The Limits of Reflected Glory: The Beneficial and Harmful Effects of Product Name Similarity in the U.S. Network TV Program Industry, 1944–2003

References

• Aaker DA, Keller KL (1990) Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. J. Marketing 54:27–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arkes HR, Blumer C (1985) The psychology of sunk cost. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Making Processes 35:124–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Stuart T, Wang Y (2014) Matthew: Effect or fable? Management Sci. 60:92–109.Link, Google Scholar
• Barnes B (2011) Prime time ambitions. New York Times (August 28), http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/business/media/sony-tv-aims-for-prime-time.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.Google Scholar
• Berger J (2013) Contagious: Why the Things Catch On (Simon & Schuster, New York).Google Scholar
• Bielby WT, Bielby DD (1994) All hits are flukes: Institutionalized decision making and the rhetoric of network prime-time program development. Amer. J. Sociol. 99:1287–1313.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bothner MS, Podolny JM, Smith N (2011) Organizing contests for status: The Matthew effect vs. the Mark effect. Management Sci. 57:439–457.Link, Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Brooks E, Marsh T (2003) The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network and Cable TV Shows, 1946–Present (Ballantine Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Caminal R, Vives X (1996) Why market shares matter: An information-based theory. RAND J. Econom. 27:221–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll GR, Hannan MT (2000) The Demography of Corporations and Industries (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll GR, Khessina OM, McKendrick DG (2010) The social life of products: Analyzing product demography for management theory and practice. Acad. Management Ann. 4:157–203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Catlin J (1969) Theoretical notes on the word-frequency effect. Psych. Rev. 76:504–506.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chakravarti A, Janiszewski C (2003) The influence of macro-level motives on consideration set composition in novel purchase situations. J. Consumer Res. 30:244–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Abreu C, Smith HJ (1997) Opening the Doors to Hollywood: How to Sell Your Idea, Story, Screenplay, Manuscript (Three Rivers Press, New York).Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo JM, Kyle MK (2006) Surviving the gales of creative destruction: The determinants of product turnover. Strategic Management J. 27:241–264.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeSarbo WS, Kim J, Choi SC, Spaulding M (2002) A gravity-based multidimensional scaling model for deriving spatial structures underlying consumer preference/choice judgments. J. Consumer Res. 29:91–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobrev SD (1999) The dynamics of the Bulgarian newspaper industry in a period of transition: Organizational adaptation, structural inertia and political change. Indust. Corporate Change 8:573–605.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobrev SD, Ozdemir SZ, Teo A (2006) The ecological interdependence of emergent and established organizational populations: Legitimacy transfer, violation by comparison, and unstable identities. Organ. Sci. 17:577–597.Link, Google Scholar
• Fiske ST, Taylor SE (2008) Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture (McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New York).Google Scholar
• Fletcher JE (1993) The syndication marketplace. Allison A, Owers J, Carveth R, eds. Media Economics: Theory and Practice (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ), 283–307.Google Scholar
• Glynn MA, Abzug R (2002) Institutionalizing identity: Symbolic isomorphism and organizational names. Acad. Management J. 45:267–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glynn MA, Marquis C (2004) When good names go bad: Symbolic illegitimacy in organizations. Johnson C, ed. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 22 (JAI/Elsevier Science, New York), 147–170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodhardt GJ, Ehrenberg ASC (1969) Duplication of television viewing between and within channels. J. Marketing Res. 6:169–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Granqvist N, Grodal S, Woolley JL (2013) Hedging your bets: Explaining executives’ market labeling strategies in nanotechnology. Organ. Sci. 24:395–413.Link, Google Scholar
• Green PE, Krieger AM (1985) Models and heuristics for product line selection. Marketing Sci. 4:1–19.Link, Google Scholar
• Gross LS (1997) Cable networks. Accessed July 16, 2013, http://www.museum.tv/eotv/cablenetwork.htm.Google Scholar
• Guido G (1998) The dichotic theory of salience: A framework for assessing attention and memory. Eur. Adv. Consumer Res. 3:114–119.Google Scholar
• Gunasti K, Ross WT Jr (2010) How and when alphanumeric brand names affect consumer preference. J. Marketing Res. 47:1177–1192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan MT, Pólos L, Carroll GR (2007) The Logics of Organizational Theory: Audiences, Codes and Ecologies (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Hellofs LL, Jacobson R (1999) Market share and customers’ perceptions of quality: When can firms grow their way to higher versus lower quality? J. Marketing 63:16–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Horen J (1980) Scheduling of network television programs. Management Sci. 26:354–370.Link, Google Scholar
• Hsu G (2006) Jacks of all trades and masters of none: Audiences’ reactions to spanning genres in feature film production. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51:420–450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu G, Hannan MT (2005) Identities, genres, and organizational forms. Organ. Sci. 16:474–490.Link, Google Scholar
• Ingram P (1996) Organizational form as a mechanism for generating credible commitment: The evolution of naming strategy in the U.S. hospitality industry. Strategic Management J. 17:85–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inhoff AW (1984) Two stages of word processing during eye fixations in the reading of prose. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 23:612–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Janiszewski C (1993) Preattentive mere exposure effects. J. Consumer Res. 20:376–392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jourdan P (2001) Search or experience products: An empirical investigation of services, durable and non-durable goods. AP—Asia Pacific Adv. Consumer Res. 4:167–174.Google Scholar
• Keller KL, Heckler SW, Houston MJ (1998) The effects of brand name suggestiveness on advertising recall. J. Marketing 62:48–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kennedy RE (2002) Strategy fads and competitive convergence: An empirical test for herd behavior in primetime television programming. J. Indust. Econom. 50:57–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Khessina OM, Carroll GR (2008) Product demography of de novo and de alio firms in the optical disk drive industry, 1983–1999. Organ. Sci. 19:25–38.Link, Google Scholar
• Leclerc F, Hsee CK, Nuns J (2005) Narrow focusing: Why the relative position of a good in its category matters more than it should? Marketing Sci. 24:194–205.Link, Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Putler DS, Weinberg CB (2004) Is having more channels really better? A model of competition among commercial television broadcasters. Marketing Sci. 23:120–133.Link, Google Scholar
• Loken B, Ross I, Hinkle RL (1986) Consumer “confusion” of origin and brand similarity perceptions. J. Public Policy Marketing 5:195–211.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lowery TM, Shrum LJ (2007) Phonetic symbolism and brand name preference. J. Consumer Res. 34:406–414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malter D (2014) On the causality and cause of returns to organizational status: Evidence from the Grands Crus Classés of the Médoc. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59:271–300.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDowell WS, Dick SJ (2003) Has lead-in lost its punch? An analysis of prime time inheritance effects: Comparing 1992 with 2002. Internat. J. Media Management 5:285–293.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science. Science 159:56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Negro G, Leung MD (2013) “Actual” and perceptual effects of category spanning. Organ. Sci. 24:684–696.Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson P (1970) Information and consumer behavior. J. Political Econom. 72:311–329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio A (2012) TV success rate: 65% of new shows will be canceled (& why it matters). Screen Rant (May 17), http://screenrant.com/tv-success-rate-canceled-shows-aco-172162/.Google Scholar
• O’Hara KP, Payne SJ (1998) The effects of operator implementation cost on planfulness of problem solving and learning. Cognitive Psych. 35:34–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park CW, Lessig VP (1981) Familiarity and its impact on consumer biases and heuristics. J. Consumer Res. 8:223–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW (1976) Task complexity and contingent processing in decision-making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organ. Behav. Performance 16:366–387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pedersen T (2003) Sense cluster techniques. Accessed August 30, 2013, http://www.d.umn.edu/~tpederse/senseclusters.html.Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ (2013) Shaping Jazz: Cities, Labels, and the Global Emergence of an Art Form (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ, Kim Y (2009) Why pseudonyms? Deception as identity preservation among jazz record companies, 1920–1929. Organ. Sci. 20:481–499.Link, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1993) A status-based model of market competition. Amer. J. Sociol. 98:829–872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2005) Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Stuart TE (1995) A role-based ecology of technological change. Amer. J. Sociol. 100:1224–1260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Radas S, Shugan SM (1998) Seasonal marketing and timing new product introductions. J. Marketing Res. 35:296–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robertson KR (1987) Strategically desirable brand name characteristics. J. Consumer Marketing 6:61–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosa JA, Judson KM, Porac JF (2005) On sociocognitive dynamics between categories and product models in mature markets. J. Bus. Res. 58:62–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosa JA, Porac JF, Runser-Spanjol J, Saxon MS (1999) Sociocognitive dynamics in product market. J. Marketing 63:64–77.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosch E (1975) Cognitive representations of semantic categories. J. Experiment. Psych.: General 104:192–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rose L, Guthrie M (2012) The strange art of picking a TV title. Hollywood Reporter (March 6), http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/strange-art-picking-a-tv-298101.Google Scholar
• Sauder MF (2008) Interlopers and field change: The entry of U.S. news into the field of legal education. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53:209–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sauder M, Lynn F, Podolny JM (2012) Status: Insights from organizational sociology. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38:267–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrum WM (1991) Critics and publics: Cultural mediation in highbrow and popular performing arts. Amer. J. Sociol. 97:347–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart. J. Econom. 69:99–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sloutsky VM, Lo Y-F, Fisher A (2001) How much does a shared name make things similar? Linguistic labels, similarity, and the development of inductive inference. Child Development 72:1695–1709.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O (2000) Letting the market work for you: An evolutionary perspective on product strategy. Strategic Management J. 21:577–592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB (1999) Stpiece: A program for the estimation of piecewise-constant rate hazard models in STATA 600. Unpublished Ado-File, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Staw BM (1976) Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 16:27–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart T, Hoang H, Hybels RC (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:315–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tampa Bay Times (2005) TV Guide revamps size, content. Accessed April 5, 2013, http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/27/Artsandentertainment/TV_Guide_revamps_size.shtml.Google Scholar
• Tversky A (1977) Features of similarity. Psych. Rev. 84:327–352.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Verhaal JC, Khessina OM, Dobrev SD (2015) Oppositional product names, organizational identities, and product appeal. Organ. Sci. 26:1466–1484.Link, Google Scholar
• Vogel HL (2001) Entertainment Industry Economics: A Guide for Financial Analysis, 5th ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webster JG (1985) Program audience duplication: A study of television inheritance effects. J. Broadcasting Electronic Media 29:121–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wei-Skillern J, Marciano S (2008) Primer on the U.S. television industry. Harvard Business School Background Note 308-128, Boston.Google Scholar
• Williams RL (2000) A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics 56:645–646.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yorkston E, Menon G (2004) A sound idea: Phonetic effects of brand names on consumer judgments. J. Consumer Res. 31:43–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajonc R (1980) Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. Amer. Psychologist 35:151–175.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zerubavel E (1997) Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Zhao EY, Ishihara M, Lounsbury M (2013) Overcoming the illegitimacy discount: Cultural entrepreneurship in the U.S. feature film industry. Organ. Stud. 34:1747–1776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zuckerman E (1999) The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the illegitimacy discount. Amer. J. Sociol. 104:1398–1438.Crossref, Google Scholar