Emerging Issues in Advertising Research

EMERGING ISSUES IN ADVERTISING RESEARCH

L. J. Shrum, Tina M. Lowrey, and Yuping Liu

dvertising is a fascinating subject. No other marketing vehicle Acaptures the attention of consumers like advertising, although the attention it does capture tends to foster a love-hate relationship. Viewers spend sizable amounts of money on recording devices to enable them to avoid viewing ads, but at the same time schedule Super Bowl parties in which ad-watching is a planned event (Lowrey, Shrum, & McCarty, 2005). Advertising is also a fascinating area of research, and just as ads themselves capture consumers’ attention, understanding how advertising works has also captured the attention of academic research. Moreover, this research has spanned a number of disciplines, including but not limited to marketing, mass communication, various areas of psychology (e.g., social, cognitive, developmental), sociology, and political science. Although each of these disciplines may have its own idiosyncratic reason for studying the phenomenon, all are interested in documenting and explaining its effects (intended or unintended, individual or societal). The interdisciplinary attention and interest that advertising brings has generated a voluminous amount of research. Numerous books and journals are devoted primarily to advertising-related phenomena within each of the disciplines just noted. For this reason, space

N 299 300 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning constraints preclude any adequate discussion tend to suffer from the usual suspects of reasons: of advertising effects in general (see Petty, unnatural viewing environments, short-duration Briñol, & Priester, 2009, and Stewart & experimental stimuli, and arti ficial stimuli, Pavlou, 2009, for more thorough reviews). among others. Field research, which has the Rather, in this chapter we discuss some of potential to provide the more ecologically the emerging issues in advertising research, valid results that practi tioners often prefer, with the aim of providing a snapshot of suffers from lack of experimental control, the current theoretical and functional which is particularly problematic because the areas that have more recently captured effects of product placement are not only often research interest. The broad issues we subtle and transitory, but difficult to address are product placement research, distinguish from other promotional inputs interactivity effects research, and (advertising, sales promotion, publicity) that psycholinguistics research. Although these are part of the entire marketing campaign three topics are certainly not exhaustive in (Balasubramanian et al., 2006). terms of emerging areas of research, they provide a good cross-section of theories and methodologies that are being employed. FACTORS INFLUENCING PRODUCT PLACEMENT EFFECTS o Product Placement Research Despite the difficulties just noted, a number of factors have been shown to be important mediators and moderators of product place - One area of advertising research that is ment effects. Some of these are execution fac - generating substantial interest is product tors, such as the prominence of the placement placement. Product placement refers to within the media content, the modality of the the practice of inserting identifiable placement (visual, audio, both), and the brands, brand names, or brand logos extent to which the placement is integrated within nonmarketing media content into the story. Other factors include ones (Balasubramanian, 1994; Lowrey et al., that per tain to the viewers themselves, such 2005). It is most readily identifiable with as brand familiarity, brand preferences, and placements in films and movies, but attitudes toward marketing and advertising placements in other forms of media (e.g., practices in general, and product place ment magazines, novels) can also occur. As in particular (Balasubramanian et al., 2006). McCarty (2004) details, product place ment Compounding the complexity is the virtual has a long history, appearing as early as the certainty that many of these factors interact 1920s (see also Balasubramanian, Karrh, & with each other. Patwardhan, 2006), but it is only most Consider the issue of the prominence of recently that placement has been seen as an placement in the media content. An oft- cited important and strategic marketing function. industry maxim is that one’s product Although marketers seem confident (whether in conventional ads or product enough of the positive effects of product placements) must be noticed, or attended placement on marketing effectiveness to, to have an effect. Thus, one would likely mea sures, the empirical research land - predict that the more prominent a placement scape is very muddled (for reviews, see appears within a program, the more effective Balasubramanian et al., 2006; Bhatnagar, the placement. However, placements are Aksoy, & Malkoc, 2004; Law & Braun- much different from ads. Viewers have come LaTour, 2004). Part of this is because of the to accept ads as necessary evils (attempts difficulty in conducting both internally and to bypass them notwithstanding) that occur externally valid research. Laboratory studies between the programs they are viewing for Chapter 20 Emerging Issues in Advertising Research –––N–––301 entertainment. But what happens when the MEASURING PRODUCT entertainment itself is altered to include a PLACEMENT EFFECTIVENESS marketing message via placement? In such cases, at least when noticed, the general The issues raised concerning execution enjoyment of watching the program may factors such as the prominence or obviousness be interrupted, and feelings of “flow” of the placement and possible consumer (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990) or “transportation” reactions to the placement bring up interesting (Green & Brock, 2000; Green, Garst, & issues regarding methods used to evaluate the Brock, 2004) may diminish. Research shows effectiveness of the placements. In typical that when consumers recognize a communi - advertising research, recall is often considered cation as a persuasive attempt, they process a crucial measure of effectiveness and even a the information in funda mentally different necessary condition for attitude change. The ways than if they are not aware of a assumption is that recall will have a positive persuasive intent (Friestad & Wright, effect because the portrayal of the brand in the 1994). Thus, recognition of a persuasive ad is invariably positive. For placements, attempt in the form of a product placement however, this may not necessarily be the case. may induce viewers to scrutinize aspects of If, as we have speculated, certain conditions the placement and the placement context, foster better recall but induce more negative to disengage from the communication, attitudes (e.g., an obvious, incongruous and possibly to resent the intrusion into placement that is poorly integrated), then program enjoyment (McCarty, 2004). In recall measures may be unrelated or such cases, awareness of the product negatively related to attitude and choice placement—which should be greater in measures. Consistent with this proposition, high- than low-prominence situations— Law and Braun (2000) found that even may result in more negative than positive though product placements that were central attitudes (but would result in higher recall). to the plot were better remembered than Some evidence supports this possibility. placements that were not central, there was For example, when placements are more no effect of centrality on product choice. prominent because they are a major focus Based on the findings just discussed, it of a scene, increased exposure time has seems clear that there is often a disjunction a positive effect on recall, but when the between memory and attitude measures. placements are more in the background of In some cases, placements are recalled but scenes, exposure time is unrelated to attitudes are unaffected; in other cases, recall (Brennan, Dubas, & Babin, 1999). attitudes are positively affected in conjunc- However, the situation becomes more tion with no recall effects. These situations complex when factors such as the extent (particularly the latter) have led a number to which the placements are integrated of researchers to make a distinction between into the program are considered. For explicit and implicit memory measures example, when placements are highly when assessing product placement effects integrated into the program, liking for (Auty & Lewis, 2004; Law & Braun- the placements is greater than when the LaTour, 2004; Yang, Roskos-Ewoldsen, placements are not highly integrated, but & Roskos-Ewoldsen, 2004). Examples of delayed recall is actually lower. In a explicit memory measures are recognition similar manner, the obviousness of the and recall, whereas implicit measures are placement has a more positive effect ones such as attitudes, beliefs, and behav- on liking when the placement is well ior, or methods that attempt to measure integrated into the scene than when it is accessibility effects (e.g., reaction times, not (d’Astous & Chartier, 2000; see also word fragment completion). The latter are Russell, 2002). termed implicit memory measures because it 302 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning is assumed that, at least under well- controlled Depending on the level of interest in the experimental conditions, some notice of the ad, the consumer can ignore the ad product placement—even if not consciously completely, view the ad but without recalled—is required for attitude change taking any further action, or click on the or for a concept to have been made more ad to access a deeper layer of information accessible. Thus, for example, Auty and present on the advertiser’s Web site. In the Lewis (2004) found that product placement last scenario, the consumer can further was positively related to product choice but choose from a large amount of infor- showed little relation with explicit recall. mation on the Web site and view only the In a study of placement effects in video pages that are most relevant to him or her, games, Yang, Roskos-Ewoldsen, Dinu, and creating in effect a customized advertising Arpan (2006) found that participants exhib - exposure. The advertiser, in the meantime, ited low levels of explicit memory mea- can capture all this information in the sured via a recognition test, but demonstrated form of Web log data to gain a better implicit brand memory measured via a word understanding of the audience and to fragment completion task. customize future advertising offerings. Although the research we have reviewed As can be seen in this simple scenario, represents only a subset of product place- inter activity can significantly alter ment research, it should make clear the advertising experiences as traditionally difficulties that this type of research presents. constructed. On the one hand, marketers for the most Although interactivity can have a far- part want to be somewhat subtle in the reaching impact on advertising, a placement in terms of interrupting the theoretical understanding of interactivity enjoyment of the program, but on the other and its effects on advertising has only hand, such subtlety makes it difficult to detect begun to emerge in recent years. Early memory effects. However, as the research we interactivity research dealt primarily with have reviewed also suggests, using implicit the definition (e.g., Rafaeli & Sudweeks, measures of memory may be more effective 1997), representation (e.g., Ghose & Dou, in detecting subtle but potentially impor- 1998), and measure ment of the construct tant effects. Clearly, the issues involved in (e.g., Liu, 2003). More recently, understanding the effects of product place- researchers have started to focus more on ments are very complex, and will likely be understanding the effect of interactivity on pursued for some time to come. advertising processes and outcomes and on identifying factors that work in conjunction with interactivity to produce o Interactivity Effects Research persuasive outcomes (e.g., Liu & Shrum, 2009; Sicilia, Ruiz, & Munuera, 2005; Sohn, Ci, & Lee, 2007). So far, some Another emerging area within consensus seems to have emerged from the advertising research—interactivity—is literature, such as the multi dimensional brought forth by the fast-growing nature of interactivity and its presence in Internet media. Unlike traditional mass both the objective and the perceptual media, interactive online media allow domain. In the meantime, contro versy still consumers to actively parti cipate in the remains as to whether interactivity truly advertising process, select the information facilitates persuasion (Sohn et al., 2007). they receive, and build an instantaneous This section synthe sizes existing research two-way dialogue with adver tisers. in this area, identifies agreement as well as Consider a typical Web-browsing session diverging points in the literature, and where a consumer encounters an advertiser’s points out a few important future research message in the form of a banner ad. questions. Chapter 20 Emerging Issues in Advertising Research –––N–––303

WHAT IS INTERACTIVITY? would be difficult to tease the two apart both theoretically and empirically. Although no com mon definition of Besides the dimensional content of interactivity exists in the adver tising field, interactivity, it is also necessary to specify three themes have emerged from the the domain within which it resides. One literature: (a) interactivity is a mul ti - issue in this area is the specification of the dimensional construct, (b) it can reside entities between which interactivity is among different entities, and (c) it can be assumed to exist (Stromer-Galley, 2004). defined both as structural characteristics Three dyads have been proposed: human- and as perception. On the multi dimensional human, human-message, and human- nature of interactivity, two-way communi - machine (Ko, Cho, & Roberts, 2005; Liu cation and control have been suggested & Shrum, 2002). The first dyad comes most often as the subdimensions of inter - from an interpersonal communication activity (Liu, 2003; McMillan & Hwang, perspective and focuses on the parties 2002). Two-way communication refers to engaged in the communication and the the bidirectional flow of informa tion dynamics of information exchanged, often between two entities, and some researchers independent of the medium involved (e.g., have also added to it the speed or Alba et al., 1997; Rafaeli & Sudweeks, responsiveness of the information flow (e.g., 1997). The second perspective, human- Johnson, Bruner, & Kumar, 2006; Steuer, message interactivity, most closely resembles 1992; Sundar, Kalyanaraman, & Brown, studies of consumer reaction to traditional 2003). This dimension of interactivity read ily advertising and has been the main focus of distinguishes the Internet from traditional advertising researchers (e.g., Ariely, 2000; Cho mass media, as advertising information in & Leckenby, 1999). The third dyad, human- those media is normally presented in one machine interactivity, focuses on users’ direction, from advertisers to the audience, reactions to the technical aspects of a medium without a direct feedback channel (Hoffman and is studied most by technology researchers & Novak, 1996). whose goal is to design effective and user- The control dimension of interactivity friendly machines and system interfaces (e.g., refers to the autonomy consumers have in Gonzalez & Kasper, 1997; Rogers, 1986). manipulating an information flow (Ariely, A further distinction made in the inter- 2000; Liu & Shrum, 2002; Sicilia et al., activity literature is whether interactivity is 2005). One of the earliest studies on inter- a structural characteristic of a medium/ activity (Bezjian-Avery, Calder, & Iacobucci, message or a subjective experience perceived 1998), for example, manipulated inter - by interacting parties (Tremayne & activity by allowing consumers to determine Dunwoody, 2001). The structural perspec - the order in which they viewed a series of tive considers interactivity to be an innate ads instead of being given a set order of attribute of a medium (e.g., the Internet) presentation. Recently, however, researchers or a message/environment within that have questioned the inclusion of control as medium (e.g., a Web site). It is created a dimension of interactivity, citing that through the design features of the medium/ control cannot be readily generalized into environment (Fortin & Dholakia, 2005; other media contexts (Johnson et al., 2006). Lohtia, Donthu, & Hershberger, 2003; The difficulty with presenting control as a Sicilia et al., 2005). The experiential per - separate construct, however, lies in the spective, in contrast, defines interactivity implicit tie between control and two-way as it is perceived by the individuals communication. By allowing bidirectional engaged in an interaction (Liu, 2003; Liu flow of information, one assumes that each & Shrum, 2009; McMillan & Hwang, party has at least some level of control over 2002; Yadav & Varadarajan, 2005). It is a the communication process. Therefore, it malleable experience that is affected by 304 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning structural interactivity but also varies detrimental when cognitive load was high. with individual and situational factors This negative effect of interactivity may (McMillan, 2003). Both of these approaches explain the nonlinear effect of interactivity have been studied in the advertising context. found in previous research (Fortin & Dholakia, 2005; Sundar et al., 2003; see also Liu & Shrum, 2009). It may also explain EFFECTS OF INTERACTIVITY ON why an interactive advertising representation INFORMATION PROCESSING led to less browsing time and lower purchase AND DECISION MAKING intention in Bezjian-Avery et al. (1998). Given the double-edged effect of inter- Within the realm of cognitive processes, activity on cognitive processing, it is not interactivity has been posited to affect surprising that elaboration variables (e.g., consumers’ cognitive involvement with and need for cognition [NFC]; Cacioppo & elaboration of advertising messages Petty, 1982) would moderate the effects of (Johnson et al., 2006; Liu & Shrum, 2002, interactivity. However, two studies on this 2009). The control dimension of inter- issue have yielded very different results. activity has been most often associated with Whereas Sicilia et al. (2005) found a larger this cognitive component of ad processing. effect of interactivity on high- than low-NFC The central thesis is that an interactive individuals, Fortin and Dholakia (2005) message or medium increases consumers’ found the opposite to be true. This involvement in the communication process divergence in findings may be attributed to and potentially shifts the focus of the different products that the two studies processing toward a more central route used: computers for Sicilia et al. (2005) and (Johnson et al., 2006; Sundar et al., 2003). power surge protectors for Fortin and The result of this process is more cognitive Dholakia (2005). Because computers are elaboration, better recall, and learning high-involvement purchases, both low-NFC (Tremayne & Dunwoody, 2001). Supporting and high-NFC consumers are likely already this view, Gonzalez and Kasper (1997) engaging in high elaboration, and high-NFC found that a more interactive system led to individuals may have been better able to higher decision quality than a less interactive process the large amount of information and system. In another study, Sicilia et al. (2005) at the same time control the information found that a more interactive Web site not flow. The power surge protectors used by only increases the amount of elaboration, Fortin and Dholakia (2005), in contrast, but also leads to more favorable elaboration represent a more moder ate amount of than a noninteractive Web site. involvement. As a result, interactivity may Interactivity is also associated with have led to a shift in processing focus among significant cognitive costs. Using the talk- low-NFC individua ls who would not have aloud technique, Tremayne and Dunwoody devoted much thinking into the issue. (2001) found that user navigation of an interactive system led to more elaboration effort devoted to orientating oneself (i.e., INTERACTIVITY AND where I am), which sometimes interfered ATTI TUDINAL OUTCOMES with the rehearsal and elaboration of actual information presented by the system. The Studies of interactivity effects on attitudi - effect of this interference was confirmed in nal outcomes can be classified into two gen - Ariely (2000), who found that the ability eral categories, depending on whether the y to control information presentation was focus on the structural or experiential beneficial to decision making when users’ aspect of interactivity. Studies of interactiv - concurrent cognitive load was low but was ity as a structural feature of an online ad Chapter 20 Emerging Issues in Advertising Research –––N–––305

(often in the form of a Web site) typically Criticism of such research has even have used experimental methodology and suggested that studying the effects of either manipulated interactivity through perceived interactivity is tautological features in experimental Web sites or used and that researchers should examine existing Web sites with varying degrees of structural interactivity instead (Sundar, interactivity (Coyle & Thorson, 2001; 2004). More recent research, however, Sicilia et al., 2005). So far, this stream of has started to synthesize the two types of research has yielded ambiguous and some - interactivity studies by presenting times conflicting results. Although most experiential inter activity as a mediator studies confirmed a positive effect of between structural interactivity and inter activity on attitude (e.g., Fortin & persuasive outcomes (Lee, Lee, Kim, & Dholakia, 2005; Sicilia et al., 2005), quite a Stout, 2004; Song & Zinkhan, 2008; Wu, few studies also found no or even negative 2005). These research ers argue that, effects of interactivity on persuasive out - although interactive mechanisms are comes (e.g., Bezjian-Avery et al., 1998; provided to users under high-interactivity Coyle & Thorson, 2001). conditions, it is even tually the users’ The literature reveals two potential idiosyncratic use and per ception of these explanations for these divergent findings. interactive features that determine the The first is that interactivity may have a outcome of an interaction. curvilinear (rather than linear) effect on attitudes. The positive effect of interactivity either reaches a plateau at moderate levels FUTURE INTERACTIVITY (Fortin & Dholakia, 2005) or peaks at RESEARCH moderate levels and then turns negative as the level of interactivity continues to Although research on interactivity has increase (Sundar et al., 2003). Therefore, been robust over recent years, much more the findings from past studies may simply work remains to be done to clarify some of have resided in different segments of this the existing ambiguities. Thus far, research curve. Second, individual user preferences has focused mostly on whether inter - and experiences may have also contributed activity leads to positive persuasive to the ambivalent results on interactivity outcomes. Once we have a better grasp effects. Sohn et al. (2007), for example, on the direction of interactivity effects, found a positive effect of interactivity on however, a much more important research Web site attitude only when users expected question is how interactivity actually the interactivity level of the Web site to be affects persuasion. In other words, what is high. When users expected the interactivity the underlying process through which level to be low, interactivity had a negative interactivity affects persuasion? Does effect on attitude. Liu (2007) and Macias interactivity affect persuasion through (2003) further suggest that the effect of its impact on cognitive information interactivity may be contingent on how processing, or is there a more affect- much consumers are ready to engage in oriented or peripheral process that may interactive communication. also take place? The divergence in existing In contrast with research on structural findings further suggests potential interactivity, studies of experiential inter- individual and situational factors that may activity have consistently found positive moderate the effects of interactivity. effects on persuasive outcomes. The short- Existing research has paid limited coming of such research, however, is attention to the actual mechanisms that the possibility of common methods bias are used to implement interactivity. The due to the use of self-reported measures. advertising literature, however, suggests 306 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning that the executional elements of an ad, o Psycholinguistic Studies of such as color (Meyers-Levy & Peracchio, Advertising and Brand Names 1995) and use of pictures (Miniard, Bhatla, Lord, Dickson, & Unnava, 1991), may have varying effects on persuasion A third area of advertising research that depending on how they are implemented. has received much attention in recent It is reasonable to expect that interactive years is the application of psycholinguistic features that offer consumers higher theory to the study of advertising and control versus features that facilitate two- other marketing communication tools. way communication may have differential Psycholinguistics refers to the psychology effects on how consumers respond. Most of language, and research in this area studies thus far have focused on the control investigates the mechanisms underlying element of interactivity. More research language acquisition, comprehension, and is needed to better understand the use. A comprehensive review of all the implications of two-way communication research that utilizes a psycholinguistic features and to compare their effect with approach is beyond the scope of this that of control. chapter, but a brief overview of recent As the Web moves toward the second advances in three areas will be provided: generation, Internet technology has become (a) the effects of syntactic complexity, in more content oriented, and user-generated conjunction with other variables, on the contents are playing an even more impor - persuasiveness and memorability of adver- tant role in the online media. However, tising; (b) dual-language processing of because many interactivity-related studies advertising among bilingual consumers; were initiated during the early stages of and (c) evidence for phonetic symbolism in the Internet, they have trailed behind the brand names across diverse languages. evolvement of technology and consumer behavior. For example, although inter - activity has been conceptualized to reside SYNTACTIC COMPLEXITY among users (e.g., Alba et al., 1997), no research on virtual communities has For many years, advertising copywriters explicitly incorporated the concept of inter - have followed the adage of KISS (“keep it activity, despite the central role of interaction simple, stupid”), but evidence has been in a virtual community. The need to adapt mounting that higher levels of complexity in to fundamental changes in technology advertising might actually enhance memory will prove challenging for interactivity for and attitudes toward advertising (Bradley researchers, given the speed of technology & Meeds, 2002; Chamblee, Gilmore, innovation in today’s envi ronment. On the Thomas, & Soldow, 1993; Lowrey, 1998; one hand, this favors the development of Macklin, Bruvold, & Shea, 1985). At the fundamental and syste matic theories that same time, however, other studies have are independent of technology (Yadav & reported contradictory results (e.g., Chebat, Varadarajan, 2005). On the other hand, Gelinas-Chebat, Hombourger, & Woodside, certain technologies create such disruptive 2003; Meeds & Bradley, 2007). In an effort changes in the way people communicate to reconcile these conflicting findings, a that they cannot be totally ignored. Inter - complexity continuum has been proposed activity researchers should endeavor to (Lowrey, 2008). The complexity continuum develop an underlying theory while remain - demonstrates how a particular passage of ing open toward new developments in text can be initially placed on the continuum the technology field and in the ways in terms of textual factors (primarily consumers utilize technologies. consisting of syntax and vocabulary), but Chapter 20 Emerging Issues in Advertising Research –––N–––307 then shift due to extratextual factors, analysis of this literature, see Carroll, Luna, including advertising medium and individual & Peracchio, 2007). For example, most past difference variables (e.g., age, education, advertising research using a psycholinguistic motivation). This conceptualization provides framework has been conducted in a mechanism for reconciling contradictory languages that are processed verbally, using results in past research and shows that they a part of short-term memory known as the are in fact complementary to one another. phonological loop. In contrast, logographic To illustrate, let’s say that an ad is languages (e.g., Mandarin) are processed written at a moderate syntactic complexity visually, with no need to use the level. If the ad is delivered through a print phonological loop (Schmitt, Pan, & medium to young, well-educated individuals Tavassoli, 1994). This is particularly who happen to be highly motivated to important for researchers interested in process the information, the ad shifts to phonetic symbolism, which will be discussed the easier end of the complexity continuum. in more detail in the following paragraphs. In contrast, if that same ad is delivered Existing findings are mixed, and much through a broadcast medium to older, less more research needs to be done to more educated individuals who are not as moti - fully understand bilingual advertising pro - vated to process, the ad shifts to the more cessing. The fact of the matter is that the complex end of the complexity continuum. majority of the world speaks more than one It is the interaction between the syntactic language, yet until recently, there has been a complexity, the individual, and the medium lack of research addressing this situation. of delivery that ultimately determines Indeed, it can be quite difficult to conduct memory and persuasion outcomes. multilanguage studies, in terms of both In sum, the important contribution of this stimulus production and data collection, but framework is the recognition that complexity it is imperative that adver tising research effects occur in the individ ual during the continue to tackle this important area. processing of advertising messages. Thus, although the objective complexity of a message is an important determinant of PHONETIC SYMBOLISM advertising response, it interacts with the medium and individual difference variables The existence of pho netic symbolism (i.e., to determine final outcomes. the ability of the sound of a word alone to convey meaning, apart from the denotative aspects of the word) has been debated since DUAL-LANGUAGE PROCESSING 400 BC (Plato, 1892), and the evidence in favor of phonetic symbolism, particularly in Given the increasingly global business the arena of marketing communications, environment, there has been a recent surge has been mounting in recent years (Klink, in research on bilingual processing of 2000, 2003; Lowrey & Shrum, 2007; advertising (e.g., Briley, Morris, & Yorkston & Menon, 2004), at least with Simonson, 2005; Luna & Peracchio, 2001; respect to vowel sounds. Tavassoli & Lee, 2003). Topics investigated Vowels can be pronounced more toward have included alphabetic versus logographic the front of the mouth (e.g., the “ih” sound language processing, frame switching (the in mill) or more toward the back of the moving back and forth by bilinguals mouth (e.g., the “ah” sound in mall). In between different cultural frames), and basic psycholinguistic research, both Sapir code switching (the mixing of languages in (1929) and Newman (1933) demon strated the same utterance, as in “Oh, well, c’est la that front vowel sounds tend to be vie!”), just to name a few (for an in-depth associated with attributes such as smallness, 308 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning lightness, quickness, and sharpness. In would be a significant contribution. Recent contrast, back vowel sounds tend to be research has begun to investigate whether associated with the opposite attributes of the effects obtained also hold for languages largeness, heaviness, slowness, and dullness. such as French, Spanish, and Mandarin Although there are exceptions to this pattern (Shrum, Lowrey, Luna, & Lerman, 2009). of associations (e.g., big vs. small), the This research investigates potential boundary general pattern has been demonstrated conditions such as language proficiency and across a wide variety of the world’s lan - processing constraints (such as articu latory guages (Brown, 1958; Ultan, 1978; for a suppression, which attempts to diminish use review, see Shrum & Lowrey, 2007). of the phonological loop). The findings Recent research has shown that these suggest that phonetic symbol ism is observed effects impact the preference for brand across languages, and is for the most part names for specific products. Klink (2003) unaffected by language proficiency. demonstrated that sound symbolism af - However, when the transfer of phonetic fected perceptions of brand attributes, information into short-term memory stores which in turn impacted brand liking and is inhibited, phonetic symbolism effects are per ceptions of taste. Yorkston and Menon eliminated, suggesting that phonetic (2004) found that words with back vowel symbolism effects are truly acoustic ones sounds—which through phonetic symbol- and not the result of some other variable. ism connote concepts such as creaminess and smoothness—were preferred as brand names for an ice cream over words with CONCLUSION front vowel sounds. Extending these findings, Lowrey and Shrum (2007) It is clear that more research needs to be demonstrated that this preference differs as conducted in all three of these areas, but it is a function of product category and its worth noting that findings in one of these related attributes. Using nonsense words areas have important implications for the (e.g., tiddip, toddip), they showed that other two. Additional factors to add to the words with front vowel sounds—which are complexity continuum may include language associated with concepts such as small, fast, proficiency, language processing style, and quick, sharp—were preferred over words the fit between the brand name and product with back vowel sounds when the product attributes. The study of bilingual ad category was a small convertible or a knife. processing should be greatly impacted by However, just the opposite was the case implications from the complexity research as when the product category was an SUV or well as phonetic sym bolism research that hammer. In those cases, the very same looks at additional languages. Clearly, words with back vowel sounds—which researchers interested in phonetic symbolism convey the impression of an object as large, have a number of potential boundary dull, or slow—were preferred over the conditions to investigate ranging from words with front vowel sounds. A second language proficiency issues to processing study that held product category constant burdens such as syntactic complexity. (e.g., beer) but varied the primed attributes (name preferred for a “cool, clean, crisp- tasting beer” versus a “smooth, mellow, o Conclusion rich-tasting beer”) produced similar results. One of the shortcomings in the research we have described is that a vast majority of Although only a subset of emerging issues the studies have been conducted only in in advertising research, the general topics English, and replications in other languages of product placement, interactivity, and Chapter 20 Emerging Issues in Advertising Research –––N–––309 psycholinguistics represent key areas of inter - (Ed.), The psychology of entertainment est. These areas are notable because they media: Blurring the lines between entertain - are a departure from the mainstream topics ment and persuasion (pp. 117–133). of the last 50 years. Mainstream topics in Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. advertising research tended to center on Balasubramanian, S. K. (1994). Beyond adver - executional dimensions of advertising (e.g., tising and publicity: Hybrid messages and use of humor, fear, and sympathy appeals; public policy issues. Journal of Advertising, image vs. informational appeals; celebrity 23 (4), 29–46. endorsers; frequency of exposure), memory Balasubramanian, S. K., Karrh, J. A., & issues (e.g., recall and recognition), and per - Patwardhan, H. (2006). Audience response suasion issues (e.g., belief and attitude to product placements. Journal of Advertising, change). These topics are of course still well 35 (3), 115–141. represented in current advertising research. Bezjian-Avery, A., Calder, B., & Iacobucci, D. However, as technology has changed and (1998). New media interactive advertising consumers have the ability to interact with vs. traditional advertising. Journal of a medium and marketers have the ability to Advertising Research, 38 (4), 23–32. insert promotions digitally into a program, Bhatnagar, N., Aksoy, L., & Malkoc, S. A. new areas of research necessarily are opened. (2004). Embedding brands within media With respect to persuasion, the field of psy - content: The impact of message, media, and cholinguistics provides a new way of looking consumer characteristics on placement effi - at the persuasiveness of communications, cacy. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), The psychology and shows that it is not just the denotative of entertainment media: Blurring the lines meaning of words we use in advertising between entertainment and persuasion that persuades, but that the symbolic (pp. 99–116). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. aspects of the words we use (e.g., phonetic Bradley, S. D., & Meeds, R. (2002). Surface- symbolism) and the way we use them (e.g., structure transformations and advertising dual-language ads) have persuasive impact slogans: The case for moderate syntactic as well. As new technologies are developed, complexity. Psychology & Marketing, 19, and more is learned about human cognitive 595–619. processing, still newer and more exciting Brennan, I., Dubas, K. M., & Babin, L. A. areas of research will surely develop. (1999). The influence of product-placement type and exposure time on product-place ment recognition. International Journal of o References Advertising, 18, 323–337. Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I. (2005). Biculturals and shifting strategies: Alba, J., Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., The role of language and audiences in elic - Lutz, R., Sawyer, A., et al. (1997). Inter- iting cultural styles of decision making. active home shopping: Consumer, retailer, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, and manufacturer incentives to participate 351–362. in electronic marketplaces. Journal of Brown, R. (1958). Words and things. New York: Marketing, 61 (3), 38–53. Free Press. Ariely, D. (2000). Controlling the information Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need flow: Effects on consumers’ decision mak - for cognition. Journal of Personality and ing and preference. Journal of Consumer Social Psychology, 42, 116–131. Research, 27, 233–248. Carroll, R., Luna, D., & Peracchio, L. A. (2007). Auty, S., & Lewis, C. (2004). The “delicious Dual language processing of marketing paradox”: Preconscious processing of prod - communications. In T. M. Lowrey (Ed.), uct placements by children. In L. J. Shrum Psycholinguistic phenomena in marketing 310 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning

communications (pp. 221–246). Mahwah, Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role NJ: Erlbaum. of transportation in the persuasiveness of Chamblee, R., Gilmore, R., Thomas, G., & public narratives. Journal of Personality Soldow, G. (1993). When copy complexity and Social Psychology, 79, 401–421. can help ad readership. Journal of Advertising Green, M. C., Garst, J., & Brock, T. C. (2004). Research, 33 (2), 23–28. The power of fiction: Determinants and Chebat, J.-C., Gelinas-Chebat, C., Hombourger, S., boundaries. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), The psy - & Woodside, A. G. (2003). Testing con - chology of entertainment media: Blurring sumers’ motivation and linguistic ability as the lines between entertainment and moderators of advertising readability. Psychol - persuasion (pp. 161–176). Mahwah, NJ: ogy & Marketing, 20, 599–624. Erlbaum. Cho, C., & Leckenby, J. D. (1999). Interactivity Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). as a measure of advertising effectiveness: Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated Antecedents and consequences of interac - environments: Conceptual foundations. tivity in Web advertising. In M. S. Roberts Journal of Marketing, 60 (3), 50–68. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1999 conference Johnson, G. J., Bruner, G. C., & Kumar, A. of the American Academy of Advertising (2006). Interactivity and its facets revisited. (pp. 162–179). Gainesville: University of Journal of Advertising, 35 (4), 35–52. Florida. Klink, R. R. (2000). Creating brand names with Coyle, J. R., & Thorson, E. (2001). The effects meaning: The use of sound symbolism. of progressive levels of interactivity and Marketing Letters, 11, 5–20. vividness in Web marketing sites. Journal of Klink, R. R. (2003). Creating meaningful brands: Advertising, 30 (3), 65–77. The relationship between brand name and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psy - brand mark. Marketing Letters, 14, 143–157. chology of optimal experience. New York: Ko, H., Cho, C.-H., & Roberts, M. S. (2005). Harper & Row. Internet uses and gratifications. Journal of d’Astous, A., & Chartier, F. (2000). A study of Advertising, 34 (2), 57–70. factors affecting consumer evaluations and Law, S., & Braun, K. A. (2000). I’ll have what memory of product placements in movies. she’s having: Gauging the impact of product Journal of Current Issues & Research in placements on viewers. Psychology & Advertising, 22 (2), 31–40. Marketing, 17, 1059–1075. Fortin, D. R., & Dholakia, R. R. (2005). Law, S., & Braun-LaTour, K. A. (2004). Interactivity and vividness effects on social Product placements: How to measure their presence and involvement with a Web- impact. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), The psychol - based advertisement. Journal of Business ogy of entertainment media: Blurring the Research, 58, 387–396. lines between entertainment and persuasion Friestad, J., & Wright, P. (1994). The persua sion (pp. 63–78). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. knowledge model: How people cope with Lee, S.-J., Lee, W.-N., Kim, H., & Stout, P. A. persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer (2004). A comparison of objective charac - Research, 22, 62–74. teristics and user perception of Web sites. Ghose, S., & Dou, W. (1998). Interactivity func - Journal of Interactive Advertising, 4(2). tions and their impacts on the appeal of Retrieved April 21, 2009, from http:// Internet presence sites. Journal of Advertising www.jiad.org/article50 Research, 38 (3), 29–43. Liu, Y. (2003). Developing a scale to measure Gonzalez, C., & Kasper, G. M. (1997). Animation the interactivity of Web sites. Journal of in user interfaces designed for decision sup - Advertising Research, 43, 207–216. port systems: The effects of image abstraction, Liu, Y. (2007). Online interaction readiness: transition, and interactivity on decision quality. Conceptualization and measurement. Decision Sciences, 28, 793–823. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 6, 283–299. Chapter 20 Emerging Issues in Advertising Research –––N–––311

Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2002). What is interac - the lines between entertainment and per sua - tivity and is it always such a good thing? sion (pp. 45–61). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Implications of definition, person, and situ - McMillan, S. J. (2003). Effects of structural and ation for the influence of interactivity perceptual factors on attitudes toward the on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Website. Journal of Advertising Research, Advertising, 31 (4), 53–64. 43, 400–409. Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2009). A dual-process McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J.-S. (2002). model of interactivity effects. Journal of Measurement of perceived interactivity: An Advertising , 38 (2), 53–68. exploration of communication, user control, Lohtia, R., Donthu, N., & Hershberger, E. K. and time in shaping perceptions of interac - (2003). The impact of content and design tivity. Journal of Advertising, 31 (3), 41–54. elements on banner advertising click- Meeds, R., & Bradley, S. D. (2007). The role of through rates. Journal of Advertising the sentence and its importance in market ing Research, 43, 410–418. communications. In T. M. Lowrey (Ed.), Lowrey, T. M. (1998). The effects of syntactic Psycholinguistic phenomena in marketing complexity on advertising persuasiveness. communications (pp. 103–118). Mahwah, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7, 187–206. NJ: Erlbaum. Lowrey, T. M. (2008). The case for a com - Meyers-Levy, J., & Peracchio, L. A. (1995). plex ity continuum. In E. F. McQuarrie & Understanding the effects of color: How the B. J. Phillips (Eds.), Go figure: New direc - correspondence between available and tions in advertising rhetoric (pp. 159–177). required resources affects attitudes. Journal Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. of Consumer Research, 22, 121–138. Lowrey, T. M., & Shrum, L. J. (2007). Phonetic Miniard, P. W., Bhatla, S., Lord, K. R., symbolism and brand name preference. Dickson, P. R., & Unnava, H. R. (1991). Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 406–414. Picture- based persuasion processes and the Lowrey, T. M., Shrum, L. J., & McCarty, J. A. moderating role of involvement. Journal of (2005). The future of television advertising. Consumer Research, 18, 92–107. In A. J. Kimmel (Ed.), Marketing communi - Newman, S. S. (1933). Further experiments in cation: Emerging trends and develop - phonetic symbolism. American Journal of ments (pp. 113–132). New York: Oxford Psychology, 45, 53–75. University Press. Petty, R. E., Briñol, P., & Priester, J. R. (2009). Luna, D., & Peracchio, L. A. (2001). Mass media attitude change: Implications of Moderators of language effects in advertising the elaboration likelihood model of persua - to bilinguals: A psycholinguistics approach. sion. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 284–295. effects: Advances in theory and research Macias, W. (2003). A beginning look at the (3rd ed., pp. 125–164). New York: Routledge. effects of interactivity, product involvement Plato. (1892). Cratylus. In B. Jowett (Ed.), The and Web experience on comprehension: dialogues of Plato (Vol. 1, pp. 253–289). Brand Web sites as interactive advertising. Oxford: Clarendon. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Rafaeli, S., & Sudweeks, F. (1997). Networked Advertising, 25 (2), 31–44. interactivity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Macklin, M. C., Bruvold, N. T., & Shea, C. L. Communication, 2(4). Retrieved April 21, (1985). Is it always as simple as “Keep it 2009, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/ simple!”? Journal of Advertising, 14 (4), issue4/rafaeli.sudweeks.html 28–35. Rogers, E. M. (1986). Communication technol - McCarty, J. A. (2004). Product placement: The ogy: The new media in society. New York: nature of the practice and potential avenues Free Press. of inquiry. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), The psy - Russell, C. A. (2002). Investigating the effective - chology of entertainment media: Blurring ness of product placements in television 312 –––N––– PART IV Persuasion and Learning

shows: The role of modality and plot connec - Sundar, S. S. (2004). Theorizing interactivity’s tion congruence on brand name mem ory and effects. Information Society, 20, 385–389. attitude. Journal of Consumer Research, Sundar, S. S., Kalyanaraman, S., & Brown, J. 29, 306–318. (2003). Explicating Web site interactivity: Sapir, E. (1929). A study in phonetic symbolism. Impression formation effects in political Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, campaign sites. Communication Research, 225–239. 30, 30–59. Schmitt, B. H., Pan, Y., & Tavassoli, N. T. Tavassoli, N. T., & Lee, Y. H. (2003). The dif - (1994). Language and consumer memory: ferential interaction of auditory and visual The impact of linguistic differences between advertising elements with Chinese and Chinese and English. Journal of Consumer English. Journal of Marketing Research, 40, Research, 21, 419–431. 468–480. Shrum, L. J., & Lowrey, T. M. (2007). Sounds Tremayne, M., & Dunwoody, S. (2001). convey meaning: The implications of pho - Interactivity, information processing, and netic symbolism for brand name construc - learning on the World Wide Web. Science tion. In T. M. Lowrey (Ed.), Psycholinguistic Communication, 23, 111–134. phenomena in marketing communications Ultan, R. (1978). Size-sound symbolism. In (pp. 39–58). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. J. H. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson, & Shrum, L. J., Lowrey, T. M., Luna, D., & E. A. Moravcsik (Eds.), Universals of human Lerman, D. (2009). Processes and general - language: Vol. 2. Phonology (pp. 525–568). izations for phonetic symbolism effects on Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. brand name preference . Manuscript submit - Wu, G. (2005). The mediating role of perceived ted for publication. interactivity in the effect of actual inter ac - Sicilia, M., Ruiz, S., & Munuera, J. L. (2005). tivity on attitude toward the Website. Journal Effects of interactivity in a Web site: The of Interactive Advertising, 5(2), 45–60. moderating effects of need for cognition. Yadav, M., & Varadarajan, R. (2005). Journal of Advertising, 34 (3), 31–45. Interactivity in the electronic market - Sohn, D., Ci, C., & Lee, B.-K. (2007). The mod - place: An exposition of the concept and erating effects of expectation on the patterns implications for research. Journal of the of the interactivity-attitude relationship. Academy of Marketing Science, 33, Journal of Advertising, 36 (3), 109–119. 585–603. Song, J. H., & Zinkhan, G. M. (2008). Yang, M., Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., & Roskos- Determinants of perceived Web site interac - Ewoldsen, D. R. (2004). Mental models tivity. Journal of Marketing, 72 (2), 99–113. for brand placements. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: The psychology of entertainment media: Dimensions determining telepresence. Blurring the lines between entertainment Journal of Communication, 42 (4), 73–93. and persuasion (pp. 45–61). Mahwah, NJ: Stewart, D. W., & Pavlou, P. A. (2009). The Erlbaum. effects of media on marketing communica - Yang, M., Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R., Dinu, L., & tions. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Arpan, L. M. (2006). The effectiveness Media effects: Advances in theory and of “in-game” advertising. Journal of Adver - research (3rd ed., pp. 362–401). New York: tising, 35 (4), 143–152. Routledge. Yorkston, E. A., & Menon, G. (2004). A sound Stromer-Galley, J. (2004). Interactivity-as- idea: Phonetic effects of brand names on product and interactivity-as-process. Infor - consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer mation Society, 20, 391–394. Research, 31, 43–51.