Focal attention
Marketers want their stimuli identified and categorized mssage becomes focus of conscious attention Information enters short term (working) memory Factors that attract involuntary attention Features of the stimuli: salience, vividness, novelty Features of the consumer: motivation, intentions, attitudes
Salience
The extent to whish a stimulus is noticeably different from its environment Fully context-dependent Advertising clutter Ads typically grouped together Try to stand out to be consciously noticed Potential threat: "Bandwagon effect" Competitors imitate successful ads that stand out If contrast is lost, salience effect is gone Example: Humor Example: Upward angle Figure-ground principle: stimulu becomes more focal an background fades Moderated by the motivation to process informaion e.g. works better for people with a low need for cognition
Vividness
emotionally interesting concrete and image-provoking proximate (very close) in a sensory temporal or spatial way unlike salience, not fully context-dependent depends on person: interest and ability for mental magery depends on the stimuli: concreteness, proximity Does vividness leat to favorable attitudes toward products? advertisers assume it does not entirely supported by research: mixed results in empirical studies
Novelty
Extent to which information is new and unfamiliar and disconfirms existing expectations Disconfirming info produces surprise Surprise creates cognitive elaboration Example: USBBurger, Eath Hour, the word "NEW" (= second most commom word in products after "FREE")
Expectancy disconfirmation model
ads influence expectations → expectations influense satisfaction if actual product performance exceeds expectations: increased satisfaction (surprise) if not: decreased satisfaction (disappointment) but very often ads promise too much, that the product cannot provide
Subtle ways to create novelty
- Changes in advertising execution without innovating the product - Cosmetic changes, variation
Does vividness leat to favorable attitudes toward products?
advertisers assume it does not entirely suppored by research - mixed results in empirical studies 1. Key moderator: individual differences in tendency to engage in visual imagery High visualizers are more sensitive to vivid imagery than low visualizers - low visualizers: no impacs of vividness on attitudes toward product - high visualizers: positive impact of vividness on product attitudes 2. Another moderator: Consumer goals What is vivid depends on consumer goals at the time of processing ad memorization goal: attention to body text and pictorial design brand-learning goal: attention to body text, but inhibited attention to poctorial design
