Cette étude suggère que l'effet, sur l'évaluation de la marque, de l'exposition répétée à la publicité est modéré par la complexité du traitement de l'information véhiculée par le message publicitaire. Elle montre que l'exposition croissante à la publicité favorise l'efficacité du message quand celui-ci est complexe, augmente puis réduit cette efficacité quand le message est modérément complexe, et réduit puis augmente cette efficacité quand le message est simple. Ces résultats tendent à prouver que l'efficacité des messages publicitaires est affectée par le temps de traitement de l'information et le temps consacré à cette tâche.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
RajeevBatra and MichaelRay (1986), Situational Effects of Advertising Repetition: The Moderating Influence of Motivation, Ability and Opportunity to Respond, Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (March), 432–445.
2.
Belch GeorgeE. (1982), The Effects of Television Commercial Repetition on Cognitive Response and Message Acceptance, Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (June), 56–65.
3.
Berlyne DonaldE. (1970), Novelty, Complexity and Hedonic Value, Perception and Psychophysics, 8, 279–286.
4.
Berlyne DonaldE. (1971), Aesthetics and Psychobiology, New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts.
5.
Cacioppo JohnT. and Petty RichardE. (1979), Effects of Message Repetition and Position on Cognitive Response, Recall and Persuasion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37 (January), 97–109.
6.
BobbyCalder and BrianSternthal (1980), Television Commercial Wearout: An Information Processing View, Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (May), 173–186.
7.
Cox DenaS. and Cox AnthonyD. (1988), What Does Familiarity Breed? Complexity as a Moderator of Repetition Effects in Advertisement Evaluation, Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (June), 111–116.
8.
GalizioM. and ClydeHendrick (1972), Effect of Musical Accompaniment on Attitude: The Guitar as a Prop for Persuasion, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2 (October-December), 350–359.
9.
Holbrook MorrisB. (1981), Integrating Compositional and Decompositional Analyses to Represent the Intervening Role of Perceptions in Evaluative Judgements, Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (February), 13–29.
10.
JohnsonH.H. and WatkinsT.H. (1971), The Effects of Message Repetition on Immediate and Delayed Attitude Change, Psychonomic Science, 16, 536–552.
11.
McCullough JamesL. and ThomasOstrom (1974), Repetition of Highly Similar Messages and Attitude Change, Journal of Applied Psychology, 59 (2), 395–397.
12.
Mitchell AndrewA. and Olson JerryC. (1977), Cognitive Effects of Advertising Repetition, Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 4, PerreaultW. D.Jr., ed., Atlanta, Association for Consumer Research, 213–220.
13.
Rethans ArnoJ., Swasy JohnL. and Marks LawrenceJ. (1986), Effects of Television Commercial Repetition, Receiver Knowledge and Commercial Length: A Test of the Two-Factor Model, Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (February), 50–61.
14.
Sawyer AlanG. (1981), Repetition and Cognitive Response, in Cognitive Responses in Persuasion, PettyRichard E., OstromThomas C. and BrockTimothy E., eds, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 237–262.
15.
SmithG.G. and DorfmanD. D. (1975), The Effects of Stimulus Uncertainty on the Relationship Between Frequency of Exposure and Liking, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31 (January), 150–155.
