Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose Grounded in the S–O–R framework, this study examines how design–related stimuli and brand identification are associated with consumers' purchase intention, both directly and through brand loyalty and brand–lifestyle congruence in the chain coffee context. Design/methodology/approach An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was adopted. Structural equation modeling and bootstrapped mediation analysis were applied to 372 valid questionnaires to test direct and indirect relationships, while semi–structured interviews with 16 consumers were used to interpret the underlying mechanisms. Findings The quantitative results show that brand visual symbols, brand identification, and brand design perception are positively associated with brand loyalty, brand–lifestyle congruence, and purchase intention. Brand loyalty and brand–lifestyle congruence are also positively associated with purchase intention. Bootstrapping further showed that brand loyalty and brand–lifestyle congruence significantly mediated all six indirect relationships between the three antecedents and purchase intention. Qualitative findings helped explain these pathways and suggested that consumption purpose, price sensitivity, and product quality may shape the relevance of brand design. Originality/value This study extends the S–O–R framework in the chain coffee context by distinguishing specific brand visual symbols from holistic brand design perception, positioning brand identification as a relational antecedent, and identifying brand loyalty and brand–lifestyle congruence as mediating organism states. The explanatory sequential mixed-methods design connects statistical relationships with consumers' interpretations of coffee consumption scenarios, providing a context–sensitive account of how brand image design is related to purchase intention. The findings provide practical guidance for chain coffee brands to coordinate visual identity, experiential design, and consumption convenience across brand touchpoints.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: