How many positive claims should firms use to produce the most positive impression of a product or service? This article posits that when consumers know that the message source has a persuasion motive, the optimal number of positive claims is three. Increasing the number of claims improves consumer perceptions until the fourth claim, at which point consumers’ persuasion knowledge causes them to view all the claims with skepticism. The studies herein establish and explore this pattern, which the authors refer to as the “charm of three.” An initial experiment indicates that impressions peak at three claims for sources with a persuasion motive but not for sources without a persuasion motive. The second experiment indicates that this effect occurs for attitudes and impressions and that increased skepticism at four or more claims explains the effect. Two final experiments examine the mental process by which the charm of three occurs by investigating how cognitive load and sequential claims influence the effect.
AltmannErik M., and BurnsBruce D. (2005), “Streak Biases in Decision Making: Data and a Memory Model,”Cognitive Systems Research, 6(1), 5–16.
2.
AndersonEric T., and SimesterDuncan I. (2003), “Effects of $9 Price Endings on Retail Sales: Evidence from Field Experiments,”Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 1(1), 93–110.
3.
AndersonNorman, H. (1959), “Test of a Model for Opinion Change,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(3), 371–81.
4.
AndersonNorman, H. (1967), “Averaging Model Analysis of Set-Size Effect in Impression Formation,”Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(2), 158–65.
5.
AtkinsonMax (1984), Our Masters’ Voices: The Language and Body Language of Politics.New York: Routledge.
6.
BaroneMichael J., ManningKenneth C., and MiniardPaul W. (2004), “Consumer Response to Retailers’ Use of Partially Comparative Pricing,”Journal of Marketing, 68(July), 37–47.
7.
BlockLauren G., and KellerPunam Anand (1995), “When to Accentuate the Negative: The Effects of Perceived Efficacy and Message Framing on Intentions to Perform a Health-Related Behavior,”Journal of Marketing Research, 32(May), 192–203.
8.
BookerChristopher (2005), “The Rule of Three,” in The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories.London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 229–35.
9.
BrownChristina L., and KrishnaAradhna (2004), “The Skeptical Shopper: A Metacognitive Account for the Effects of Default Options on Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 529–39.
10.
CacioppoJohn T., and PettyRichard E. (1979), “Effects of Message Repetition and Position on Cognitive Response, Recall, and Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 97–109.
11.
CampbellMargaret C., and KirmaniAmna (2000), “Consumers’ Use of Persuasion Knowledge: The Effects of Accessibility and Cognitive Capacity on Perceptions of an Influence Agent,”Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 69–83.
12.
CampbellMargaret C., and KirmaniAmna (2008), “I Know What You're Doing and Why You're Doing It: The Use of the Persuasion Knowledge Model in Consumer Research,” in Handbook of Consumer Psychology, HugvstedtCurt, HerrPaul, and KardesFrank, eds. New York: Psychology Press, 549–74.
13.
CarlsonKurt A., MeloyMargaret G., and Edward RussoJ. (2006), “Leader-Driven Primacy: Using Attribute Order to Affect Consumer Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 513–18.
14.
CarlsonKurt A., and Edward RussoJ. (2001), “Biased Interpretation of Evidence by Mock Jurors,”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7(2), 91–103.
15.
CarlsonKurt A., and ShuSuzanne B. (2007), “The Rule of Three: How the Third Event Signals the Emergence of a Streak,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104(1), 113–21.
16.
ChaikenShelly (1980), “Heuristic Versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source Versus Message Cues in Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–66.
17.
CialdiniRobert, B. (2007), Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, Revised Edition. New York: HarperCollins.
18.
ClineThomas W., and KellarisJames J. (2007), “The Influence of Humor Strength and Humor–Message Relatedness on Ad Memorability: A Dual Process Model,”Journal of Advertising, 36(1), 55–67.
19.
CrowleyAyn E., and HoyerWayne D. (1994), “An Integrative Framework for Understanding Two-Sided Persuasion,”Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 561–74.
20.
DeightonJohn (1992), “The Consumption of Performance,”Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 362–72.
21.
Ewing v. California (2003), 538 U.S. 11.
22.
ForehandMark R., and GrierSonya (2003), “When Is Honesty the Best Policy? The Effect of Stated Company Intent on Consumer Skepticism,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 349–56.
23.
FriestadMarian, and WrightPeter (1994), “The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts,”Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1–31.
24.
FriestadMarian, and WrightPeter (1995), “Persuasion Knowledge: Lay People's and Researchers’ Beliefs About the Psychology of Persuasion,”Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 62–74.
25.
GardnerBurleigh B., and LevySidney J. (1955), “The Product and the Brand,”Harvard Business Review, 33(March/April), 33–39.
26.
HardestyDavid M., CarlsonJay P., and BeardenWilliam O. (2002), “Brand Familiarity and Invoice Price Effects on Consumer Evaluations: The Moderating Role of Skepticism Toward Advertising,”Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 1–15.
27.
HovlandCarl I., JanisIrving L., and KelleyHarold H. (1953), Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28.
HowardDaniel J., ShuSuzanne B., and KerinRoger A. (2007), “Reference Price and Scarcity Appeals and the Use of Multiple Influence Strategies in Retail Newspaper Advertising,”Social Influence, 2(1), 18–28.
29.
HowardJohn A., and ShethJagdish N. (1969), The Theory of Buyer Behavior.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
30.
JeffreyInman J., McAlisterLeigh, and HoyerWayne D. (1990), “Promotion Signal: Proxy for a Price Cut?”Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 74–81.
31.
KaminsMichael A., and AssaelHenry (1987), “Two-Sided Versus One-Sided Appeals: A Cognitive Perspective on Argumentations, Source Deterioration, and the Effect of Disconfirming Trial on Belief Change,”Journal of Marketing Research, 24(February), 29–39.
32.
KareevYaakov (1995), “Through a Narrow Window: Working Memory Capacity and the Detection of Covariation,”Cognition, 56(3), 263–69.
33.
KareevYaakov (2000), “Seven (Indeed, Plus or Minus Two) and the Detection of Correlations,”Psychological Review, 107(2), 397–403.
34.
KindeJohn (2009), “The Rule of Three: A Humor Technique from the World of Comedy,” HumorPower.com, (accessed October 2, 2013), [available at http://www.humorpower.com/art-rulethree.html].
35.
KirmaniAmna (1997), “Advertising Repetition as a Signal of Quality: If It's Advertised So Much, Something Must Be Wrong,”Journal of Advertising, 26(3), 77–86.
36.
KirmaniAmna, and CampbellMargaret C. (2004), “Goal Seeker and Persuasion Sentry: How Consumer Targets Respond to Interpersonal Marketing Persuasion,”Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 573–82.
37.
ShankerKrishnan H., and ChakravartiDipankar (2003), “A Process Analysis of the Effects of Humorous Advertising Executions on Brand Claims Memory,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 230–245.
38.
MitchellAndrew, A. (1986), “The Effect of Verbal and Visual Components of Advertisements on Brand Attitudes and Attitude Toward the Advertisement,”Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 12–24.
39.
MorganFred W., SchulerDrue K., and StoltmanJeffrey J. (1995), “A Framework for Examining the Legal Status of Vulnerable Consumers,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14(Fall), 267–77.
40.
WhanPark C., JaworskiBernard J., and MacInnisDeborah J. (1986), “Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management,”Journal of Marketing, 50(October), 135–45.
41.
PechmannCornelia, and RatneshwarS. (1992), “Consumer Covariation Judgments: Theory or Data Driven?”Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 373–86.
42.
PettyRichard E., and CacioppoJohn T. (1986), Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change.New York: Springer.
43.
PreacherKristopher J., and HayesAndrew F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in Simple Mediation Models,”Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36(4), 717–31.
44.
ReberRolf, SchwarzNorbert, and WinkielmanPiotr (2004), “Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience?”Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364–82.
45.
RuckerDerek D., PreacherKristopher J., TormalaZakary L., and PettyRichard E. (2011), “Mediation Analysis in Social Psychology: Current Practices and New Recommendations,”Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 359–71.
46.
SawyerAlan G., and HowardDaniel J. (1991), “Effects of Omitting Conclusions in Advertisements to Involved and Uninvolved Audiences,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28(November), 467–74.
47.
ScottWalter, D. (1908), The Psychology of Advertising.New York: Arno Press.
48.
SettleRobert B., and GoldenLinda L. (1974), “Attribution Theory and Advertiser Credibility,”Journal of Marketing Research, 11(May), 181–85.
49.
ShabbirHaseeb, and ThwaitesDes (2007), “The Use of Humor to Mask Deceptive Advertising: It's No Laughing Matter,”Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 75–85.
50.
ShethJagdish N., and SisodiaRajendra (2002), The Rule of Three: Surviving and Thriving in Competitive Markets.New York: Simon and Schuster.
51.
ShivBaba, and FedorikhinAlexander (1999), “Heart and Mind in Conflict: The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making,”Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278–92.
52.
SmithRobert E., and HuntShelby D. (1978), “Attributional Processes and Effects in Promotional Situations,”Journal of Consumer Research, 5(3), 149–58.
53.
StewartRalph, H. (1965), “Effects of Continuous Responding on the Order Effect in Personality Impression Formation,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(2), 161–65.
54.
TenenbaumJosh B., and XuFei (2000), “Word Learning as Bayesian Inference,” in Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, GleitmanLila R., and JoshiAravind K., eds. Philadelphia: Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, 517–22.
55.
TyboutAlice, M. (1978), “Relative Effectiveness of Three Behavioral Influence Strategies as Supplements to Persuasion in a Marketing Context,”Journal of Marketing Research, 15(May), 229–42.
56.
RaoUnnava H., and BurnkrantRobert E. (1991), “An Imagery-Processing View of the Role of Pictures in Print Advertisements,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28(May), 226–31.
57.
UslayCan, Ayca AltintigZ., and WinsorRobert D. (2010), “An Empirical Examination of the ‘Rule of Three': Strategy Implications for Top Management, Marketers, and Investors,”Journal of Marketing, 74(March), 20–39.
58.
WillisRichard, H. (1960), “Stimulus Pooling and Social Perception,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60(3), 365–73.
59.
ZhaoXinshu, JohnG. LynchJr., and ChenQimei (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis,”Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
