ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802 Conceptualisation, Consumer and Cognition: the 3 Cs That Will Advance Product Placement Research Jane Scott, University of New South Wales, Australia Margaret Craig-Lees, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand Before useful product placement research and effective practice can occur, several conceptual issues must be resolved. Specifically, product placement needs to be clearly distinguished from advertising message embeds, endorsement, sponsorship, advertainment and other liminal activities. Essentially this involves defining and establishing the parameters of product placement, identifying the factors that affect placement processing, developing an ontology of placement context, and identifying what effects are possible and effective ways for measuring these effects. This paper aims to address all of these issues, thus offering a framework for future product placement research. [to cite]: Jane Scott and Margaret Craig-Lees (2006) ,"Conceptualisation, Consumer and Cognition: the 3 Cs That Will Advance Product Placement Research", in AP - Asia-Pacific Advances in Consumer Research Volume 7, eds. Margaret Craig Lees, Teresa Davis, and Gary Gregory, Sydney, Australia : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 365-371. [url]: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/12973/volumes/ap07/AP-07 [copyright notice]: This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/. CONCEPTUALISATION, CONSUMER AND COGNITION: THE 3 CS THAT WILL ADVANCE PRODUCT PLACEMENT RESEARCH Jane Scott, University of New South Wales Margaret Craig-Lees, Auckland University of Technology ABSTRACT Most empirical research to date has focused on Before useful product placement research and examining the effects of one or more executional effective practice can occur, several conceptual issues variables under the control of the sponsor and program must be resolved. Specifically, product placement needs creator (e.g. program-induced mood, placement to be clearly distinguished from advertising message modality) on placement memory. In doing so, these embeds, endorsement, sponsorship, advertainment and studies have ignored how the characteristics of the other liminal activities. Essentially this involves defining audience member themselves affect placement and establishing the parameters of product placement, processing. Though the quality of the placement can identifying the factors that affect placement processing, influence the degree of attention paid to the placement, developing an ontology of placement context, and other factors will also have an impact. This paper argues identifying what effects are possible and effective ways that the success of a product placement could well lie for measuring these effects. This paper aims to address with the audience, being a function of their level of all of these issues, thus offering a framework for future engagement with the entertainment they are consuming, product placement research. their familiarity with the product or brand that is placed, and their adopted information processing style, and INTRODUCTION presents a placement processing framework that As traditional means of delivering advertising incorporates these factors. Furthermore, it also offers a messages lose their ability to reach and effectively resolution to the aforementioned definition and construct communicate with those target audiences judged most problems. desirable by advertisers, the need for alternative vehicles for communication becomes more urgent (Nebenzahl and DEFINING PRODUCT PLACEMENT Secunda 1993). Product placement, and its variant, A necessary condition for adequately measuring a advertainment, has arisen as tools to penetrate the construct is to specify the domain of the construct, with audiences’ awareness, catching the audience when they the researcher delineating what is and is not included are relatively ‘captive’ during a program, when their ‘this within the definition (Churchill 1979). With no such is advertising’ evaluation is turned off. It is this parameters yet established for product placement, it unobtrusive entry of the commercial message that makes remains somewhat ill-defined and difficult to product placement different from most other forms of operationalise. A starting point is therefore to define the marketing communication (McCarty 2004). construct. Since research in this area began a number of Current estimates valued the net worth of the definitions have been proffered and these are listed in overall product placement market to be $3.5 billion in Exhibit 1. These definitions differ considerably in their 2004, a rise of 30.5% from 2003 (Kaplan 2005). Yet level of inclusivity, namely which media product considering its use in practice, there has been a placements can feature in, what forms of payment may be disproportionate amount of product placement research made, and how a product placement is executed within a and there remains a considerable paucity of research in a specific medium. It would therefore seem that the most number of areas. A fundamental problem is the lack of a comprehensive definition of product placement has been strong conceptual foundation, with no overriding offered by Karrh (1998, 33) who defines it as “the paid theoretical framework to describe how product placement inclusion of branded products or brand identifiers, may work. A myriad of definitions of product placement through audio and/or visual means, within mass media exist, but it is argued that none of these really capture programming”. He argues that his is the most inclusive what product placement is about and what it hopes to definition because it describes the paid nature of product achieve, or the different forms it can take in various placement (c.f. Steortz 1987; c.f. Balasubramanian 1994), media contexts. Moreover, product placement needs to be it explains that brands can appear both visually and / or properly distinguished from related forms of aurally (c.f. Steortz 1987), and infers that product communication such as sponsorship, endorsement and placement encompasses many more mediums than just advertainment. Finally, we also need to understand what television or movies (c.f. Balasubramanian 1994; Gupta effects are possible and what factors impact on these and Lord 1998; d'Astous and Chartier 2000). Indeed, no effects. Most research into product placement other definition in current circulation has all of these effectiveness has focused on memory for the placement, characteristics. However, shortcomings can also be found with the complexity of this research varying from simply with Karrh’s definition. Firstly, “brand identifier” is a determining how many brands could be remembered and tautology, given that a brand is an identifier, so this offering no explanation (e.g. Babin and Carder 1996), to phrase is redundant. Secondly, it reduces product trying to explain results by considering certain placement to the placement of brands only. Thirdly, since executional characteristics of the actual placement (e.g. placement can occur in a variety of entertainment modality, prominence). These effects have been mediums, the focus on audio/visual would also seem measured via explicit memory tests, thus assuming unnecessary. Finally, as with most other definitions, it conscious memory. Yet given that product placement is a (wrongly) limits product placement to activities that are form of embedding, we cannot ignore the possibility of paid for. This would be acceptable provided that all unconscious processing and memory and thus the value product placements were contingent on a reward factor, of implicit memory measures. but often, this is not the case, with the purpose being to enhance the program or story. For these reasons, product 365 placement is better described by defining it in terms of branded and/or unbranded – to support content in the actual act, namely, “the inclusion of products - entertainment programs”. FIGURE 1 DEFINITIONS OF PRODUCT PLACEMENT • “the inclusion of a brand name, product, package, signage or other trademark merchandise within a motion picture, television show, or music video (Steortz 1987) • "the inclusion of consumer products and services in motion pictures distributed to theatres by major Hollywood studios in return for cash fees or reciprocal promotional exposure for the films in marketing advertising programs" (Clark 1991, in Nebenzahl and Secunda 1993). • “the planned entries of products into movies or television shows that may influence viewers’ product beliefs and/or behaviors favourably” (Balasubramanian 1994) • “the practice of placing brand name products in movies as props” (Gupta and Gould 1997) • “incorporating brands in movies in return for money or for some promotional or other consideration” (Gupta and Gould 1997) • “the paid inclusion of branded products or brand identifiers, through audio and/or visual means, within mass media programming” (Karrh 1998) • “a paid product message aimed at influencing movie (or television) audiences via the planned and unobtrusive entry of a branded product into a movie (or television program)” (Gupta and Lord 1998) • “the placement of a brand or a firm in a movie or in a television program by different means and for promotional purposes” (d'Astous and