100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Summary

Economic & Consumer Psychology Articles Summary

Rating
-
Sold
-
Pages
27
Uploaded on
22-10-2023
Written in
2023/2024

Summary for all of the following papers! Week 1: 1. Yang, M., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2007). The effectiveness of brand placements in the movies: Levels of placements, explicit and implicit memory, and brand-choice behavior. Journal of Communication, 57 (3), 469-489. 2. Cheung, C. M. Y., Sia, C. L., & Kuan, K. K. (2012). Is this review believable? A study of factors affecting the credibility of online consumer reviews from an ELM perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(8), 618-635.  Week 2: 1. Antonetti, P., & Maklan, S. (2014). Feelings that make a difference: How guilt and pride convince consumers of the effectiveness of sustainable consumption choices. Journal of Business Ethics, 124 (1), 117-134. 2. Chang, C. (2020). How morality judgments influence humor perceptions of prankvertising. International Journal of Advertising, 40(2), 246- 271. Week 3: 1. Paek, H. J., Yoon, H. J., & Hove, T. (2011). Not all nutrition claims are perceived equal: Anchoring effects and moderating mechanisms in food advertising. Health communication, 26(2), 159- 170. 2. Cui, Y. G., Kim, S. S., & Kim, J. (2021). Impact of preciseness of price presentation on the magnitude of compromise and decoy effects. Journal of Business Research, 132, 641- 652. Week 4: 1. Vo, T. T., Xiao, X., & Ho, S. Y. (2019). How does corporate social responsibility engagement influence word of mouth on Twitter? Evidence from the airline industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(2), 525-542. 2. Aqueveque, C. (2018). Ignorant experts and erudite novices: Exploring the Dunning-Kruger effect in wine consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 65, 181- 184. Week 5: 1. Nash, J. G., & Rosenthal, R. A. (2014). An investigation of the endowment effect in the context of a college housing lottery. Journal of Economic Psychology, 42, 74- 82.  2. Wohl, M. J., Branscombe, N. R., & Lister, J. J. (2014). When the going gets tough: Economic threat increases financial risk taking in games of chance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(2), 211-217. Week 6: 1. Tiefenbeck, V., Staake, T., Roth, K., & Sachs, O. (2013). For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign. Energy Policy, 57, 160- 171. 2. Cho, H., & Schwarz, N. (2008). Of great art and untalented artists: Effort information and the flexible construction of judgmental heuristics. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 18(3), 205-211. 3. Guan, J., Ma, E., & Bi, J. (2021). Impulsive Shopping Overseas: Do Sunk Cost, Information Confusion, and Anticipated Regret Have a Say?. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Week 7: Loveland, K. E., Smeesters, D., & Mandel, N. (2010). Still preoccupied with 1995: The need to belong and preference for nostalgic products. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 393- 408. Carter, T. J., & Gilovich, T. (2012). I am what I do, not what I have: The differential centrality of experiential and material purchases to the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 102(6), . Week 8: 1. Kervyn, N., Fiske, S. T., & Malone, C. (2022). Social perception of brands: Warmth and competence define images of both brands and social groups. Consumer Psychology Review, 5(1), 51- 68. 2. Connors, S., Spangenberg, K., Perkins, A., & Forehand, M. (2021). Health-Based Weight Stereotypes in Advertising: Perpetuating Unhealthy Responses among Overweight Identifiers. Journal of Advertising, 50(2), 97-118. 3. Grau, S. L., & Zotos, Y. C. (2016). Gender stereotypes in advertising: a review of current research. International Journal of Advertising, 35(5), 761-770.

Show more Read less
Institution
Course










Whoops! We can’t load your doc right now. Try again or contact support.

Written for

Institution
Study
Course

Document information

Uploaded on
October 22, 2023
Number of pages
27
Written in
2023/2024
Type
Summary

Subjects

Content preview

Week 1

Is this review believable? A study of factors affecting the credibility of online consumer
reviews from an ELM perspective (Cheung, Sia, and Kuan)

Study examines four information cues used to evaluate the credibility of online reviews:
1. Argument quality
2. Source credibility
3. Review consistency
4. Review sidedness

Summary of the findings
 Argument quality (central cue) was the primary factor affecting review credibility
 Individuals relied on peripheral cues (such as source credibility, review consistency,
and review sidedness) when evaluating online consumer reviews
 Review sidedness had a stronger impact on review credibility when the recipient had
a low involvement level and a high expertise level

Elaboration likelihood model (ELM) 
understanding how people process messages
that are intended to be persuasive; there are two
routes including a central route (= high level of
elaboration) and peripheral route (=low level of
elaboration); degree of elaboration through the
central or peripheral route depends on the
individual’s ability and motivation




Central cue  argument quality
 The audience’s subjective perception of the arguments in the persuasive message as
strong and cogent on the one hand versus weak and specious on the other
 Determines one’s attitude towards a message primarily through careful deliberation
about the merits of the arguments presented; a message with stronger arguments is
expected to yield more favourable responses

Peripheral cues
 Source credibility  recipient’s perception of the credibility of a message source; it
is not concerned with the message itself; has a positive effect on message credibility
 Review consistency  the extent to which information in a review is consistent with
information in other reviews; information consistency is a heuristic cue that affects
knowledge adoption
 Review sidedness  whether a review is one sided (= contains either positive or
negative product comments) or two sided (= contains both positive and negative
comments on a product); a two-sided message is often perceived as more believable

Recipient’s expertise and involvement  the degree of influence that results from the
central or the peripheral cues depends on the recipient’s ability and motivation
 Recipient’s expertise  the recipient’s prior knowledge about the issue

,  Recipient’s involvement  the personal relevance of the issue

Central cues will have a greater influence on judgement when a recipient is able and
motivated to consider the information given in a message
 People will a high level of involvement are sufficiently engaged and motivated to
understand the message
 The influence of argument quality is stronger when the recipient has high expertise
and involvement

When the recipient in unable or not motivated to consider the information, peripheral cues
have a greater role in shaping judgement (people without the relevant expertise cannot assess
the quality of the message)
 The influence of peripheral cues is stronger when the recipient has low expertise and
involvement

Discussion
Argument quality is the most influential factor in the evaluation of online consumer reviews
 in the context of online consumer reviews, the influence of argument quality did not vary
across different levels of expertise and involvement
 Explanation 1: people typically make a deliberate choice to visit online consumer
review sites to search for information to facilitate their decisions (are somehow
motivated to elaborate)
 Explanation 2: the information in online reviews does not require exceptionally high
levels of expertise

People also rely on peripheral cues to evaluate online consumer reviews  the degree of
reliance on the peripheral cues depends on the recipient’s expertise and involvement levels
 HOWEVER, the moderation effects of involvement and expertise are more situation
dependent and complex

People who are involved and knowledgeable rely more on central cues (argument quality).
However, people who were not involved or knowledgeable did not necessarily rely more on
peripheral cues. Thus, consumers rely more on source credibility and review consistency in
the evaluation of online reviews when their expertise level is low, but involvement is high.
 Explanation: an information cue can be both a peripheral cue or a central cue
depending on the situation  when people are not motivated, reviews were perceived
more positively when they covered both positive and negative aspects because these
reviews seemed to be fair; when people are not involved, review sidedness is more a
peripheral cue

People with a high expertise level perceived two-sided reviews more favourable and people
with a low expertise level preferred one-sided reviews.
 Explanation: people rely on online consumer reviews to facilitate their purchase
decisions; reviews that provide both positive and negative information are useful if
people are able to judge the validity of the information  a knowledgeable user can
judge the significance of the pros and cons and make a final decision independently

The effectiveness of brand placements in the movies: levels of placement, explicit and
implicit memory, and brand-choice behaviour (Yang & Roskos-Ewoldsen)

, The study focused on the effect of three different levels of visual brand placements: in the
background (= when the product is shown with one of the main characters, but the character
does not use the product), used by the main character (= when the product is used by one of
the main characters), and as a story connection (= when the product is used as an enabler in
the story line). Additionally, the study explored the influence of brand placements using both
explicit and implicit measures of memory.

Summary of the findings
1. Levels of brand placements influence recognition of the target brand and attitudes
towards the brand
2. Simple placement of the brand within the movie influenced implicit memory and the
implicit choice task

Brand placements  the paid inclusion of branded products or brand identifiers, through
audio and/or visual means, within mass media programming

The landscape model  looks at the relationship between online processing of a story and
the memorial representation of that story

Discussion
Prediction of landscape model: during the comprehension process, background brand
placements have minimal level of activation, brand placements used by a main character have
a moderate level of activation and brand placements that are integral to the story have the
highest level of activation.
 Findings supporting the prediction: individuals recognized the brand more when the
brand was used by the main character or when the brand was integral to the story than
when the brand was featured as a background.
 Finding contrary to the prediction: no significant difference in recognition between
the main character using the brand or when it was related to the unfolding of the story.
 Levels of placement influence explicit memory

Results of the implicit memory test  the mere presence of the brand in the movie improved
individual’s implicit memory for the products
 Levels of placement did not influence implicit memory

Explicit and implicit measures of memory are sensitive to different influences of brand
placements on memory

People’s attitudes toward the brand had a reliable influence on their choices, but brand
placements did not influence the choice behaviour.
 People who saw the target brand in the movie were more likely to choose that brand

When the brand was used by the main character, people expressed more positive attitudes
toward the brand than when the product was presented in the background or when the brand
was part of the unfolding story


Insights for real-life brand placements
 If the intention is to gain recognition of the brand  want brand to be used by a main
character or play a role in the unfolding story
$6.52
Get access to the full document:

100% satisfaction guarantee
Immediately available after payment
Both online and in PDF
No strings attached

Get to know the seller
Seller avatar
lotteroukema99

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
lotteroukema99 Universiteit Leiden
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
0
Member since
4 year
Number of followers
0
Documents
1
Last sold
-

0.0

0 reviews

5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their tests and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can instantly pick a different document that better fits what you're looking for.

Pay as you like, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions