- UID
- 1333346
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2018-3-14
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
JOURNAL ARTICLE
What to Say When: Advertising Appeals in Evolving Markets
Rajesh K. Chandy, Gerard J. Tellis, Deborah J. MacInnis and Pattana Thaivanich
Journal of Marketing Research
Vol. 38, No. 4 (Nov., 2001), pp. 399-414
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1558607
Page Count: 16
http://sci-hub.tw/https://www.jstor.org/stable/1558607
The authors study how ad cues affect consumer behavior in new versus well-established markets. The authors use theoretical insights from consumer information processing to argue that the same ad cues can have different effects on consumer behavior, depending on whether the market is new or old. The authors then test these hypotheses in the context of a toll-free referral service, using a highly disaggregate econometric model of advertising response. The results indicate that argument-based appeals, expert sources, and negatively framed messages are particularly effective in new markets. Emotion-based appeals and positively framed messages are more effective in older markets than in new markets.
HYPOTHESES
Appeal Mode: The Role of Argument and Emotion
Scholars have long examined the role of arguments relative to emotions in driving behavior (Agres, Edell, and Dubitsky 1990; Cohen and Areni 1991; McGuire I969; Petty and Wegener 1998). Early research in marketing focused on whether emotional ads are more effective than argument-based ads (Friestad and Thorson 1986; Golden and Johnson 1983; Ray and Batra 1983). This research shows conflicting findings; some authors argue that emotions are more effective (e.g., Edwards 1990; Edwards and von Hippel 1995; Friestad and Thorson 1986), and others argue that arguments are more effective (e.g., Golden and Johnson 1983; Millar and Millar 1990).
More recent research suggests that both emotions and arguments can be effective, but their effectiveness varies by context (see Olson and Zanna 1993; Petty and Wegener I998; Stayman and Aaker 1988). Specifically, when consumers have little information about a product, they are more motivated to attend to and process arguments in the ads. Then, if ads are to be persuasive, they need to provide compelling arguments that reduce purchase risks and differentiate the product from competitors. Because consumers are motivated to process ads when prior knowledge is lacking, they should find ads more compelling when the ads provide a credible reason for buying the product. However, when consumers are already aware of the product and have preexisting attitudes toward it, they are less motivated to process information about it. Indeed, they may respond negatively to argument-focused ads because of satiation, boredom, or irritation (Batra and Ray 1986; Pechmann and Stewart 1988; Petty and Cacioppo 1979; Rethans, Swasy, and Marks 1986; Schumann, Petty, and Clemons 1990). In the context of market age, this theory suggests that argument-based ads would be more persuasive in younger markets than in older ones, because consumers would be more motivated to process their content.
The opposite effect may hold for emotion-based ads. Such ads rarely convey factual information about a product. Therefore, they may not reduce consumers’ perceptions of risk. As such, they may have limited effects on consumers who have limited prior knowledge. Although emotions may convey warm feelings and stimulate favorable brand attitudes, attitudes formed by such processes may not lead to choices of products about which consumers are not well informed. The reason may be that such ads may neither provide a credible reason for buying the product nor change fundamental beliefs about it. Furthermore, when consumers lack product knowledge, emotional ads may distract consumers from critical product content (Moore and Hutchinson 1983). Thus, consumers are less likely to encode or transfer product information to long-term memory.
However, in older markets, where motivation is lacking but product knowledge is present, emotion-laden ads may win consumers’ attention and help the retrieval of prior product knowledge from memory. Because such ads make the product more accessible, bringing it to the forefront of consumers’ memory, they are likely to affect behavior. Furthermore, emotion-based ads may be more user oriented and therefore more capable of enabling high-knowledge consumers to imagine themselves interacting with the product. This usage-oriented imagery may stimulate consumers to elaborate on the benefits of personal usage, thus motivating behavior.
This logic suggests the following hypotheses:
H1: Argument-based ads are more effective in younger markets than in older markets.
H2: Emotion-based ads are more effective in older markets than in younger markets.
Note that we are not equating emotional ads with peripheral cues. Several models of persuasion (e.g., MacInnis and Jaworski I989; Rossiter and Percy 1987; Vaughn 1980) presume no necessary relationship between ad content (emotional versus rational) and peripheral versus central route processing. Nor are we arguing that emotional and information ads represent two ends of a continuum. Rather, we are conceptualizing them as independent entities. Nor are we comparing emotional to rational arguments. Rather, we argue that ads that contain rational information will be more effective in younger markets than in older markets, whereas ads that contain emotional information will work better in older markets than in younger markets.
|
本帖子中包含更多资源
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看，没有帐号？立即注册
x
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2019-3-10 20:28:31
收藏
收藏
