Popcorn in the cinema: Oral interference sabotages advertising effects

Journal of Consumer Psychology

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 169-176

  Topolinski, Sascha ^a   Lindner, Sandy ^a   Freudenberg, Anna ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WÜRZBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Advertising; Embodiment; Marketing; Mere exposure; Persuasion

Indexed keywords

EID: 84896403148     PISSN: 10577408     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.09.008     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Alter A.L., Oppenheimer D. Predicting short-term stock fluctuations by using processing fluency. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2006, 103:9369-9372.
2. Baker W.E. When can affective conditioning and mere exposure directly influence brand choice. Journal of Advertising 1999, 28(4):31-46.
3. Blüher R., Pahl S. Der 'Mere-Exposure'-Effekt und die Wahl von Produkten: ein Experiment im Feld. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie 2007, 38(3):209-215.
4. Bornstein R.F. Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin 1989, 106(2):265.
5. de Vries M., Holland R.W., Chenier T., Starr M.J., Winkielman P. Happiness cools the warm glow of familiarity: Psychophysiological evidence that mood modulates the familiarity-affect link. Psychological Science 2010, 21:321-328. 10.1177/0956797609359878.
6. Elliott R., Yannopoulou N. The nature of trust in brands: A psychosocial model. European Journal of Marketing 2007, 41(9/10):988-998.
7. Esch F.R., Möll T., Schmitt B., Elger C.E., Neuhaus C., Weber B. Brands on the brain: Do consumers use declarative information or experienced emotions to evaluate brands?. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2012, 22(1):75-85.
8. Fombrun C., Shanley M. What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. The Academy of Management Journal 1990, 33(2):233. 10.2307/256324.
9. Grimes A., Kitchen P. Researching mere exposure effects to advertising - Theoretical foundations and methodological implications. International Journal of Market Research 2007, 49(2):191-219.
10. Janiszewski C. Preattentive mere exposure effects. Journal of Consumer Research 1993, 20:376-393.
11. Keller K.L. Brand synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal of Consumer Research 2003, 29:595-600.
12. La Barbera P.A., Tucciarone J.D. GSR reconsidered: A behavior approach to evaluating and improving the sales potency of advertising. Journal of Advertising Research 1995, 35(5):33-53.
13. Leder H., Bär S., Topolinski S. Covert painting simulations influence aesthetic appreciation of artworks. Psychological Science 2013, 23(12):1479-1481.
14. Lodish L.M., Magid A., Kalmenson S., Livelsberger J., Lubetkin B. How TV advertising works: A meta-analysis of 289 real world split cable TV advertising experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 1995, 32(2):125-139.
15. Maheswaran D., Mackie D.M., Chaiken S. Brand name as a heuristic cue: The effects of task importance and expectancy confirmation on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology 1992, 1:317-336.
16. Matthes J., Schemer C., Wirth W. More than meets the eye: Investigating the hidden impact of brand placements in television magazines. International Journal of Advertising 2007, 26(4):477-503.
17. Moreland R.L., Topolinski S. The mere exposure phenomenon: A lingering melody by Robert Zajonc. Emotion Review 2010, 2(4):329-339.
18. Morris A.L., Cleary A.M., Still M.L. The role of autonomic arousal in feelings of familiarity. Consciousness and Cognition 2008, 17(4):1378-1385.
19. Novemsky N., Dhar R., Schwarz N., Simonson I. Preference fluency in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research 2007, 44:347-356.
20. Pashler H. Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin 1994, 116(2):220.
21. Reber R., Schwarz N., Winkielman P. Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience?. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2004, 8(4):364-382.
22. Reber R., Winkielman P., Schwarz N. Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science 1998, 9(1):45-48.
23. Reimann M., Castaño R., Zaichkowsky J., Bechara A. How we relate to brands: Psychological and neurophysiological insights into consumer-brand relationships. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2012, 22(1):128-142.
24. Rosenthal R. Combining results of independent studies. Psychological Bulletin 1978, 85(1):185.
25. Rosenthal R., Rosnow R.L., Rubin D.B. Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach 2000, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
26. Schmitt B. The consumer psychology of brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2012, 22(1):7-17.
27. Schwarz N. Situated cognition and the wisdom of feelings: Cognitive tuning. The wisdom in feelings 2002, 144-166. Guilford, New York. L. Feldman Barrett, P. Salovey (Eds.).
28. Shapiro S., Krishnan H.S. Memory-based measures for assessing advertising effects: a comparison of explicit and implicit memory effects. Journal of Advertising 2001, 30(3):1-14.
29. Song H., Schwarz N. If it's difficult-to-pronounce, it must be risky: Fluency, familiarity, and risk perception. Psychological Science 2009, 20:135-138.
30. Sparenberg P., Topolinski S., Springer A., Prinz W. Minimal mimicry: Mere effector matching induces preference. Brain and Cognition 2012, 80(3):291-300.
31. Strack F., Werth L., Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2006, 16(3):205-216.
32. Stroop J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1935, 12:242-248.
33. Topolinski S. Moving the eye of the beholder: Motor components in vision determine aesthetic preference. Psychological Science 2010, 21(9):1220-1224.
34. Topolinski S. The sensorimotor contributions to implicit memory, familiarity, and recollection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2012, 141(2):260-281.
35. Topolinski S., Deutsch R. Phasic affective modulation of semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2013, 39:414-436.
36. Topolinski S., Likowski K.U., Weyers P., Strack F. The face of fluency: Semantic coherence automatically elicits a specific pattern of facial muscle reactions. Cognition and Emotion 2009, 23(2):260-271.
37. Topolinski S., Maschmann I.T., Pecher D., Winkielman P. Oral approach-avoidance: Affective consequences of muscular articulation dynamics 2013, (submitted for publication).
38. Topolinski S., Reber R. Gaining insight into the "Aha"- experience. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2010, 19(6):402-405.
39. Topolinski S., Strack F. The analysis of intuition: Processing fluency and affect in judgements of semantic coherence. Cognition and Emotion 2009, 23(8):1465-1503.
40. Topolinski S., Strack F. Motormouth: Mere exposure depends on stimulus-specific motor simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2009, 35(2):423-433.
41. Topolinski S., Strack F. Scanning the "fringe" of consciousness: What is felt and what is not felt in intuitions about semantic coherence. Consciousness and Cognition 2009, 18:608-618.
42. Topolinski S., Strack F. False fame prevented - Avoiding fluency-effects without judgmental correction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2010, 98(5):721-733.
43. Venkatraman V., Clithero J.A., Fitzsimons G.J., Huettel S.A. New scanner data for brand marketers: How neuroscience can help better understand differences in brand preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2012, 22(1):143-153.
44. Zajonc R.B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monographs 1968, 9(2, Pt. 2):1-27.