Print advertising: Vivid content

Journal of Business Research

Volumn 65, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 861-864

  Fennis, Bob M ^a   Das, Enny ^b   Fransen, Marieke L ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Brand attitude; Individual differences in imagery vividness; Vivid vs. pallid ad executions

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860370430     PISSN: 01482963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.01.008     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Aiken L.S., West S.G. Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions 1991, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
2. Bergkvist L., Rossiter J.R. The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs. J Mark Res 2007, 44:175-184.
3. Bone P.F., Ellen P.S. The generation and consequences of communication-evoked imagery. J Consum Res 1992, 19:93-104.
4. Fortin D.R., Dholakia R.R. Interactivity and vividness effects on social presence and involvement with a web-based advertisement. J Bus Res 2005, 58(3):387-396.
5. Frey K.P., Eagly A.H. Vividness can undermine the persuasiveness of messages. J Pers Soc Psychol 1993, 65(1):32-44.
6. Johnson M.P. Miscarriage: Is vividness of visual imagery a factor in the grief reaction of the partner?. Br J Health Psychol 1998, 3(2):137-146.
7. Kisielius J., Sternthal B. Examining the vividness controversy: An availability-valence perspective. J Consum Res 1986, 12(4):418-431.
8. LeBoutillier N., Marks D.F. The factorial validity and reliability of the eyes-open version of the vividness of visual imagery questionnaire. J Ment Imagery 2001, 25(3-4):107-114.
9. Marks D.F. Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. Br J Psychol 1973, 64(1):17-24.
10. Marks D.F. Bibliography of research utilizing the vividness of visual imagery questionnaire. Percept Mot Skills 1989, 69(3, Pt 1):707-718.
11. McKelvie S.J. The vividness of visual imagery questionnaire as a predictor of facial recognition memory performance. Br J Psychol 1994, 85(1):93-104.
12. McKelvie S.J. Effects of gender on reported vividness of visual imagery for parents. J Ment Imagery 1998, 22(3-4):99-112.
13. Mitchell A.A., Olson J.C. Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude?. J Mark Res 1981, 18:318-332.
14. Nisbett R.E., Ross L. Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment 1980, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
15. Puto C.P., Wells W.D. Informational and transformational advertising: The differential effects of time. Adv Consum Res 1984, 11:572-576.
16. Richardson J.T.E. Gender differences in the vividness of visual imagery questionnaire: A meta-analysis. J Ment Imagery 1995, 19(3-4):177-187.
17. Rossiter J.R., Bellman S. Marketing Communications: Theory and Applications 2005, Pearson Prentice Hall, Frenchs Forest, Australia.
18. Rossiter J.R., Bergkvist L. The importance of choosing one good item for single-item measures of attitude towards the ad and attitude towards the brand and its generalization to all measures. Transf Werbeforschung Prax 2009, 55(2):8-18.
19. Rossiter J.R., Percy L. Visual imaging ability as a mediator of advertising response. Adv Consum Res 1978, 5:621-629.
20. Rossiter J.R., Percy L. Attitude change through visual imagery in advertising. J Advert 1980, 9:10-16.
21. Rossiter J.R., Percy L. Visual communication in advertising. Information Processing Research in Advertising 1983, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. R.J. Harris (Ed.).
22. Rossiter J.R., Percy L. Advertising and Promotion Management 1987, McGraw-Hill, New York.
23. Rossiter J.R., Percy L. Advertising Communications and Promotion Management 1997, McGraw-Hill, New York. 2nd edition.
24. Sullivan G.L., Macklin C.M. Vividness and unvividness effects in print advertising: An experimental investigation. J Ment Imagery 1988, 12(3-4):133-144.
25. Taylor S.E., Thompson S.C. Stalking the elusive "vividness" effect. Psychol Rev 1982, 89(2):155-181.