the capital of a brand and an advantage that limits the actions of competitors (Abraham etal., 2016). Plainly, is one of the most important signals that producers transmit to the market for credibility (Veloutsou & Moutinho, 2009). For all these reasons, reputation is a key component to the marketing strategy of a luxury brand, as it can help expand its presence, strengthen its status, and raise awareness of its existence in consumers (Fionda & Moore, 2009). 2.4. Familiarity with luxury brands Familiarity is obtained from knowledge accumulated through continuous customer experiences with the luxury brand (Kuo & Nagasawa, 2020). Familiarity consists of the knowledge structure and associations that the consumer retains in his memory about a brand (Delgado-Ballester etal., 2012). In this way, the greater the degree of familiarity of a consumer with a brand, the greater the consideration they have of it and the greater the attention they will place on receiving information about it (Park & Stoel, 2005). Therefore, familiarity with a brand has direct and positive effects on the consumer’s intention to buy. In this sense, familiarity helps the consumer perceive a low level of risk when buying a brand thus reinforcing the perception of the brand’s quality (Dursun etal., 2011). Familiarity with a luxury brand could also be defined as the number of experiences accumulated by the consumer with the brand (Tam, 2008). Massara etal. (2019) suggests that familiarity with a specific brand may also influence the consumer’s willingness-to-pay. 2.5. Cognitive experience with luxury brands The cognitive experience of the luxury brand can be defined as the brand-related thought processing and elaboration (Brodie etal., 2013). It focuses on the belief that the consumer will obtain the expected benefits (De Silva etal., 2020). Cognitive experience is an important indicator of customer engagement with the luxury brand (Bazi et al., 2020). Specialized literature considers that, from the cognitive-behavioral point of view, interrelations between the consumer and the brand make it possible to establish an association of memory structure that facilitates the processing and subsequent recovery of information (Cleff etal., 2014). The consumer’s cognitive perception route represents a process formed by the knowledge, image, and perceived quality of the brand (Matthews etal., 2014). The perception of the cognitive attributes of a brand helps it to be better known by the consumer (Vinhas & Faridah, 2006). The first cognitive experience of the consumer with a brand favors the good subsequent predisposition of the first with the second and, therefore, a more favorable purchase intention arises (Sanyal etal., 2014). The cognitive force of a luxury brand, formed by the beliefs and knowledge that the consumer possesses, is one of the main characteristics of the luxury brand (Hennigs etal., 2015). 2.6. Affective experience with luxury brands Affective experience plays an important role in the motivation and purchase decision of luxury brand consumers (Farah & Ramadan, 2020). Affective experience is an important indicator of the client’s commitment to the luxury brand (Bazi etal., 2020). Experiences with luxury brands create an intense emotional bond with the consumer (De Kerviler & Rodriguez, 2019). The literature defines the affective experience of a brand as the judgment that a consumer makes based on the feelings, moods, and emotions that the brand provokes (Malhotra, 2005). Specifically, luxury brands can cause positive emotions in the consumer and, therefore, a strong attachment and emotional involvement with the brand, a greater commitment and loyalty towards them, as well as an explicit intention of the consumer to buy (Chan etal., 2015; Hennigs etal., 2015; Sanyal etal., 2014). Bachmann etal. (2019) point out that the consumers’ engagement, driven by strong attitudinal attachments, creates an emotional bond of trust and commitment with a brand. In turn, they may become “brand ambassadors” who recommend and even influence future purchases of the product. Therefore, positive affective experiences are considered a powerful predictor of consumer behavior of luxury brands (Ko & Megehee, 2012). Hennings etal. (2015) suggest that consumers with high luxury value perception in a status-conscious context will have a positive attitude towards the luxury brand and recommend it to other consumers. 3. THEORETICAL MODEL The theory of reputation in organizations, proposed by Zinco etal. (2007), considers personal well-being or satisfaction as an Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 54 Enrique Marinao-Artigas, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández, Coro Chasco, Denise Laroze-Prehn indirect outcome of reputation mediated by trust. From the specific perspective of marketing, the trust in the luxury brand –defined as the perception of the reduction of irritation or anxiety at the time of purchase, of faith in the supplier and the knowledge of what to expect– will positively affect the general satisfaction of the client (Chiou & Droge, 2006). Marketing literature has explained that, both from a psychological and economic point of view, the greater the trust of the consumer towards a product and its sellers, the greater that consumer’s satisfaction will be (Erciş et al., 2012). This relationship has been demonstrated in the premium cosmetics market (Chiou & Droge, 2006) and in the relationship between companies in electronic commerce (Kim etal., 2009). Therefore, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H1: Trust in the luxury brand directly and positively influences consumer satisfaction. According to the theory of reputation in organizations, trust is one of the direct outcomes of reputation (Zinco etal., 2007). In effect, the reputation of a brand can reduce uncertainty and build consumer trust (Han etal., 2015). In turn, specialized literature has shown that corporate reputation positively affects consumer trust (Keh & Xie, 2009). Similarly, the reputation of a web page has positive effects on the trust of a virtual buyer (Casalo etal., 2007). Considering this context, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H2: The reputation of a luxury brand directly and positively affects consumer trust. A sociological theory of trust considers the familiarity as a precondition of trust. In fact, “trust is only possible in a familiar world, it needs history as a reliable background” (Luhmann, 1979, p. 20). Literature in the field of electronic commerce has also demonstrated the direct and positive relationship that exists between familiarity with a brand and consumer trust (Van Dyke etal., 2007). Similarly, it is also demonstrated that familiarity with a product through physical contact and relationship with employees positively affects consumer trust (Benedicktus etal., 2010). Familiarity with the luxury brand has been proven to have a positive effect on consumer trust. (Kuo & Nagasawa, 2020). In this sense, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H3: Familiarity with the luxury brand directly and positively affects consumer trust. The direct and positive relationship between the cognitive experience that a consumer makes of a brand and the reputation of the latter has long been demonstrated in different contexts and sectors (Milewicz & Herbig, 1994). For example, in the field of organizational theory, it has been shown that the corporate reputation of a company is a consequence of the cognitive assessment performed by the evaluators (Bitektine, 2011). In the field of group work, it has also been shown that the cognitive perception of power among people or subgroups is related to their reputation (Fiol etal., 2001). Furthermore, in the context of industrial advertising, it is known that the cognitive perception that the buyer possesses is an important antecedent of the seller’s corporate reputation (Leigh, 1982). Based on these findings, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H4: The consumer cognitive experience directly and positively affects the reputation of the luxury brand. Similarly, from the point of view of information processing, familiarity with a product is determined by the cognitive structure that the consumer possesses in their memory (Srivastava & Kamdar, 2009). Product familiarity is a consequence of the cognitive structures of product knowledge (Marks & Olson, 1981). From this perspective, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H5: The consumer cognitive experience directly and positively affects familiarity with the luxury brand. This relationship has been verified in different contexts. Thus, from the point of view of strategic management, it has been shown that the transfer of affection understood as the emotional engagement of employees to consumers affects the corporate reputation of the company (Davies etal., 2010). In the field of corporate communication, if the consumer has a good emotional image of an organization, this positively affects its reputation (Cian & Cervai, 2014). Furthermore, from the perspective of public relations, consumer emotions also have a positive effect on a company’s corporate reputation (Choi & Lin, 2009). Thus, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H6: The consumer affective experience directly and positively affects the reputation of the luxury brand. The emotional stimuli evaluated positively by the individual also plays an important role in the process of familiarity and association in their memory (Ochsner, 2000). Affective signals perceived as positive by the subject lead to a greater sense of familiarity with the object (Kim etal., 2016; Verde etal., 2010). This same relationship has been found in a luxury brand that managed to create a powerful antecedent of familiarity through the affection of consumers (Kim etal., 1998). However, the consumption of luxury can also have unintended consequences, for example, the lack of authenticity of a luxury brand has a negative impact on its affective experience (Goor etal., 2020). Based on this evidence, it is possible to establish the following hypothesis: H7: Consumer affective experience positively affects the familiarity with the luxury brand. Concerning the cross-cultural specificities between Chile and Spain, it must be said that Chilean and Spanish people share a common aversion to uncertainty, which underlines the role of safety and trust in whatever dimension of life (Hofstede, 2001). Hence, it is expected to find similar intercultural intensity in the relations where the construct of trust is concerned, as both antecedent of satisfaction and consequence of a brand reputation and familiarity. Conversely, the Spanish society is identified as more individualist and competitive than the Chilean one, while the Chilean society shows a higher tendency to be more collectivist or concerned by social reputation. Hence, the Spanish consumers tend to build a luxury brand reputation through affective experience (individual feelings), while the Chilean ones identify brand reputation through the cognitive experience of more objective qualities which can be found in high social class individuals. Therefore, it is expected to find different intensities in the relations between brand reputation, familiarity, and experience. Based on these commonalities and differences, it is possible to split the previous hypotheses as follows: H1a: The intensity of the effect of trust in the luxury brand on consumer satisfaction remains constant in Chile and Spain. Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector 55 H2a: The intensity of the effect of a luxury brand reputation on consumer trust remains constant in Chile and Spain. H3a: The intensity of the effect of familiarity with the luxury brand on consumer trust remains constant in Chile and Spain. H4a: The intensity of the effect of consumer cognitive experience on the reputation of the luxury brand undergoes variations in Chile and Spain. H5a: The intensity of the effect of the consumer cognitive experience on familiarity with the luxury brand undergoes variations in Chile and Spain. H6a: The intensity of the effect of consumer affective experience on the reputation of the luxury brand undergoes variations in Chile and Spain. H7a: The intensity of the effect of the consumer affective experience on familiarity with the luxury brand undergoes variations in Chile and Spain. In line with MacKenzie etal. (2005), the conceptual model (see Fig. 1) reflects the hypotheses made based on the findings of previous studies: Trust Cognitive experience Brand reputation Affective experience Brand familiarity Trust luxury brand Honest luxury brand Satisfaction Competent luxury brand Honest sales force Benevolent sales force Competent sales force Trust sales force Benevolent brand H4 H6 H7 H5 H1 H3 H2 Figure 1 Conceptual model Source: own elaboration. 4. EMPIRICAL MODELLING 4.1. Procedure This research is based on a face-to-face opinion poll. Through a process of validation of the measurement scales, it was possible to propose a hypothesis of interrelation between the factors that influence the satisfaction of a consumer of luxury brands. The results allow for the proposal of a theoretical model pertaining to the antecedents of consumer satisfaction of luxury brands and the role played by trust in the luxury brand. Opinion survey on luxury brands: The survey was designed using a multi-step methodological process, following Deng and Dart (1994). This with the purManagement Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 56 Enrique Marinao-Artigas, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández, Coro Chasco, Denise Laroze-Prehn pose of building measurement scales that have a high degree of reliability, validity, and dimensionality. Satisfaction, trust in the brand and in the store’s sales force, reputation, familiarity, cognitive experience, and affective experience were evaluated. The first step consisted of the construction of the scales with a high degree of content validity. The scales used for this study were developed from previous scales: satisfaction: Choi and Lee (2012), Kim etal. (2013); trust: Doney and Cannon (1997); Kumar etal. (1995), Roy etal. (2001) and Siguaw etal. (1998); reputation: Fombrun et al. (2000); Jarvenpaa et al. (2000); McKnight etal. (2002) and Nguyen and Leblanc (2001); familiarity: Coulter and Coulter (2003); Gefen (2000) and Kennedy et al. (2001); affective experience: Madden et al. (1988) and Yoo etal. (1998); cognitive experience: Chiu etal. (2005) and Downs (1970). For the second step, a study was conducted through a critical incident interview in which the interviewees were asked to describe the key components of the previous constructs. We interviewed 50 selected individuals in a sample for non-probabilistic convenience from a group of consumers who went to the luxury brands district in Santiago, Chile. Similarly, the same procedure was applied to an equal amount of people who went to buy at various luxury brand stores in Madrid, Spain. This procedure allowed the identification of a first scale of customer satisfaction, trust in the luxury brand and in the store’s sales force, reputation, familiarity, and cognitive and affective experience. The third step saw the verification of these scales, considering the process recommended by De Wulf and Odekerken-Schörder (2003), which consists of performing a series of interviews, both with regular customers of luxury brands and with commercial executives from the retail industry specialized in luxury products in Santiago and Madrid. These analyses allowed, on the one hand, the identification of the items reflecting more adequately their corresponding dimension, and on the other hand, the re-assignment or complete elimination of the items that proved to be conflictive or redundant. Considering a modification of the method developed by Zaichkosky (1985), each participant in this qualitative analysis was asked to classify the relationship of each previously developed item to its construct or dimension. The three alternatives used were: 1) clearly representative,2)slightly representative, or 3) not at all representatives. In the final step, the items that showed a high level of consensus were retained as shown in Lichtenstein etal. (1990). 4.2. Questionnaire construction In this next methodological step, a preliminary questionnaire was constructed, tested with a random sample of 50 consumers who went to the luxury brands district in Santiago and 50 consumers who visited different luxury brand stores in Madrid. Both samples were different from the previous samples. An exploratory factor analysis was then applied to the results of this pre-test to calculate the Cronbach’s alpha for each of the resulting dimensions. The relevance and coherence of the items that composed each construct were confirmed. The items were written as statements to be evaluated using a 7-point Likert scale (see Table1). All statements were written so that they could be understood and answered by all participants interviewed. Table1 Measurement Scales Satisfaction Sat1 Through this luxury brand I feel very satisfied Sat2 Through this luxury brand I have very satisfactory experiences Sat3 Through this luxury brand I have done important encounters Sat4 Through this luxury brand I feel very satisfied with its characteristics Sat5 Through this luxury brand I feel very satisfied because it is ideal for me Trust Trust luxury brand Honest luxury Brand Holb1 This luxury brand is reliable Holb2 This luxury brand is integrated Benevolent luxury brand Belb1 This luxury brand acts in my benefit Belb2 This luxury brand acts in my favour Competent Luxury brand Colb1 This luxury brand makes fashion a prime job Colb2 This luxury brand makes fashion an “art” Trust sales forcé Honest sales force Hosf1 The luxury brand`s sales force is honest Hosf2 The luxury brand`s sales force is respectful Benevolent sales force Besf1 The luxury brand`s sales force cares about my well-being Besf2 The luxury brand`s sales force has empathy for me Competent sales force Cosf1 The luxury brand`s sales force knows how to treat me Cosf2 The luxury brand`s sales force has paramount skills Reputation (Rep) Rep1 This luxury brand has a good reputation Rep2 This luxury brand has a better reputation than other similar brands Rep3 This luxury brand is highly respected by people Rep4 People speak very well of this luxury brand Rep5 This luxury brand historically has a good reputation Familiarity (Fam) Fam1 This luxury brand is familiar to me Fam2 This luxury brand is very well known to me Fam3 From this luxury brand I am always well informed (a) Fam4 I always have this luxury brand in mind Fam5 My friends say that I know this luxury brand very well Cognitive experience (Coge) Coge1 This luxury brand is more elegant than other brands Coge2 This luxury brand is of better quality than other brands Coge3 This luxury brand is a safer option than other brands Coge4 This luxury brand is more innovative than other brands Coge5 This luxury brand is more dominant than other brands Affective experience (Affe) Affe1 I feel this luxury brand is entertaining Affe2 I feel this luxury brand is lively Affe3 I feel this luxury brand is nice Affe4 I feel this luxury brand is cheerful Affe5 I feel this luxury brand is stimulating Source: own elaboration. Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector 57 4.3. Data collection The final survey was applied to a non-probabilistic judgment sample according to the objective of this research, that is, this study surveyed luxury brand customers who visited shopping centers in Santiago de Chile and Madrid, Spain. The conceptual definition for luxury brands was expressed based on the top five brands of the last five years, Gucci, Luis Vuitton, Chanel, Rolex, and Dior (Luxe-Digital, n.d.). In total 1,058 customers of luxury brands were surveyed (see Table2), 608 in Santiago and 450 in Madrid. Table2 Sample Profile Chile and Spain Gender % Civil status % Chile Spain Chile Spain Male 39 50 Single 78 49 Female 61 50 Married 16 40 Total 100 100 Other marital status 6 11 Total 100 100 Age % Education % Chile Spain Chile Spain Between 18 to 24 46 14 University studies 17 33 Between 25 to 34 31 21 Postgraduate 7 12 Over 35 35 65 Incomplete University Studies 76 55 Total 100 100 Total 100 100 Employment situation % Family income € % Chile Spain Chile* Spain * Working 43 78 Income Under the 635 12 17 Look for Work 25 15 Between 636 and 2.117 45 63 Student 32 7 Income Over the 2.119 43 20 Total 100 100 Total 100 100 Note: *1 €=756,11 Chilean pesos as of March 20, 2019. Source: own elaboration. 4.4. Psychometric analysis of the data In both counties, psychometric analysis of the data was performed to confirm the reliability, validity, and dimensionality of the measurement scales. For the computations performed in this paper, the statistical packages IBM SPSS Statistics and Amos, version 25 were used. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and several reliability analyses such as the Cronbach’s alpha, construct reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) were conducted. To confirm whether the indicators were attached to their corresponding dimension, principal components were performed with varimax rotation (Hair etal., 1998). The results suggested the elimination of several indicators in some of the scales (see Table 3). Specifically, indicators Sat2 and Sat3 for satisfaction and Fam2 and Fam5 for familiarity were eliminated so as all the scales showed a high degree of unidimensionality with factor loadings far exceeding 0.4, as recommended in Larwood etal. (1995). The correlation values between variables (see Appendix A-1) were all significant (p <0.001). Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 58 Enrique Marinao-Artigas, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández, Coro Chasco, Denise Laroze-Prehn Table3 Factorial Confirmatory Analysis of Scales of Chile and Spain Scales Variables Factor loadings Explained variance (%) Eigenvalues % Standard error Chile Spain Chile Spain Chile Spain Satisfaction Sat1 0.910 0.853 83.981 79.732 2.519 2.392 1.62 Sat4 0.934 0.911 1.64 Sat5 0.905 0.914 1.74 Trust luxury brand Honest luxury brand Holb1 0.811 0.785 68.475 94.762 4.108 5.686 1.38 Holb2 0.865 0.747 1.45 Benevolent luxury brand Belb1 0.835 0.945 1.70 Belb2 0.823 0.943 1.69 Competent luxury brand Colb1 0.840 0.820 1.34 Colb2 0.790 0.838 1.48 Trust sales force Honest sales force Hosf1 0.846 0.736 73.382 68.787 4.403 4.127 1.58 Hosf2 0.867 0.730 1.43 Benevolent sales force Besf1 0.870 0.891 1.71 Besf2 0.860 0.902 1.73 Competent sales force Cosf1 0.867 0.838 1.56 Cosf2 0.830 0.862 1.61 Reputation Rep1 0.921 0.843 82.549 62.623 4.127 3.131 1.20 Rep2 0.864 0.404 1.33 Rep3 0.920 0.909 1.26 Rep4 0.930 0.867 1.24 Rep5 0.906 0.825 1.21 Familiarity Fam1 0.816 0.639 76.953 87.223 2.309 2.617 1.79 Fam3 0.904 0.768 1.91 Fam4 0.909 0.906 1.94 Cognitive experience Coper1 0.798 0.713 62.940 59.647 3.147 2.982 1.58 Coper2 0.803 0.712 1.44 Coper3 0.825 0.822 1.50 Coper4 0.779 0.811 1.50 Coper5 0.767 0.796 1.53 Affective experience Affe1 0.871 0.909 73.809 87.618 3.690 4.381 1.81 Affe2 0.896 0.942 1.76 Affe3 0.827 0.937 1.64 Affe4 0.897 0.957 1.73 Affe5 0.800 0.934 1.77 Source: own elaboration. Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector 59 4.5. Validity analysis In both countries, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) enabled the confirmation of whether the indicators were appropriate for achieving a good model fit. For this step, the criteria set by Jöreskog and Sörbom (1993) was followed, eliminating the items that retained a weak convergent validity with their corresponding latent variable; that is, with a t-student value below 2.58 (p < 0.001). Since in our model all the items fulfill this criterion, the second step, which states that those items with standardized loading coefficients below 0.5 should also be removed, was taken. Lastly, these authors also recommend dropping those items with low goodness-of-fit (e.g., a determination coefficient R2 value less than 0.3). As items Fam3, Belb1 and Belb2 were the only ones that do not fit the second and third criteria, the complete dimension ‘Benevolent luxury brand’ of trust was eliminated from the empirical model. To confirm the multidimensional nature of trust, we used a rival model’s strategy (Steenkamp & Van Trijp, 1991), comparing a one-dimensional (first order) model to another, multidimensional (second order) one. In both cases, the second-order model showed a better fit than the first-order model, confirming the construct’s multidimensionality (see Table4). Table4 Multidimensional analysis of trust of Chile and Spain Indicators Recommended value First-order Second order Trust Chile Spain Chile Spain Absolute NCP Minimum 1040.143 2895.50 98.884 68.033 ECVI Minimum 1.870 6.72 0.329 0.385 RMSEA < 0.08 0.221 0.346 0.075 0.078 Incremental NFI High (close to 1) 0.773 0.426 0.973 0.983 IFI High (close to 1) 0.779 0.430 0.979 0.983 CFI High (close to 1) 0.778 0.429 0.979 0.983 Parsimony AIC Minimum 1135.143 3021.407 199.884 173.033 Normed χ2[1; 5] 30.718 54.62 4.44 3.77 Source: own elaboration. Next, for both countries, a CFA was computed only for the latent variable of trust (trust in the luxury brand and in the store’s sales force) with their three corresponding dimensions of honesty, benevolence, and competence, as well as a CFA for all the variables of the final model. In both cases, no other we items were eliminated. The model of trust (trust in the luxury brand and in the store’s sales force) and the final model achieved particularly good results. For Chile, the statistical outcomes for the model of trust are as follows: IFI=0.979, CFI=0.979, RMSEA=0.075; Normedc2=4.40 p < 0,001. The outcomes for the final model are as follows: IFI=0.921, CFI=0.921, RMSEA=0.072, Normedc2=4.14. For Spain, the statistical outcomes for the model of trust are as follows: IFI=0.983, CFI=0.983, RMSEA=0.078; Normedc2=3.72 p < 0,001. The outcomes for the final model are as follows: IFI=0.919, CFI=0.919, RMSEA=0.078, Normedc2=3.74. Once the optimal model was verified, the reliability of each scale for both countries was confirmed using three tests: Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability of the construct, both with a limit of 0.7 (Jöreskog, 1971), and average variance extracted (limit of 0.5, following (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table5 shows the results, which in all cases meet the minimum values established. However, while it is acceptable, attention should be paid to the weak alpha value of the familiarity scale (George & Mallery, 2003). Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 66 Enrique Marinao-Artigas, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández, Coro Chasco, Denise Laroze-Prehn Choi, J. H., & Lee, H. J. (2012). Facets of simplicity for the smartphone interface: A structural model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70(2), 129-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijhcs.2011.09.002 Chung, M., Ko, E., Joung, H., & Kim, S. J. (2020). Chatbot e-service and customer satisfaction regarding luxury brands. Journal of Business Research, 117, 587-595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.004 Cian, L., & Cervai, S. (2014). Under the reputation umbrella: An integrative and multidisciplinary review for corporate image, projected image, construed image, organizational identity, and organizational culture. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 19(2), 182-199. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-10-2011-0055 Cleff, T., Lin, I. C., & Walter, N. (2014). Can You Feel it? -The Effect of Brand Experience on Brand Equity. IUP Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), 7-27. Coulter, K. S., & Coulter, R. A. (2003). The effects of industry knowledge on the development of trust in service relationships. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20(1), 31-43. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00120-9 Dahlén, M., Granlund, A., & Grenros, M. (2009). The consumer-perceived value of non-traditional media: effects of brand reputation, appropriateness, and expense. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(3), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760910954091 Danesh, S. N., Nasab, S. A., & Ling, K. C. (2012). The study of customer satisfaction, customer trust and switching barriers on customer retention in Malaysia hypermarkets. International Journal of business and Management, 7(7), 141-150. Davies, G., Chun, R., & Kamins, M. A. (2010). Reputation gaps and the performance of service organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 530-546. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.825 De Kerviler, G., & Rodriguez, C. M. (2019). Luxury brand experiences and relationship quality for Millennials: The role of self-expansion. Journal of Business Research, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.046 Delgado-Ballester, E. (2004). Applicability of a brand trust scale across product categories: A multigroup invariance analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 38(5/6), 573-592. https://doi. org/10.1108/03090560410529222 Delgado-Ballester, E., Navarro, A., & Sicilia, M. (2012). Revitalizing brands through communication messages: the role of brand familiarity. European Journal of Marketing, 46(1/2), 31-51. https://doi. org/10.1108/03090561211189220 Deng, S., & Dart, J. (1994). Measuring market orientation: a multi‐factor, multi‐item approach.Journal of marketing management, 10(8), 725-742. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.1994.9964318 De Wulf K., & Odekerken–Schröder, G. (2003). Assessing the impact of a retailer’s relationship efforts on consumers` attitudes and behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10(2), 95 – 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-6989(02)00013-9 De Silva, S. S., Seeley, E. L., Ongsakul, V., & Ahmed, Z. U. (2020). Conceptualizing a new model for luxury brand purchase intention in an emerging country setting. Journal of Transnational Management, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475778.2020.1734419 Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299706100203 Downs, R. M. (1970). The cognitive structure of an urban shopping center. Environment and Behavior, 2 (1), 13-39. https://doi. org/10.1177/001391657000200102 Dursun, I., Kabadayi, E. T., Alan, A. K., & Sezen, B. (2011). Store brand purchase intention: Effects of risk, quality, familiarity, and store brand shelf space. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 11901200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.133 Erciş, A., Ünal, S., Candan, F. B., & Yildirim, H. (2012). The effect of brand satisfaction, trust and brand commitment on loyalty and repurchase intentions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1395-1404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1124 Farah, M. F., & Ramadan, Z. B. (2020). Viability of Amazon’s driven innovations targeting shoppers’ impulsiveness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101973 Fiol, C. M., O’Connor, E. J., & Aguinis, H. (2001). All for one and one for all? The development and transfer of power across organizational levels. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 224-242. https://doi. org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378017 Fionda, A. M., & Moore, C. M. (2009). The anatomy of the luxury fashion brand. Journal of Brand Management, 6(5-6), 347-363. https:// doi.org/10.1057/bm.2008.45 Fombrun, C. J., Gardberg, N.A., & Sever, J. M. (2000). The Reputation Quotient: A multi-stakeholder measure of corporate reputation. Journal of Brand Management, 7(4), 241–255. https://doi. org/10.1057/bm.2000.10 Fornell, C., & Larcker, F. (1981). Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 382 – 388. https://doi. org/10.1177/002224378101800313 Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6), 725-737. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(00)00021-9 George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-07683-000 Goor D., Ordabayeva, N., Keinan, A., & Crener, S. (2020). The Impostor Syndrome from Luxury Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(6), 1031-1051. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucz044 Gucci. (2021). https://www.gucci.com/es/es/st/about-gucci Hair, J. F., JR., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Han, S. H., Nguyen, B., & Lee, T. J. (2015). Consumer-based chain restaurant brand equity, brand reputation, and brand trust. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 50, 84-93. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.06.010 Heine, K. (2012). The concept of luxury brands. Luxury brand management,1, 2193-1208. Hennigs, N., Wiedmann, K. P., Behrens, S., & Klarmann, C. (2015). Unleashing the power of luxury: Antecedents of luxury brand perception and effects on luxury brand strength. Journal of Brand Management, 20(8), 705-715. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2013.11 Hennigs, N., Wiedmann, K., Klarmann, C., & Behrens, S. (2015). The complexity of value in the luxury industry: From consumers’ individual value perception to luxury consumption. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 43(10/11), 922-939. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-07-2014-0087 Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations (2nd ed.). Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Hofstede, G (2022, January 19). Insights Organizational Culture Consulting. https://www.hofstede-insights.com Hughes, D. E., & Ahearne, M. (2010). Energizing the reseller’s sales force: The power of brand identification. Journal of Marketing, 74(4), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.74.4.081 Jarvenpaa, S.L., Tractinsky, N. & Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer trust in an Internet store. Information Technology and Management, 1(12), 45-71. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019104520776 Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 Antecedents and consequences of trust as a multidimensional construct. Cross-country analysis in the luxury retail sector 67 Jiang, Z., Nagasawa, S. Y., & Watada, J. (2014). Luxury fashion brand image building: the role of store design in Bally and Tod’s Japan. Management Decision, 52(7), 1288-1301. https://doi.org/10.1108/ MD-11-2012-0809 Jöreskog, & Karl G. (1971). Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika, 36(4), 409-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF02291366 Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). New features in Lisrel 8. Chicago: Scientific Software International. Kapferer, J. N., & Valette-Florence, P. (2021). Which consumers believe luxury must be expensive and why? A cross-cultural comparison of motivations. Journal of Business Research, 132, 301-313. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.003 Kauppinen-Räisänen, H., Mühlbacher, H., & Taishoff, M. (2020). Exploring consumers’ subjective shopping experiences in directly operated luxury brand stores. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57, 102251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102251 Keh, H. T., & Xie, Y. (2009). Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The roles of trust, identification, and commitment. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 732-742. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.02.005 Kennedy, M. S., Ferrell, L. K., & LeClair, D. T. (2001). Consumers’ trust of salesperson and manufacturer: an empirical study. Journal of Business Research, 51(1), 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S01482963(99)00039-9 Kim, J. H. (2019). Imperative challenge for luxury brands. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 47(2), 220 – 244. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-06-2017-0128 Kim, J. H., & Kim, M. (2020). Conceptualization and assessment of E-service quality for luxury brands. The Service Industries Journal, 40(5-6), 436-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2018.1517755 Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2009). Trust and satisfaction, two steppingstones for successful e-commerce relationships: A longitudinal exploration. Information systems research, 20(2), 237-257. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/isre.1080.0188 Kim, Y. H., Kim, D. J., & Wachter, K. (2013). A study of mobile user engagement (MoEN): Engagement motivations, perceived value, satisfaction, and continued engagement intention. Decision Support Systems, 56, 361-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2013.07.002 Kim, J., Lim, J. S., & Bhargava, M. (1998). The role of affect in attitude formation: A classical conditioning approach. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 26(2), 143-152. https://doi. org/10.1177/0092070398262005 Kim, S., Park, G., Lee, Y., & Choi, S. (2016). Customer emotions and their triggers in luxury retail: Understanding the effects of customer emotions before and after entering a luxury shop. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5809-5818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.178 Klein, J. F., Falk, T., Esch, F. R., & Gloukhovtsev, A. (2016). Linking popup brand stores to brand experience and word of mouth: The case of luxury retail. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5761-5767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.172 Ko, E., Costello, J. P., & Taylor, C. R. (2019). What is a luxury brand? A new definition and review of the literature. Journal of Business Research, 99, 405-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.023 Ko, E., & Megehee, C., M. (2012). Fashion marketing of luxury brands: Recent research issues and contributions. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1395-1398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.004 Kootenaie, M. F., & Kootenaie, S. M. (2021). Identify Sales Incentives for Luxury Brands in Emerging Markets. Journal of Social, Management and Tourism Letter, 2021, 1-6. http://www.htpub.org/Journal-Of-Social,-Management-And-Tourism-Letter/ Kuikka, A., & Laukkanen, T. (2012). Brand loyalty and the role of hedonic value. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 21(7), 529537. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211276277 Kumar N, Scheer L.K, & Steenkamp J.B.E.M. (1995). The Effects of Perceived Interdependence on Dealer Attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 348-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379503200309 Kuo, C. H., & Nagasawa, S. (2020). Deciphering Luxury Consumption Behavior from Knowledge Perspectives. Journal of Business and Management, 26(1), 1-21. DOI: 10.6347/JBM.202003_26(1).0001 Larwood, L., Falbe, C. M., Kriger, M. P., & Miesing, P. (1995). Structure and meaning of organizational vision. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 740-769. https://doi.org/10.5465/256744 Leigh, T. W. (1982). Company Reputation as a Determinant of Sales Call Effectiveness: A Cognitive Social Learning Perspective. Marketing theory, philosophy of science perspectives, 171-175. Lichtenstein, D. R; Netemeyer, R. G; & Burton S. (1990). Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness: An acquisition - transaction utility theory perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54, 5467. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400305 Lies, J. (2020). Aesthetics Rising from Beauty to Reputation Management. Corporate Reputation Review, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1057/ s41299-019-00094-w Liu, X., Burns, A. C., & Hou, Y. (2013). Comparing online and in-store shopping behavior towards luxury goods. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 41(11/12), 885-900. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-01-2013-0018 Luis Vuitton. (2022, January 20). The Louis Vuitton World. https:// la.louisvuitton.com/esp-mx/homepage Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and Power (1st ed.). Wiley, Chichester. Lunardo, R., & Mouangue, E. (2019). Getting over discomfort in luxury brand stores: How pop-up stores affect perceptions of luxury, embarrassment, and store evaluations. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.005 Luxe-Digital. (n.d.). The 15 Most Popular Luxury Brands Online In 2019. https://luxe.digital/digital-luxury-ranking/most-popular-luxury-brands/ MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Jarvis, C. B. (2005). The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. Journal of applied psychology, 90(4), 710. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.710 Madden, T. J. Allen, C. A., & Twible, J. L. (1988). Attitude Toward the Ad: An assessment of diverse measurement indices under different processing “sets”. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 242 – 252. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378802500302 Malhotra, N. K. (2005). Attitude and affect new frontiers of research in the 21st century. Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 477-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00146-2 Marinao-Artigas, E., Chasco, C., Torres-Moragas, E., & Barra, C. (2017). Determinants of trust towards tourist destinations. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 6(4), 327-334. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.03.003 Massara, F., Porcheddu, D., & Melara, R. D. (2019). Luxury brands pursuing lifestyle positioning: effects on willingness to pay. Journal of Brand Management, 26, 291-303. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-018-0130-4 Marks, L. J., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Toward a cognitive structure conceptualization of product familiarity. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 145-150. Matthews, D. R., Son, J., & Watchravesringkan, K. (2014). An exploration of brand equity antecedents concerning brand loyalty: A cognitive, affective, and conative perspective. Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 9(1), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.24052/ JBRMR/180 Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68 68 Enrique Marinao-Artigas, Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández, Coro Chasco, Denise Laroze-Prehn McKnight, D., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact with a web site: a trust building model.The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3), 297-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00020-3 Milewicz, J., & Herbig, P. (1994). Evaluating the brand extension decision using a model of reputation building. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 3(1), 39-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610429410053077 Nguyen, N., & Leblanc, G. (2001). Corporate image and corporate reputation in customers’ retention decisions in services. Journal of retailing and Consumer Services, 8(4), 227-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0969-6989(00)00029-1 Ochsner, K. N. (2000). Are affective events richly recollected or simply familiar? The experience and process of recognizing feelings past. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129 (2), 242-261. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.2.242 Ozyer, Y. (2016). Understanding the Impact of the Brand Experience on Brand Reputation by the Moderating Role of Technology Turbulence. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 8(1), 161-169. Pappu, R., & Quester, P. (2006). Does customer satisfaction lead to improved brand equity? An empirical examination of two categories of retail brands. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 15(1), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420610650837 Park, J., Stoel, L. (2005). Effect of brand familiarity, experience, and information on online apparel purchase. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 2, 148-160. https://doi. org/10.1108/09590550510581476 Reast, J. D. (2005). Brand trust and brand extension acceptance: the relationship. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14(1), 4-13. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420510583707 Roy M.C.H., Dewit O., & Aubert B.A. (2001). The impact of interface usability on trust in Web retailers. Internet Research, 11(5), 388-398. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240110410165 Sanyal, S. N., Datta, S. K., & Banerjee, A. K. (2014). Attitude of Indian consumers towards luxury brand purchase: an application of ‘attitude scale to luxury items. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 59(3), 316-339. https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJICBM.2014.064696 Shimul, A. S., & Phau, I. (2018). Consumer advocacy for luxury brands. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 26(3), 264-271. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2018.05.016 Siguaw J.A, Penny M.S, & Baker T.L. (1998). Effects of Supplier Market Orientation on Distributor Market Orientation and the Channel Relationship: The Distributor Perspective. Journal of Marketing, 62, 99111. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299806200307 Sinha, J., & Lu, F. C. (2019). Ignored or Rejected: Retail Exclusion Effects on Construal Levels and Consumer Responses to Compensation. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(4), 791-807. https://doi. org/10.1093/jcr/ucz021 Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002). Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. Journal of marketing, 66(1), 1537. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.1.15.18449 Statista. (2022, January 10). Value of various global luxury markets in 2021, by market type. https://www.statista.com/statistics/246115/ value-of-various-global-luxury-markets-by-market-type/ Srivastava, M., & Kamdar, R. M. (2009). Brand image formation as a function of involvement and familiarity. Paradigm, 13(1), 8-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971890720090111 Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Van Trijp, H. C. (1991). The use of LISREL in validating marketing constructs. International Journal of Research in marketing, 8(4), 283-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(91)90027-5 Tam, J. L. (2008). Brand familiarity: its effects on satisfaction evaluations. Journal of Services Marketing, 22(1), 3-12. https://doi. org/10.1108/08876040810851914 Taylor, S. A., Celuch, K., & Goodwin, S. (2004). The importance of brand equity to customer loyalty. Journal of product and brand management, 13(4), 217-227. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420410546934 The World Bank. (2022, January 21). GDP (current US$) - Chile, Spain. https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=CL-ES Turunen, L. L. M., & Pöyry, E. (2019). Shopping with the resale value in mind: A study on second-hand luxury consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43(6), 549-556. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12539 Van Dyke, T. P., Midha, V., & Nemati, H. (2007). The effect of consumer privacy empowerment on trust and privacy concerns in e-commerce. Electronic Markets, 17(1), 68-81. DOI: 10.1080/10196780601136997 Veloutsou, C., & Moutinho, L. (2009). Brand relationships through brand reputation and brand tribalism. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 314-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.05.010 Verde, M. F., Stone, L. K., Hatch, H. S., & Schnall, S. (2010). Distinguishing between attributional and mnemonic sources of familiarity: The case of positive emotion bias. Memory and cognition, 38(2), 142153. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.2.142 Villegas Pinuer, F., Valenzuela Fernández, L., Llonch Andreu, J. & López Belbeze, P. (2021). Environmental sustainability and their factors in SMEs: A multiple case study of Spain and Chile. Cuadernos de Gestión, 6-18. https://doi.org/10.5295/cdg.211370fv Vinhas Da Silva, R., & Faridah Syed Alwi, S. (2006). Cognitive, affective attributes and conative, behavioral responses in retail corporate branding. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 15(5), 293305. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420610685703 Wang, L., Law, R., Hung, K., & Guillet, B. D. (2014). Consumer trust in tourism and hospitality: A review of the literature. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 21, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jhtm.2014.01.001 Williams, L. J., Hartman, N., & Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 477-514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428110366036 Wu, W. Y., Lu, H. Y., Wu, Y. Y., & Fu, C. S. (2012). The effects of product scarcity and consumers’ need for uniqueness on purchase intention. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(3), 263-274. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01000.x Yoo, C. Park J., & Macinnis, D. J. (1998). Effects of store characteristics and In-Store emotional experiences on store attitude. Journal of Business Research, 42, 253-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S01482963(97)00122-7 Yu, Lu, & Daniel T.L., & Shek. (2014). Testing factorial invariance across groups: an illustration using AMOS. International Journal on Disability and Human Development, 13(2), 205-216. https://doi. org/10.1515/ijdhd-2014-0306 Zaichkowsky J. L. (1985). Measuring the Involvement Construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1086/208520 Zinko, R., Ferris, G.R., Blass, F.R. & Dana Laird, M. (2007). Toward a Theory of Reputation in Organizations. In Martocchio, J.J. (Ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management volume 26 (pp. 163-204). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(07)26004-9 Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión 23/2 (2023) 51-68