Assesses culinary brand experience impact on brand equity among tourists, suggesting strategic enhancements for marketers.
Purpose This study aims to examine the effects of culinary brand experiential value and culinary brand cultural competence on the relationship between culinary brand experience and brand equity. Design/methodology/approach A two-stage research design using two independent samples was used. In the first stage, a pilot study involving 404 foreign tourists supported the development of a context-specific measurement for the Turkish Cuisine Brand (TCB) scale through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, which revealed a four-factor structure. In the second stage, data from 656 tourists were analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling to assess reliability, validity and test hypotheses. Findings All hypotheses were supported, indicating that Turkish cuisine brand experience has a significant influence on TCBEV and TCBCC, which in turn enhance the TCBE. Research limitations/implications The study’s focus on Istanbul and non-probability sampling may limit the generalisability of the findings. Future research could explore other cities or cuisines. Practical implications The findings offer strategic insights for tourism marketers and culinary brand managers. Enhancing experiential elements and fostering cultural competence can significantly strengthen the brand equity of Turkish cuisine among international visitors. Social implications The research underscores the role of culinary experiences in fostering cultural exchange and improving intercultural relations. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by integrating experiential value and cultural competence into the brand experience-brand equity framework within the context of culinary branding from the perspective of stimulus–organism–response theory. It presents a validated four-factor scale and empirically reveals the mediating mechanisms that enhance culinary brand equity among international tourists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Çakır et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: