Controversial advertisement executions and involvement on elaborative processing and comprehension

Journal of Marketing Communications

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 293-313

  Huhmann, Bruce A ^a   Mott Stenerson, Beth ^b  

^a NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN INDIANA   (United States)

Author keywords

Controversial advertisement execution; Offensive advertising; Provocative advertisement; Resource matching perspective; Shock appeal

Indexed keywords

EID: 47949110615     PISSN: 13527266     EISSN: 14664445     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13527260802141413     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aaker, D.A., and D.E. Bruzzone. 1985. Causes of irritation in advertising. Journal of Marketing 49, no. 2: 47-57.
2. Aaker, J.L., and J. Sengupta. 2000. Additivity versus attenuation: The role of culture in the resolution of information incongruity. Journal of Consumer Psychology 9, no. 2: 67-82.
3. Anand, P., and B. Sternthal. 1990. Ease of message processing as a moderator of repetition effects in advertising. Journal of Marketing Research 27: 345-53.
4. Andrews, J.C., S.H. Akhter, S. Durvasula, and D.D. Muehling. 1992. The effects of advertising distinctiveness and message content involvement on cognitive and affective responses to advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising 14, no. 1: 45-58.
5. Barnes, J.H. Jr., and M.J. Dotson. 1990. An exploratory investigation into the nature of offensive television advertising. Journal of Advertising 19, no. 3: 61-9.
6. Beatty, S.E., and S. Talpade. 1994. Adolescent influence in family decision making: A replication with extension. Journal of Consumer Research 21, no. 2: 332-41.
7. Bello, D.C., R.E. Pitts, and M.J. Etzel. 1983. The communication effects of controversial sexual content in television programs and commercials. Journal of Advertising 12, no. 3: 32-42.
8. Callow, M., and C.G. McDonald. 2005. The 'Spanglification' of advertising campaigns in Hispanic media? A comparison of approaches in Spanish-only and dual language magazines. Journal of Marketing Communications 11, no. 4: 283-95.
9. Celsi, R.L., and J.C. Olson. 1988. The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research 15, no. 2: 210-24.
10. Crosier, K., and B.Z. Erdogan. 2001. Advertising complaint: Who and where are they? Journal of Marketing Communications 7, no. 2: 109-20.
11. Dahl, D.W., K.D. Frankenberger, and R.V. Manchanda. 2003. Shocking and nonshocking advertising content among university students. Journal of Advertising Research 43, no. 3: 268-80.
12. De Pelsmacker, P., and J. Van Den Bergh. 1996. The communication effects of provocation in print advertising. International Journal of Advertising 15, no. 3: 203-22.
13. Fahy, J., D. Smart, W. Pride, and O.C. Ferrell. 1995. Advertising sensitive products. International Journal of Advertising 14, no. 3: 231-43.
14. Fam, K.-S., and D.S. Waller. 2003. Advertising controversial products in the Asia Pacific: What makes them offensive? Journal of Business Ethics 48, no. 3: 237-50.
15. _, and B.Z. Erdogan. 2004. The influence of religion on attitudes towards the advertising of controversial products. European Journal of Marketing 38, nos. 5-6: 537-55.
16. Grazer, W.F., and G. Keesling. 1995. The effect of print advertising's use of sexual themes on brand recall and purchase intention. Journal of Applied Business Research 11, no. 3: 47-57.
17. Huhmann, B. A. 2007. A model of the cognitive and emotional processing of rhetorical works in advertising. In Go figure: New directions in advertising rhetoric, eds. E.F. McQuarrie and BJ. Phillips, 133-75. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
18. Jacoby, J., and W.D. Hoyer. 1989. The comprehension/miscomprehension of print communication: Selected findings. Journal of Consumer Research 14, no. 4: 434-43.
19. Jardine, A. 2006. French Connection advertisement incites wave of protests. Advertising Age 77, no. 9: 24.
20. Kapner, S. 2002. Agencies say British regulators are too quick to ban advertisements. New York Times, January 4, sec. C.
21. Katsanis, L.P. 1994. Do unmentionable products still exist? An empirical investigation. Journal of Product and Brand Management 3, no. 4: 5-14.
22. Kurylko, D.T. 2006. VW: No apologies for advertisements; Helga et al. bring in the customers, marketer says. Automotive News, June 12.
23. Machleit, K.A., C.T. Allen, and T.J. Madden. 1993. The mature brand and brand interest: An alternative consequence of ad-evoked affect. Journal of Marketing 57, no. 4: 72-82.
24. Maclnnis, D.J., C. Moorman, and B.J. Jaworski. 1991. Enhancing and measuring consumers' motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information from advertisements. Journal of Marketing 55, no. 4: 32-53.
25. MacKenzie, S.B., R.J. Lutz, and G.E. Belch. 1986. The role of attitude toward the advertisement as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research 23, no. 2: 130-43.
26. Maheswaran, D., and S. Chaiken. 1991. Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: Effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61, no. 1: 13-25.
27. Malaviya, P., J. Kisielius, and B. Sternthal. 1996. The effect of type of elaboration on advertisement processing and judgment. Journal of Marketing Research 33, no. 4: 410-21.
28. McQuarrie, E.F., and D.G. Mick. 1992. On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research 19, no. 2: 180-97.
29. Millan, E., and R. Elliott. 2004. Offensive advertising, public policy, and the law: The rulings on the Zagorka case. Journal of Consumer Policy 27, no. 4: 475-93.
30. Miniard, P.W., S. Bhatla, and R.L. Rose. 1990. On the formation and relationship of advertisement and brand attitudes: An experimental and causal analysis. Journal of Marketing Research 27, no. 3: 290-3.
31. Mothersbaugh, D.L., B.A. Huhmann, and G.R. Franke. 2002. Combinatory and separative effects of rhetorical figures on consumers' effort and focus in advertisement processing. Journal of Consumer Research 28, no. 4: 589-602.
32. Peracchio, L.A., and J. Meyers-Levy. 1997. Evaluating persuasion-enhancing techniques from a resource-matching perspective. Journal of Consumer Research 24, no. 2: 178-91.
33. Peter, J.P., G.A. Churchill Jr., and T.J. Brown. 1993. Caution in the use of difference scores in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 19, no. 4: 655-62.
34. Peterson, R.A., and R.A. Kerin. 1977. The female role in advertisements: Some experimental evidence. Journal of Marketing 41, no. 4: 51-63.
35. Plutchik, R. 1980. Emotion: A psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York: Harper and Row.
36. Pope, N.K.L., K.E. Voges, and M.R. Brown. 2004. The effect of provocation in the form of mild erotica on attitude to the advertisement and corporate image: Differences between cause-related and product-based advertising. Journal of Advertising 33, no. 1: 69-82.
37. Prendergast, G., B. Ho, and I. Phau. 2002. A Hong Kong view of offensive advertising. Journal of Marketing Communications 8, no. 3: 165-77.
38. Reliman, S.N., and J.R. Brooks. 1987. Attitudes toward television advertising for controversial products. Journal of Health Care Marketing 7, no. 3: 78-83.
39. Rosnow, R.L., and R. Rosenthal. 1989. Definition and interpretation of interaction effects. Psychological Bulletin 105, no. 1: 143-6.
40. Severn, J., G.E. Belch, and M.A. Belch. 1990. The effects of sexual and non-sexual advertising appeals and information level on cognitive processing and communication effectiveness. Journal of Advertising 19, no. 1: 14-22.
41. Shavitt, S., P. Lowrey, and J. Haefner. 1998. Public attitudes toward advertising: More favorable than you might think. Journal of Advertising Research 38, no. 4: 7-22.
42. Shukor, S. 2004. Children shoot to kill in shock Mirren anti-gun advert. Sunday Times, March 21.
43. Venkat, R., and N. Abi-Hanna. 1995. Effectiveness of visually shocking advertisements: Is it context dependent? In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada Marketing Division. Vol.16: ed. H.J. Ogden, 139-46. Windsor, ON: Administrative Sciences Association of Canada.
44. Vezina, R., and O. Paul. 1997. Provocation in advertising: A conceptualization and an empirical assessment. International Journal of Research in Marketing 14, no. 2: 177-92.
45. Waller, D.S. 1999. Attitudes towards offensive advertising: An Australian study. Journal of Consumer Marketing 16, no. 3: 288-94.
46. _. 2005. A proposed response model for controversial advertising. Journal of Promotion Management 11, nos. 2-3: 3-15.
47. _, K.-S. Fam, and Z.B. Erdogan. 2005. Advertising of controversial products: a cross-cultural study. Journal of Consumer Marketing 22, no. 1: 6-13.
48. Wolburg, J., and J. Pokrywczynski. 2001. A psychographic analysis of generation Y college students. Journal of Advertising Research 41, no. 5: 33-53.