Increasing advertising effectiveness through incongruity-based tactics: The moderating role of consumer involvement

Journal of Marketing Communications

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 182-197

  Halkias, Georgios ^a   Kokkinaki, Flora ^a  

^a ATHENS UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Greece)

Author keywords

consumer attitudes; decision involvement; memory performance; schema incongruity theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84879638328     PISSN: 13527266     EISSN: 14664445     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13527266.2011.592346     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Aaker, D.A. 1991. Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name, New York: The Free Press.
2. Aaker, J.L. and Sengupta, J. 2000. Additivity versus attenuation: The role of culture in the resolution of information incongruity. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9 (2): 67 - 82.
3. Boush, D.M. and Loken, B. 1991. A process-tracing study of brand extension evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (1): 16 - 28.
4. Brannon, L.A. and Brock, T.C. 2006. " Measuring the prototypicality of product categories and exemplars: Implications of schema correspondence theory ". In Creating images and the psychology of marketing communication, Edited by: Kahle, L.R. and Kim, C.-H. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbraum Associates, Inc.
5. Campbell, M.C. and 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 - 49.
6. Celsi, R.L. and Olson, J.C. 1988. The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (2): 210 - 24.
7. Chaiken, S. and Maheswaran, D. 1994. Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: The effect of source credibility, argument ambiguity and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (3): 460 - 73.
8. Crockett, W.H. 1988. " Schemas, affect, and communication ". In Communication, social cognition, and affect, Edited by: Donohew, L., Sypher, H.E. and Higgins, E.T. 33 - 52. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Dahlén, M., Lange, F., Sjödin, H. and Törn, F. 2005. Effects of Ad-brand incongruency. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 27 (2): 1 - 12.
10. Fiske, S.T. 1982. " Schema-triggered affect: Applications to social perception ". In Affect and cognition: The seventeenth annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Edited by: Clark, M.S. and Fiske, S.T. 55 - 78. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
11. Fiske, S.T. and Linville, P.W. 1980. What does the schema concept buy us?. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 6 (4): 543 - 57.
12. Fiske, S.T. and Pavelchak, M.A. 1986. " Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect ". In Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior, Edited by: Sorrentino, R.M. and Higgins, E.T. 167 - 203. New York: Guilford Press.
13. Fiske, S.T. and Taylor, S.E. 1991. Social cognition, 1st ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
14. Friedman, A. 1979. Framing pictures: The role of knowledge in automated encoding and memory for gist. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108 (3): 316 - 55.
15. Goodstein, R.C. 1993. Category-based applications and extensions in advertising: Motivating more extensive ad processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (1): 87 - 99.
16. Gutman, J. 1982. A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. Journal of Marketing, 48 (2): 60 - 72.
17. Halkias, G. and Kokkinaki, F. 2010. How schema incongruity influences consumer responses: Exploring the degree of incongruity for different sources of discrepancy. European Advances in Consumer Research, 9 (in press)
18. Hastie, R. 1980. " Memory for information which confirms or contradicts a general impression ". In Person memory: The cognitive basis of social perception, Edited by: Hastie, R., Ebbesen, E.B., Wyer, R.S. Jr., Hamilton, D.L. and Carlston, D.E. 155 - 177. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
19. Heckler, S.E. and Childers, T.L. 1992. The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: What is incongruency?. Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (4): 475 - 92.
20. Houston, M.J., Childers, T.L. and Heckler, S.E. 1987. Picture-word consistency and the elaborative processing of advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 24 (4): 359 - 69.
21. Keller, K.L. 1993. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57 (1): 1 - 22.
22. Keller, Kevin Lane. 2003. Strategic brand management: Building, measuring, and managing brand equity, 2nd ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
23. Lange, F. and Dahlén, M. 2003. Let's be strange: Brand familiarity and ad-brand incongruency. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 12 (7): 449 - 61.
24. Lee, E.-J. and Schumann, D. 2004. Explaining the special case of incongruity in advertising: Combining classic theoretical approaches. Marketing Theory, 4 (1/2): 59 - 90.
25. Lee, Y.H. and Mason, C. 1999. Responses to information incongruency in advertising: The role of expectancy, relevancy, and humor. Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (2): 156 - 69.
26. MacInnis, D.J. and Jaworski, B.J. 1989. Information processing from advertisements: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53 (4): 1 - 23.
27. Mandler, G. 1982. " The structure of value: Accounting for taste ". In Affect and cognition: The seventeenth annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Edited by: Clark, M.S. and Fiske, S.T. 3 - 36. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
28. Mantel, S.P. and Kardes, F.R. 1999. The role of direction of comparison, attribute-based processing, and attitude-based processing in consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 25: 335 - 52.
29. Meyers-Levy, J. and Tybout, A.M. 1989. Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (1): 39 - 54.
30. Meyers-Levy, J., Louie, T.A. and Curren, M.T. 1994. How does the congruity of brand names affect evaluations of brand name extensions?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79 (1): 46 - 53.
31. Noseworthy, T.J., Finlay, K. and Islam, T. 2010. From a commodity to an experience: The moderating role of thematic positioning on congruity-based product judgment. Psychology & Marketing, 27 (5): 465 - 86.
32. Ozzane, J.L., Brucks, M. and Grewal, D. 1992. A study of information search behavior during the categorization of new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (4): 452 - 63.
33. Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J. and Maclnnis, D.J. 1986. Strategic brand concept-image management. Journal of Consumer Research, 50 (4): 135 - 45.
34. Park, C.W., Milberg, S. and Lawson, R. 1991. Evaluation of brand extensions: The role of product feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (2): 185 - 93.
35. Peracchio, L.A. and Tybout, A.M. 1996. The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (3): 177 - 92.
36. Percy, L. and Elliott, R. 2005. Strategic advertising management, 2nd ed., New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
37. Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Schumann, D. 1983. Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (2): 135 - 46.
38. Petty, R.E. and Wegener, D.T. 1998. " Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables ". In The handbook of social psychology, Edited by: Gilbert, D., Fiske, S. and Lindzey, G. 328 - 389. New York: McGraw-Hill.
39. Pieters, R., Warlop, L. and Michel, W. 2002. Breaking through the clutter: Benefits of advertisement originality and familiarity for brand attention and memory. Management Science, 48 (6): 765 - 81.
40. Ratchford, B. 1987. New insights about the FCB grid. Journal of Advertising Research, 27 (4): 24 - 38.
41. Reynolds, T.J. and Gutman, J. 1984. Advertising is image management. Journal of Advertising Research, 24 (1): 27 - 38.
42. Rossiter, J.R., Percy, L. and Donovan, R.J. 1991. A better advertising planning grid. Journal of Advertising Research, 31 (5): 11 - 21.
43. Sjodin, H. and Torn, F. 2006. When communication challenges brand associations: A framework for understanding consumer responses to brand image incongruity. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5 (1): 32 - 42.
44. Smith, E.E. and Medin, D.L. 1981. Categories and concepts, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
45. Stayman, D.M., Alden, D.L. and Smith, K.H. 1992. Some effects of schematic processing on consumer expectations and disconfirmation judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (2): 240 - 55.
46. Sujan, M. 1985. Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (1): 31 - 46.
47. Sujan, M. and Bettman, J.R. 1989. The effects of brand positioning strategies on consumers' brand and category perceptions: Some insights from schema research. Journal of Marketing Research, 26 (4): 454 - 67.
48. Sujan, M., Bettman, J.R. and Sujan, H. 1986. Effects of consumer expectations on information processing in selling encounters. Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (4): 346 - 53.
49. Thompson, D.V. and Hamilton, R.W. 2006. The effects of information processing mode on consumers' responses to comparative advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (4): 530 - 40.
50. Törn, F. and Dahlén, M. 2008. Effects of brand incongruent advertising in competitive settings. European Advances in Consumer Research, 8: 234 - 9.
51. Wansink, B. and Ray, M.L. 1996. Advertising strategies to increase usage frequency. Journal of Marketing, 60 (1): 31 - 46.
52. Zaichkowsky, J.L. 1985. Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (3): 341 - 52.