Exploring the changing role of brand archetypes in customer-brand relationships, by Omar Merlo, Andreas B. Eisingerich, Richard Gillingwater and Jia Jocelyn Cao, published in Business Horizons in 2023, is a peer reviewed marketing study analyzing over 2,400 brands to argue that strong brands now tend to draw on multiple archetypes at once rather than embodying a single one, revising over twenty years of prior brand strategy advice. Cited here specifically for its correct attribution of the popular twelve archetype marketing framework to Margaret Mark and Carol S. Pearson's 2001 work on a Jungian basis, and for the point that mapping a brand onto an archetype happens after the fact of a brand's existing identity rather than as prediction. Its strength is peer reviewed empirical grounding for that attribution and that limitation. Its limit is that it studies the commercial marketing framework specifically, not Carl Jung's own psychological archetype theory, which this atlas should keep distinct from the marketing application this article addresses.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Merlo, Eisingerich, Gillingwater and Cao's article in Business Horizons, published by Elsevier, is a peer reviewed marketing study, treated at the top tier as peer reviewed journal scholarship, cited here specifically for its empirically grounded attribution of the popular twelve archetype framework to Margaret Mark and Carol S. Pearson's 2001 Jungian-based work. NotesPeer-reviewed. Cited here only for what it is authority on: that the twelve-archetype framework in general use derives from Margaret Mark and Carol S. Pearson (2001) on a Jungian basis, and that the mapping of an archetype onto a subject is made after the fact rather than predicted. It is the primary attribution for the twelve-archetype framework this atlas catalogues, which is that framework and not Jung's own archetypes.
Citation
AuthorOmar Merlo, Andreas B. Eisingerich, Richard Gillingwater and Jia Jocelyn Cao
PublisherBusiness Horizons 66(5), Elsevier
Publication Year2023
Source TypeJournal article
Claims Backed By This Source (15 claims)
This source backs 15 claims across the atlas. As facts: 14 well-attested. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Categories, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.