Summary Overview of Studies Marketing Communications

Marketing Communication
Overview of studies
Lecture 2: Breaking through the Advertising Clutter

Study – Self-Referencing and Recall (Burnkrant & Unnava, 1995)
 RQ: What is the effect of second-person wording (you) and third-person wording (it) on recall
and attitude?
 Design:
o You statements (you all know that…)
o It statements (It’s well-known that…)
o You questions
o It questions
 IV:
o Statements (you vs. it)
o Questions (you vs. it)
 DV:
o Recall
o Attitude
 Results:
o Using ‘it’ statements result in less recall than using ‘you’
statements
o When you approach people personally, they often
remember more information
o You can capture more attention when asking questions
 Notes:
o Focus on statements and recall in the lecture

Study – Dual Coding Theory: verbal and visual information (Burnkrant & Unnava, 1991)
 RQ: What is the effect of combining imagery text and pictures on ad recall?
 Design: 2 level of imagery (high vs. low) by 2 picture (present vs. absent)
4 ad manipulations:
o High imagery / Picture absent
o High imagery / Picture present
o Low imagery / Picture absent
o Low imagery / Picture present
o Example high imagery: “Picture a child’s shiny face, happy smile, and dancing eyes as
he blows out his first birthday candle. The light of the candle is enough for the
Digitron camcorder.”
o Example low imagery: “A Digitron camcorder performs very well under low light
conditions. With its new filters and lenses, a light as dim as a candle is enough.”
 IV:
o Level of imagery (high vs. low)
o Picture (absent vs. present)
 DV:
o Recall


1

,  Results:
o People can get confused when you tell them to imagine something and also show a
picture. There could be discrepancy between the picture and the imagination.
o You should not use imagery and visual ads together

Study – Encoding Variability: attention with dual-task paradigm (Unnava & Burnkrant, 1991)
 RQ: Do varied executions of ads enhance recall compared to same execution of ads?
 Design: 2 group design (2 similar ads OR 2 different ads)
o One group sees 2 similar ads of a fictious brand on the 6 th and 16th position
o One group sees 2 different ads of a fictious brand on the 6 th and 16th position
o Booklet with 30 ads
o With dual-task paradigm. Next to looking at an ad, subjects get a second task to
measure reaction time: press the button when you hear a beep. The more attention
to the ad, the less attention goes to the second task.
 IV:
o Ad execution (similar ads vs. different ads)
 DV:
o Attention
o Brand recall
o Message recall
 Results
o No effect on attention
o Brand recall: 28% on same ad executions vs. 55% on different ad executions
o Message recall: 1.53 for same ad executions vs. 2.83 on different ad executions
o Encoding variability (more memory traces) lead to higher recall

Lecture 3: Persuasion and Pre-Suasion

Study – Matching executional styles (Petty, Cacioppo & Schumann, 1983)
 RQ: System 2 people are more persuaded by strong quality arguments and for people in
system 1 the use of a celebrity can be important to persuade.
 Design: 2 involvement (low vs. high) x 2 argument quality (weak vs. strong) x 2 cue (celebrity
vs. noncelebrity status).
 IV:
o Involvement: toothpaste (low involvement) vs. disposable razors (high involvement)
o Involvement: brand would become available in other areas (low involvement) vs.
own area (high involvement)
o Argument quality: “scientifically designed” (+5 strong arguments) vs. “designed for
beauty” (+5 weak arguments)
o Cue: “professional athletes agree” + picture of 2 well-liked celebs (celebrity status)
vs. “Bakersfield, California agrees” + picture of average citizen (noncelebrity status)

 DV: attitudes
o Attitudes, recall and recognition
 Results:
o Involvement X cue (on attitude): Famous
endorsers lead to better attitudes with low

2