SCALE NAME: Evaluative)

Attitude Toward the Product/Brand (General

SCALE DESCRIPTION: The scales consist of various bi-polar adjectives presumed to measure the subject's overall evaluation of the product or brand. The various versions of the scale are similar in that they are not specific to any particular product or brand under investigation although certain adjectives may not be appropriate in some cases. Note that some scale users have referred to their measures by other names such as product evaluation, (e.g., Muthukrishnan and Ramaswami (1999), Gürhan-Canli and Batra (2004), and product utility (Thompson et al. 2005). In Lane (2000), a version of this scale was used as a brand extension evaluation. Stafford and Day (1995) made slightly different use of the scale than most of the others by measuring attitudes toward a service rather than a good. Given the directions used by Gürhan-Canli and Maheswaran (2000), their scale had the sense of a country-of-origin evaluation of a class of products. One of the three uses of the scale by Ruth and Simonin (2003) was with an event (parade) sponsored by two companies. Attitude toward a hotel chain was measured by Posavac et al. (2004). SCALE ORIGIN: There is no common origin for these scales and many of them are unique in that the sets of items of which they are composed have been used as a set in just one or two studies. Some items have been used much more than others but good/bad is by far the most commonly used bi-polar adjective. Many of the scales have used favorable/unfavorable and/or pleasant/unpleasant. At the other extreme, there are several items (e.g., #22 to #25) that appear to have been used just once. Versions of the scale in languages other than English have been reported such as Korean (Choi and Miracle 2004; Taylor, Miracle, and Wilson 1997) and Chinese (Zhang and Schmitt 2001). RELIABILITY: Reported internal consistencies have ranged from below .70 (Iyer 1988) to .98 (Kozup, Creyer, and Burton