60

Psychology of Marketing & Advertising (Subject) / 7. How advertising influences buying behavior (Lesson)

This lesson was created by Janaw55.

Learn lesson

This lesson is not released for learning.

back  |  next 1 / 2

• Physical attractiveness is always a heuristic cue False -> If there is a high relevance of the source of information (attractiveness and the attractive person) on argument (Only for products relevant to attractiveness like Beauty, not printer)
• With Low relevance of physical attractiveness on argument, the attitude was affected by source attractiveness depending of product category With Low relevance of physical attractiveness on argument, the attitude was affected by source attractiveness REGARDLESS of product category Razor = Computer
• With high relevance of physical attractiveness on argument, the attitude was affected by source attractiveness ONLY for the razor Ja
• Source congruity match between endorser associations and brands 
• The source congruity under low processing intensity was irrelevant Ja
• Under high processing intensity, the source congruity was irrelevant False -> it was important
• Fear is common in consumer products Falsoe -> Fear was more common in health education campaigns and less common in consumer products • E.g., hygiene, over-the-counter medication 
• Fear-arousing messages: Two parts – Fear appeal (warning) – Action recommendation (protecting) 
• Fear makes us more likely to accept the message Ja
• The relevance of physical attractiveness for as is valid when person is related to ad (e.g. Beauty) Ja
• Advertisement
• Listerine started a great campaign based on fear in the 1920's about Halitosis Ja
• A meta analysis Study that analyses all the studies of the subject (95 studies)
• Determinants of attitudes towards health recommendation • Perceived severity of the health threat • Argument quality • NOT personal vulnerability (whether one is at risk) 
• Determinants of intention to perform a protective action: • Perceived severity of the health threat • Personal vulnerability • NOT argument quality 
• Personal vulnerability (whether one is at risk) determines attitude towards health recommendation, because health threats can become relevant at any point, even if they are not relevant in the present False -> Personal vulnerability (whether one is at risk) DOES NOT determine attitude towards health recommendation, because health threats can become relevant at any point, even if they are not relevant in the present
• Personal vulnerability (whether one is at risk) DOES determine intention to perform protective action like health recommendation Ja
• Argument Quality DOES determine attitude towards health recommendation Ja
• Accompanying pictorial material makes no difference in health recommendation Ja
• When one is at risk, they are willing to do anything and to accept message without really judging the risk (like skin creme, scar creme) Ja
• Need for cognition (NFC) Enjoy thinking about arguments in a message  – High NFCargument quality, content-related information – Low NFCheuristic cues
• Feeling vulnerable triggers leads to a Biased systematic processing of the threat, because Highly motivated to minimize the threat (e.g., denying) but if arguments are strong: the only hope that remains is the recommendation Ja
• Feeling vulnerable triggers leeds to positively biased processing of the action recommendation, because people are highly motivated to engage in the protective action (regardless of the quality of the arguments supporting it) Ja
• People with high NFC rely mostly on heuristic cues False -> with low NFC
• Need for cognitive closure (NFCC) Desire for a definite answer on a topic, avoidance of confusion/ambiguity 
• People with high NFCC rely on heuristic cues, as these offer that Ja
• Even People with NFCC can have a need for high cognitive closure when under time pressure. Ja
• When we want to make a decision fast we need high cognitive closure and we have t rely on heuristic cues as we cannot process the message Ja
• High NFCC people prefer the central route False -> Low NFCC people prefer the central route
• Mere awareness of persuasive intent might increase resistance, because people generally try to actively avoid ads Ja
• Consumers more willing to believe product info by ads False -> Consumers more willing to believe product info by sales personnel in shops 
• Advertisement
• Consumers more willing to believe shop sellers that hold more products than only one brand (Apple vs. Saturn) Ja
• Ways to reduce resistance to advertising 1. Two-sided ads 2. Product placement 3. Sponsorships 
• Two-sided advertisements not only hold positive arguments, as they also tell you what's not so good about a product (SMART) Ja
• Benefits of two-sided ads reduce resistance to persuasion  stand out and seem more honest and objective reduce counterarguments, and are seen as more credible 
• There is empirical evidence that they reduce counterarguments, and are seen as more credible Ja
• Attitudes formed on basis of two-sided ads: – More resistant to counter-attack – Reduced impact of disconfirming info 
• Also, acknowledging a fault might not be that important if people already know about it! False -> Also, acknowledging a fault might be important if people already know about it! – Prevents from being “attacked” by competitors  
• Best strategy for two-sided advertisements is to admit serious flaws False -> Best strategy for two-sided advertisements is to avoid atmitting serious flaws
• the Optimal proportion of negative information is not more than two fifths Ja
• Product placement is the free inclusion of branded products or brand identifiers through audio and/or visual means False -> Product placement is the paid inclusion of branded products or brand identifiers through audio and/or visual means
• Product placement is an obtrusive way of persuasion False -> Product placement is a more unobtrusive way of persuasion
• Acknowledging a fault can prevent from being attacked by competitors Ja
• Product placement is usually used on low-involvement products Ja
• Product placement with disliked actors can backfire and results in negative brand attitude Ja
• The Impact of product placement on brand attitude influenced by attitude towards the artist in the video Ja
• Viewers might be irritated by blatant product placement when they are no fan False -> Viewers might be irritated by blatant product placement when they are a fan
• Blatant placement decreased product attitudes for fans, but increased attitudes for non-fans Ja
• Sponsorship A technique by which a commercial organization financially supports an entity (event, programme, team, cause) in order to associate the two 
• 2 most important types of Sponsorship – Program sponsorship • Assume total financial responsibility for program – Event sponsorship • Contribute to cost of event to allow links with brand name 
• In Event sponsorship one assumes total financial responsibility for program False -> in program sponsorship one assumes total financial responsibility for program 

back  |  next 1 / 2