Court and FTC references imply that reasonable consumers have defenses against deceptive advertising, because of higher message involvement and greater product class expertise. However, experimental results (with commonly used deceptive claim strategies) suggest involvement and expertise do not operate in the assumed manner. This raises questions about the reasonable consumer concept.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbaJoseph W., and Wesley HutchinsonJ. (1987), “Dimensions of Consumer Expertise,”Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13 (March), 411–454.
2.
AndersonRolph E., and JolsonMarvin A. (1980), “Technical Wording in Advertising: Implications for Market Segmentation,”Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 (Winter), 57–66.
3.
AndrewsJ. Craig (1988), “Motivation, Ability and Opportunity to Process Information: Conceptual and Experimental Manipulation Issues,”in Advances in Consumer Research, XV, HoustonMichael J., ed., Provo, Utah: Association for Consumer Research, 219–225.
4.
ArmstrongGary M., GurolMetin N., and RussFrederick A. (1980), “Defining and Measuring Deception in Advertising: A Review and Evaluation,” in Current Issues in Research in Advertising, LeighJames H., and MartinClaude R., eds., 17–39.
5.
ArmstrongGary M., GurolMetin N., and RussFrederick A. (1979), “Detecting and Correcting Deceptive Advertising,”Journal of Consumer Research, 6(December), 237–246.
6.
AjzenIcek, and FishbeinMartin (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
7.
BeattieAnn E. (1983), “Product Expertise and Advertising Persuasiveness,” in Advances in Consumer Research, X, BagozziRichard P., and TyboutAlice M., eds., Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 581–584.
8.
BeattieAnn E. (1982), “Effects of Product Knowledge on Comparison, Memory, Evaluation and Choice: A Model of Expertise in Consumer Decision-Making,”in Advances in Consumer Research, DC, MitchellAndrew, ed., Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 336–341.
9.
BettmanJames R. (1979), An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Publishing Co.
10.
BrandtMichael T., and PrestonIvan L. (1977), “The Federal Trade Commission's Use of Evidence to Determine Deception,”in Advances in Consumer Research, IV, PerreaultWilliam D., ed., Atlanta: Association for Consumer Research, 197–203.
11.
ChaseWilliam G., and SimonHerbert A. (1973), “Perception in Chess,”Cognitive Psychology, 4(January), 55–81.
12.
ChiMichelene T. H. (1983), “The Role of Knowledge on Problem Solving and Consumer Choice Behavior,” in Advances in Consumer Research, X, BagozziRichard P., and TyboutAlice M., eds. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 569–571.
13.
CohenDorothy (1972), “Surrogate Indicators and Deception in Advertising,”Journal of Marketing, 36(July), 10–15.
14.
CrowneDouglas P., and MarloweDavid (1964), The Approval Motive: Studies in Evaluative Independence, New York: John Wiley.
15.
CunninghamIsabella C.M., and CunninghamWilliam H. (1977), “Standards for Advertising Regulation,”Journal of Marketing, 41(October), 92–97.
DahringerLee D., and JohnsonDenise R. (1984), “The Federal Trade Commission Redefinition of Deception and Public Policy Implications: Let the Buyer Beware,”Journal of Consumer Affairs, 18(Winter), 326–342.
18.
EdellJulie, and StaelinRichard (1983), “The Information Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements,”Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 45–61.
19.
EdellJulie, and MitchellAndrew A. (1978), “An Informational Processing Approach to Cognitive Responses,” in Research Frontiers in Marketing, JainSubhash C., eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, 178–183.
20.
FordGary T., and CalfeeJohn E. (1986), “Recent Developments in FTC Policy on Deception,”Journal of Marketing, 50(July), 82–103.
21.
FordGary T., SmithDarlene B., and SwasyJohn L. (1990), “Consumer Skepticism of Advertising Claims: Testing Hypotheses from Economics of Information, Journal of Consumer Research, 16(4), 433–441.
22.
GardnerDavid M. (1975), “Deception in Advertising: A Conceptual Approach,”Journal of Marketing, 39(January), 40–46.
23.
GardnerMeryl P. (1985), “Does Attitude Toward the Ad Affect Brand Attitude Under a Brand Evaluation Set?”, Journal of Marketing Research, 22(May), 192–198.
24.
GardnerMeryl P. (1983), “Advertising Effects on Attributes Recalled and Criteria Used for Brand Evaluation,”Journal of Consumer Research, 10(December), 310–318.
25.
GardnerMeryl P., MitchellAndrew A., and Edward RussoJ. (1985), “Low Involvement Strategies for Processing Advertisements,”Journal of Advertising, 14(2), 4–13.
26.
GillJames D., and GrossbartSanford (1985), “Influence of Deceptive Claim Strategy and Product Class Involvement on Beliefs Induced by Deceptive and Corrective Commercials,” in Current Issues in Research in Advertising, LeighJames H., and MartinClaude R., eds.: 129–160.
27.
GlassmanMyron, and PieperWilliam J. (1980), “Processing Advertising Information: Deception, Salience, and Inferential Belief Formation,”Journal of Advertising, 9(Winter), 3–10.
28.
GreenwaldAnthony G., and LeavittClark (1984), “Audience Involvement in Advertising: Four Levels,”Journal of Consumer Research, 11(June), 581–592.
29.
HaefnerJames E. (1972), “The Legal Versus the Behavioral Meaning of Deception,” in Advances in Consumer Research, 3, VenkatesanM., eds. Iowa City, Iowa: Association for Consumer Research, 356–360.
30.
HaefnerJames E., and PermutSteven E. (1972), “Perceived Deception in Television Advertising: A Factor-Analytic Approach,” in Proceedings, 81st Annual APA Convention, American Psychological Association, 817–818.
31.
HarrisRichard J. (1977), “Comprehension of Pragmatic Implications in Advertising,”Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(5), 603–608.
32.
JacobyJacob, TroutmanTracy, KussAlfred, and MazurskyDavid (1986), “Experience and Expertise in Consumer Decision Making,” in Advances in Consumer Research, XIII, LutzRichard J., ed., Provo, Utah: Association for Research, 469–475.
33.
KinnearThomas C., and RootAnn (1988), “The FTC and Deceptive Advertising in the 1980s: Are Consumers Being Adequately Protected?”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 7, 40–48.
34.
KottmanE. John (1967), “A Semantic Evaluation of Misleading Advertising,”Journal of Communication, 151–156.
35.
KrugmanHerbert E. (1965), “The Impact of Television Advertising: Learning Without Involvement,”Public Opinion Quarterly, 29 (Fall), 349–356.
36.
MarksLarry J., and OlsonJerry C. (1981), “Toward a Cognitive Structure Conceptualization of Product Familiarity,” in Advances in Consumer Research, VIII, MonroeKent B., eds., Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 145–150.
37.
MitchellAndrew A. (1980), “The Use of an Information Processing Approach to Understand Advertising Effects,” in Advances in Consumer Research, VII, OlsonJerry C., ed., Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 171–177.
38.
MitchellAndrew A. (1979), “Involvement: A Potentially Important Mediator of Consumer Behavior,” in Advances in Consumer Research, VI, WilkieWilliam W., eds., Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 191–196.
39.
OlsonJerry C., ToyDaniel R., and DoverPhilip A. (1982), “Do Cognitive Responses Mediate the Effects of Advertising Content on Cognitive Structure?,”Journal of Consumer Research, 9(December), 245–262.
40.
OlsonJerry C., KanwarRajesh, and MuderrisogluAydin (1979), “Clarifying Confusion Regarding Salience, Importance and Determinance Concepts in Multiattribute Attitude Research,”Proceedings: AMA Educators Conference, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 286–290.
41.
OlsonJerry C., and DoverPhilip A. (1978), “Cognitive Effects of Deceptive Advertising,”Journal of Marketing Research, 15(February), 29–38.
42.
ParkC. Whan, and Mark YoungS. (1986), “Consumer Response to Television Commercials: The Impact of Involvement and Background Music on Brand Attitude Formation,”Journal of Marketing Research, 13(February), 11–24.
43.
PercyLarry, and RossiterJohn R. (1980), Advertising Strategy: A Communication Theory Approach, New York: Praeger Publishers.
44.
PettyRichard E., and CacioppoJohn T. (1981), Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches, Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown.
45.
PettyRichard E., and CacioppoJohn T. (1979), “Issue Involvement Can Increase or Decrease Persuasion By Enhancing Message-Relevant Cognitive Responses,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915–1926.
46.
PrestonIvan L. (1987), “A Review of the Literature of Advertising Regulation, 1983–87,”Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 10(2), 297–325.
47.
PrestonIvan L. (1983), “Research on Deceptive Advertising: Commentary,” in Information Processing Research in Advertising, HarrisRichard J., ed., Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum and Associates, 289–305.
48.
PrestonIvan L. (1976), “A Comment on ‘Defining Misleading Advertising’ and ‘Deception in Advertising’,”Journal of Marketing, 40(July), 54–60.
49.
PrestonIvan L. (1967), “Logic and Illogic in the Advertising Process,”Journalism Quarterly, 44 (Summer), 231–239.
50.
RosdenGeorge E., and RosdenPeter E. (1983), The Law of Advertising, New York: Matthew Bender & Co.
51.
ShimpTerence A., and PrestonIvan L. (1981), “Deceptive and Nondeceptive Consequences of Evaluative Advertising,”Journal of Marketing, 45(Winter), 22–32.
52.
Southwest Sunsites Inc., Green Valley Acres Inc. II, Sidney Gross, and Edwin Kritzler v. Federal Trade Commission, (1986), CCH #67,021 (CA–9, April).
53.
Sterling Drug v. Federal Trade Commission (1984), CCH #66,173 (CA–9, August).
54.
SujanMita (1985), “Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments,”Journal Of Consumer Research, 12(June), 31–46.
55.
Villarreal-CamachoAngelina (1985), “Effects of Product Class Knowledge on the Evaluation of Comparative Versus Noncomparative Messages,” in Advances in Consumer Research, XII, HirschmanElizabeth C., and HolbrookMorris B., eds., Provo, Utah: Association for Consumer Research, 504–509.
56.
WinerB.J. (1971), Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, Second Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
57.
WoodsideArch G. (1983), “Message-Evoked Thoughts: Consumer Thought Processing as a Tool for Making Better Copy,” in Advertising and Consumer Psychology, PercyLarry, and WoodsideArch G., eds., Lexington, Massachusetts: D.C. Heath and Co., 133–147.
58.
WrightPeter L. (1973), “The Cognitive Processes Mediating Acceptance of Advertising,”Journal of Marketing Research, 10(February), 53–62.
59.
ZaichkowskyJudith L. (1985), “Familiarity: Product Use, Involvement or Expertise,” in Advances in Consumer Research, XII, HirschmanElizabeth C., and HolbrookMorris B., eds., Provo, Utah: Association for Consumer Research, 296–299.
