Brand Congruity and Comparative Advertising: When and Why Comparative Advertisements Lead to Greater Elaboration

Journal of Consumer Psychology

Volumn 14, Issue 1-2, 2004, Pages 115-123

  Priester, Joseph R ^a,d   Godek, John ^b   Nayakankuppum, D J ^c   Park, Kiwan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^d 376 Gilbert Hall ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2342665666     PISSN: 10577408     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_13     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Aaker, D. A., & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 27-41.
2. Belch, G. E. (1981). An examination of comparative and noncomparative television commercials: The effects of claim variation and repetition on cognitive response and message acceptance. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 333-349.
3. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131.
4. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197-253.
5. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Kao, C. F., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(5), 1032-1043.
6. Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, R. C. (2001). The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers' evaluations of product incongruity: Preference for the norm. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 439-449.
7. Dröge, C. (1989). Shaping the route to attitude change: Central processing through comparative versus noncomparative advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 193-204.
8. Grewal, D., Kavanoor, S., Fern, E. F., Costley, C., & Barnes, J. (1997). Comparative versus noncomparative advertising: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing, 61(4), 1-15.
9. Houston, M. J., Childers, T. L., & Heckler, S. E. (1987). Picture-word consistency and the elaborative processing of advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(4), 359-369.
10. Iyer, E. S. (1988). The influence of verbal content and relative newness on the effectiveness of comparative advertising. Journal of Advertising, 17(3), 15-21.
11. Meyers-Levy, J., & Malaviya, P. (1999). Consumers' processing of persuasive advertisements: An integrative framework of persuasion theories. Journal of Marketing, 63, 45-60.
12. Meyers-Levy, J., & Tybout, A. M. (1989). Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(1), 39-54.
13. Muehling, D. D., Stoltman, J. J., & Grossbart, S. (1990). The impact of comparative advertising on levels of message involvement. Journal of Advertising, 19(4), 41-50
14. Ozanne, J. L., Brucks, M., & Grewal, D. (1992). A study of information search behavior during the categorization of new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 452-463
15. Pechmann, C., & Esteban, G. (1994). Persuasion processes associated with direct comparative and noncompartitive advertising and implications for advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2(4), 403-432.
16. Pechmann, C., & Ratneshwar, S. (1991). The use of comparative advertising for brand positioning: Association versus differentiation. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 145-159.
17. Pechmann, C., & Ratneshwar, S. (1992). Covariation judgments: Theory or Data Driven? Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 373-386.
18. Pechmann, C., & Stewart, D. W. (1990). The effects of comparative advertising on attention, memory, and purchase intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 180-191.
19. Pechmann, C., & Stewart, D. W. (1991). How direct comparative ads and market share affect brand choice. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(6), 47-55.
20. Peracchio, L. A., & Tybout, A. M. (1996). The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(3), 177-192.
21. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer/Verlag.
22. Petty, R. E., Fleming, M. A., Priester, J. R., & Feinstein, A. H. (2001). Individual- versus group-interest violation: Surprise as a determinant of argument scrutiny and persuasion. Social Cognition, 19(4), 418-442.
23. Petty, R. E., Haugtvedt, C. P., & Smith, S. M. (1995). Elaboration as a determinant of attitude strength: Creating attitudes that are persistent, resistant, and predictive of behavior. In R. E. Petty & J. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
24. Petty, R. E., Priester, J. R., & Brinol, P. (2002). Mass media attitude change: implications of the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 155-198). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
25. Petty, R. E., Priester, J. R., & Wegener, D. T. (1994). Cognitive processes in attitude change. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), The handbook of social cognition (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
26. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 323-390). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
27. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 41-72). New York: Guilford.
28. Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T., Fabrigar, L. R., Priester, J. R., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1993). Conceptual and methodological issues in the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion: A reply to the Michigan State critics. Communication Theory, 3, 336-363.
29. Petty, R. E., Wells, G. L., & Brock, T. C. (1976). Distraction can enhance or reduce yielding to propaganda: Thought disruption versus effort justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(5), 874-884.
30. Priester, J. R., & Fleming, M. A. (1997). Artifact or meaningful theoretical constructs? Examining evidence for nonbelief- and belief-based attitude change processes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6(1), 67-76.
31. Priester, J. R., & Fleming, M. A. (1997). Artifact or meaningful theoretical constructs? Examining evidence for nonbelief- and belief-based attitude change processes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6(1), 67-76.
32. 2 Model: The Influence of attitudes and attitude strength on consideration and choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 373-386.
33. Sujan, M. (1985). Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(1), 31-46
34. Wilkie, W. L. & Farris, P. W. (1975). Comparison advertising: Problems and potential. Journal of Marketing, 39(1), 7-15.