An Experimental Investigation of Comparative Advertising: Impact of Message Appeal,Information Load,and Utility of Product Class

Abstract

A three (message appeal: supportive, brand X, and comparative) by two (product class utility: social and functional) by three (information load: low, medium, and high) factorial experimental design (with covariates) was used to explore communications effectiveness of the three modes of advertising appeals. ANOVA results show that the comparative mode appears to be superior only for the affective responses to the ad itself. The brand X mode of message appeal generally is superior to other modes for cognitive, affective, and conative responses toward the promoted brand. However, the differences are only partially significant at p < .05. In no case is the supportive mode superior. Some weak evidence of information overload is also uncovered. Several personality variables did not have significant effects on the relative effectiveness of the different appeals. Lack of substantial interaction effects among the three factors indicates that advertisers can determine message appeal, amount of information provided, and type of products to be promoted independently of each other.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bettman

J. A.

(1975), “Issues in Designing Consumer Information Environments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (December), 169–77.

Campbell

D. T.

and Stanley

J. C.

(1963), Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Cox

, ed. (1967), Risk-Handling and Information-Handling in Consumer Behavior. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Engel

J. F.

, Fiorillo

H. F.

, and Cayley

M. A.

(1972), Market Segmentation: Concepts and Applications. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Etgar

and Goodwin

S. A.

(1977a), “Comparative Advertising: Issues and Problems,” in Advances in Consumer Research, 5, Hunt

, ed., Association for Consumer Research.

Etgar

and Goodwin

S. A.

(1977b), “Empirical Research on Comparative Advertising: A Review of the Evidence.” Buffalo, New York: School of Management, State University of New York at Buffalo (September).

Frank

, Massy

, and Wind

(1972), Market Segmentation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Golden

Linda

(1976), “Consumer Reactions to Comparative Advertising,” in Advances in Consumer Research, 3, Anderson

B. B.

, ed., Association for Consumer Research, 63–7.

Jacoby

Jacob

, Speller

D. E.

, and Kohn

C. A.

(1974), “Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load,” Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (February), 63–9.

10.

Kassarjian

H. H.

(1971), “Personality and Consumer Behavior: A Review,” Journal of Marketing Research, 8 (November), 409–18.

11.

Kelman

and Cohler

(1967), “Test for Cognitive Style,” in Risk Handling and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

12.

Kershaw

A. G.

and Tannenbaum

S. I.

(1976), “For and Against Comparative Advertising,” Advertising Age (July 5), 25–8.

13.

Lavidge

R. J.

and Steiner

G. A.

(1961), “A Model for Predictive Measurements of Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Marketing, 25 (October) 59–62.

14.

Levine

(1976), “Commercials That Name Competing Brands,” Journal of Advertising Research, 16 (December), 7–14.

15.

Lindquist

E. F.

(1956), Design and Analysis of Experiments. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

16.

Mazis

Michael

(1976), “A Theoretical and Empirical Examination of Comparative Advertising,” working paper, University of Florida.

17.

McDougall

Gordon

(1976), “Comparative Advertising: An Empirical Investigation of Its Role in Consumer Information,” Working Paper No. 167, School of Business Administration, The University of Western Ontario (December).

18.

Mehrabian

and Russel

J. A.

(1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press.

19.

Peter

and Tarpey

(1975), “A Comparative Analysis of Three Consumer Decision Strategies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (June), 29–37.

20.

Prasad

V. K.

(1976), “Communications Effectiveness of Cognitive Advertising: A Laboratory Analysis,” Journal of Marketing Research, 13 (May), 128–37.

21.

Pride

W. M.

, Lamb

C. W.

, and Pletcher

B. A.

(1977), “Are Comparative Advertisements More Informative for Owners of the Mentioned Competing Brands Than for Non-Owners?” in Contemporary Marketing Thought, Greenberg

B. A.

and Bellenger

D. N.

, eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 298–301.

22.

Rockey

E. A.

(1976), Comparative Advertising: Fair or Unfair, Effective or Ineffective? New York: ANA Television Workshop, February 24.

23.

Rokeach

(1960), The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books.

24.

Sawyer

A. G.

(1973), “The Effects of Repetition on Reputational and Supportive Advertising Appeals,” Journal of Marketing Research, 10 (February), 23–33.

25.

Scheffé

(1959), The Analysis of Variance. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

26.

Ulanoff

Stanley M.

(1975), Comparative Advertising: A Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Marketing Science Institute.

27.

Wilkie

W. L.

and Farris

P. W.

(1975), “Comparison Advertising: Problems and Potential,” Journal of Marketing, 39 (October), 7–15.

28.

Wilson

R. Dale

(1976), “An Empirical Evaluation of Comparative Advertising Messages: Subjects' Responses on Perceptual Dimensions,” in Advances in Consumer Research, 3, Anderson

B. B.

ed., Association for Consumer Research, 53–7.

29.

Wind

and Denny

(1974), “Multivariate Analysis of Variance in Research on the Effectiveness of TV Commercials,” Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (May), 136–42.

30.

Winer

B. J.

1971, Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.