The effectiveness of nonverbal symbolic signs and metaphors in advertisements: An experimental inquiry

Psychology and Marketing

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 298-316

  DeRosia, Eric D ^a,b  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 49049118688     PISSN: 07426046     EISSN: 15206793     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mar.20210     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Aaker, J. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 347-356.
2. Brennan, L, & Bahn, K. D. (2006). Literal versus extended symbolic messages and advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of need for cognition. Psychology & Marketing, 23, 273-295.
3. Cacioppo, J., & Petty, R. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
4. Cacioppo, J., Petty, R., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306.
5. Campbell, M. C., & Amna, K. (2000). Consumers' use of persuasion knowledge: The effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 69-83.
6. Chebat, J.-C., Gelinas-Chebat, C., Hombourger, S., & Woodside, A. G. (2003). Testing consumers' motivation and linguistic ability as moderators of advertising readability. Psychology & Marketing, 20, 599-624.
7. Childers, T. L., & Houston, M. J. (1984). Conditions for a picture-superiority effect on consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 643-654.
8. Childers, T. L., Houston, M. J., & Heckler, S. E. (1985). Measurement of individual differences in visual versus verbal information processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 125-134.
9. Childers, T. L., & Jass, J. (2002). All dressed up with something to say: Effects of typeface semantic associations on brand perceptions and consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12, 93-106.
10. Corbett, E. (1990). Classic rhetoric for the modern student. New York: Oxford University Press.
11. Coulter, K. S. (2004). An examination of qualitative versus qualitative elaboration likelihood effects. Psychology & Marketing, 22, 31-49.
12. DeRosia, E. (2007). Rediscovering theory: Integrating ancient hypotheses and modern empirical evidence of the audience-response effects of rhetorical figures. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.), Go figure! New directions in advertising rhetoric (pp. 23-50). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
13. Edell, J. A., & Staelin, R. (1983). The information processing of pictures in print advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 45-61.
14. Ferber, R. (1977). Research by convenience. Journal of Consumer Research, 4, 57-58.
15. Forceville, C. (1995). IBM is a tuning fork: Degrees of freedom in the interpretation of pictorial metaphors. Poetics, 23, 189-218.
16. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1-31.
17. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1995). Persuasion knowledge: Lay people's and researcher's beliefs about the psychology of advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 62-74.
18. Giner-Sorolla, R., Garcia, M. T., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The automatic evaluation of pictures. Social Cognition, 17, 76-96.
19. Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 147-170). New York: Academic Press.
20. Haugtvedt, C. P., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1992). Need for cognition and advertising: Understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1, 239-260.
21. Holbrook, M. (1987). The study of signs in consumer esthetics: An egocentric review. In J. Umiker-Sebeok (Ed.), Marketing and semiotics: New directions in the study of signs for sale (pp. 73-122). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
22. Intraub, H. (1999). Understanding and remembering briefly glimpsed pictures: Implications for visual scanning and memory. In V. Coltheart (Ed.), Fleeting memories: Cognition of brief visual stimuli (pp. 47-70). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
23. Jones, M. Y, Pentecost, R., & Requena, G. (2005). Memory for advertising and information content: Comparing the printed page to the computer screen. Psychology & Marketing, 22, 623-648.
24. Keller, P. A., & Block, L. G. (1997). Vividness effects: A resource matching perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 295-304.
25. Larsen, V., Luna, D., & Peracchio, L. A. (2004). Points of view and pieces of time: A taxonomy of image attributes. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 102-111.
26. Lutz, K. A., & Lutz, R. J. (1977). The effects of interactive imagery on learning: Application to advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 493-498.
27. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Haifa century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
28. Martin, B. A. S., Sherrard, M. J., & Wentzel, D. (2005). The role of sensation seeking and need for cognition on Web-site evaluations: A resource-matching perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 22, 109-126.
29. McCarthy, M. S., & Mothersbaugh, D. L. (2002). Effects of typographic factors in advertising-based persuasion: A general model and initial empirical tests. Psychology & Marketing, 19, 663-691.
30. McQuarrie, E. F, & Mick, D. G. (1992). On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 180-197.
31. McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 424-438.
32. McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive, experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 37-54.
33. Meyers-Levy, J., & Tybout, A. M. (1989). Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 39-54.
34. Mick, D. G. (1986). Consumer research and semiotics: Exploring the morphology of signs, symbols, and significance. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 196-213.
35. Mick, D. G. (1997). Semiotics in marketing and consumer research: Balderdash, verity, pleas. In S. Brown & D. Turley (Eds.), Consumer research: Postcards from the edge (pp. 24-262). London: Routledge.
36. Mick, D. G., & Politi, L. G. (1989). Consumers' interpretations of advertising imagery: A visit to the hell of connotation. In E. Hischman (Ed.), Interpretive consumer research (pp. 85-96). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
37. Miniard, P. W., Bhatla, S., Lord, K. R., Dickson, P. R., & Unnava, H. R. (1991). Picture-based persuasion processes and the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 92-107.
38. Morgan, S. E., & Reichert, T. (1999). The message is in the metaphor: Assessing the comprehension of metaphors in advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 28, 1-12.
39. Moriarty, S. E. (1996). Abduction: A theory of visual interpretation. Communication Theory, 6, 167-187.
40. Morris, C. (1938). Foundations of the theory of signs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. Morris, C. (1946). Signs, language and behavior. New York: Braziller.
42. Morris, C. (1964). Signification and significance: A study of the relations of signs and values. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
43. Mothersbaugh, D. L., Huhmann, B. A., & Franke, G. R. (2002). Combinatory and separative effects of rhetorical figures on consumers' effort and focus in ad processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 589-602.
44. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
45. Noth, W. (1990). Handbook of semiotics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
46. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinios Press.
47. Pashupati, K. (2003). "I know this brand, but did I like the ad?" An investigation of the familiarity-based sleeper effect. Psychology & Marketing, 20, 1017-1043.
48. Pedhazur, E. J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
49. Peirce, C. S. (1931-1958). Collected papers. (Vol. Vols. 1-6 ed. Hartshorne, Charles & Weiss, Paul; vols. 7-8 ed. Burks, Arthur W.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (reference is made to volumes and paragraphs).
50. Peracchio, L. A., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1994). How ambiguous cropped objects in ad photos can affect product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 190-204.
51. Peracchio, L. A., & Tybout, A. M. (1996). The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 177-192.
52. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
53. Phillips, B. (1997). Thinking into it: Consumer interpretation of complex advertising images. Journal of Advertising, 26, 77-87.
54. Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1992). When small effects are impressive. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 160-164.
55. Rosbergen, E., Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (1997). Visual attention to advertising: A segment-level analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 305-314.
56. Rossiter, J. R., & Percy, L. (1980). Attitude change through visual imagery in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 9, 10-16.
57. Schmitt, B. H., Tavassoli, N. T., & Millard, R. T. (1993). Memory for print ads: Understanding relations among brand name, copy and picture. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2, 55-81.
58. Schumann, D. W, Petty, R. E., & demons, D. S. (1990). Predicting the effectiveness of different strategies of advertising variation: A test of the repetition-variation hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 192-202.
59. Schwarz, N. (1994). Judgment in a social context: Biases, shortcomings, and the logic of conversation. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 123). San Diego, Academic Press.
60. Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.
61. Singh, S. N., Lessig, V. P., Kim, D., Gupta, R., & Hocutt, M. A. (2000). Does your ad have too many pictures? Journal of Advertising Research, 40, 11-27.
62. Sojka, J. Z., & Giese, J. L. (2006). Communicating through pictures and words: Understanding the role of affect and cognition in processing visual and verbal information. Psychology & Marketing, 23, 995-1014.
63. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
64. Sweeney, J. C., & Brandon, C. (2006). Brand personality: Exploring the potential to move from factor analytical to circumplex models. Psychology & Marketing, 23, 639-663.
65. Tantillo, J., Di Lorenzo-Aiss, J., & Mathisen, R. E. (1995). Quantifying perceived differences in type styles: An exploratory study. Psychology & Marketing, 12, 447-457.
66. Unnava, H. R., & Burnkrant, R. E. (1991). An imagery-processing view of the role of pictures in print advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 226-231.