- Created by: charlotte.farmer98
- Created on: 21-09-19 05:17
Lerner et al., 2004
- Early research suggested positive emotions => more optimistic assessments and negative emotions = pessimistic assessments. More recent research =importance of specific emotions (i.e. more than just positive and negative)
- “For example, fear arises from and evokes appraisals of uncertainty and lack of individual control, which are two central determinants of risk judgments (Slovic, 1987), whereas anger arises from and evokes appraisals of certainty and individual control (Smith & Ellsworth, 1985).”
- Experiment results = consistent with appraisal tendency theory. i.e Anger in one situation = more optimistic risk estimation and more risk-seeking decisions in unrelated areas and fear does the reverse.
- Results support that disgust triggers goals to expel therefore reducing buying and selling prices. Sadness = goal of changing circumstances so increases buying and selling prices. Emotional events (e.g. 9/11) could in fact encourage consumer spending dependent own hat the specific emotions they trigger in individuals
- results from Lerner et al.’s (2002) study suggest that emotions have significant impacts on economic transactions even when they are from irrelevant situations. For example, sadness can make consumers want to improve their circumstances and therefore purchase more
Petty et al., 1983
- 160 undergrads, male & female. 20 subjects were randomly assigned to each of the cells in a 2 (involvement: high or low) x 2 (argument quality: strong or weak) x 2 (cue: celebrity or noncelebrity) factorial design.
- "high involvement" participants were told razor would be tested in their market, "low involvement" participants were told razor would be market tested in another part of the country.
- People were more likely to notice the products in low involvement ads when they feature prominent personalities, but because of the enhanced attention reduced brand recognition occurred. Celebrity endorsement added to brand recognition in high involvement ads. Augmentation of the argument (weak vs. strong) had no effect on brand recognition. Participants could only recall 1.75 of the 12 strong arguments used in the ad.
- Under conditions of low involvement, peripheral cues were more important than issue-relevant argumentation, but under high involvement the opposite is true.
- Whilst low involvement can be a significant advantage for traditional media channels high involvement campaigns can be effective. In high involvement campaigns the subtle emotional aspects are less important and the issue relevant argumentation is key
Heath et al., 2006
- UK and US have different advertising styles. Emotive power = significant linear relationship with change in favourability.
- Cognitive Power = no relationship especially when controlling for emotive power - “it is the emotional content in advertising that is responsible for building brand relationships” – p. 416.
- Assumed that advertising needs to convey a factual message to be persuasive but advertising can work just as well by being emotionally persuasive and building strong brand relationships
Implications for Attention - Emotional content of messaging last longer than the content. Automatic/implicit learning= responsible for idea we can process emotional content effectively with little attention
Discussion “The less aware consumers are of emotional elements in advertising, the better they are likely to work, because the viewer has less opportunity to rationally evaluate, contradict, and weaken their potency.”- p. 417
Emotional content = better if less attention is payed to it. E.g. Andrex puppy’s cuteness = think of markets as friendlier nicer people who value family and affection – high levels of attention would weaken this
“Advertising that needs to get a factual message over works best if high attention is paid. But our evidence shows that if advertising wishes to build strong brand relationships, it needs to incorporate high levels of emotional content, and this emotional content will be most effective if less attention is paid to it.” – P. 418
Sengupta and Gorn, 2002
- The authors investigate the memorial consequences of deliberately omitting crucial elements from an advertisement.
- Research on the self-generation effect in cognitive psychology indicates that such element omission may actually lead to an improvement in recall.
- Support for this perspective is obtained in a series of experiments that explores the effects of feature omission in the context of both overt omission (in which the omission is highlighted by the advertiser) and implicit omission (in which the omission, though not highlighted in the advertisement, is noticed because of prior expectations for that ad type).
- Even under highly constrained processing conditions (e.g., exposure times as short as four seconds), an advertisement that omits a key element is shown to produce better recall than an equivalent advertisement that contains the element.
- The authors find that this recall improvement occurs along dimensions that are specifically related to the omitted element; therefore, leaving out an element related only to the product category (but not the brand) produces an improvement only in category recall, whereas brand recall is improved by the omission of an element related to the brand name. The authors discuss theoretical and managerial implications of these findings.
Advertising used to be glamorous – viewed like Hollywood but no longer Now defined by new technology. 1970's advertising didn't have to be about the product - Coca-cola ad at the end of Madmen - "I'd like to teach the world to sing". Didn't try to persuade customers about a specific thing - it was about the overall feeling
Internet = seemingly the solution to the problem of the wasted money spent on showing ads to people who were not your targets.
Engagement = key concept such as Pepsi's 'The Refresh Project' - wasn't actually that successful. Nearly all brands still use conventional media whilst the internet has changed the landscape the fundamentals remain the seam - Mass marketing, emotion and 'legacy media' are all effective.
Sharp’s first law = “brands can't get bigger on the back of loyal customers”. Most success comes from light buyers. E.g. coke – but ******** coke lovers but the millions that but it a few times a tear. Loyalty programmes don’t drive growth as it doesn’t provide you with new customers
Humans = spam filers, filtering out 30k brands in a supermarket. Advertising can open your eyes meaning you’re more likely to notice a brand in a store. Brands are strong differentiators but can be short cuts for decision making
TV is not sinking as much as people predicted 10 years ago and 87% UK viewing is ‘ live’ and ad-skipping is in fact decline -people are to distract by phones to bother. The passive nature of TV makes it a powerful tool e.g. John Lewis goes for emotion rather than persuasion. These ads are instantly recognisable
Magids et al, 2015
The research consists of how a business can measure and strategically target feelings that drive customer behaviour. The term used to describe these beneficial feelings is “emotional motivators.” The eventual goal is to get customers emotionally connected with a brand. Fully connected customers are 58% more valuable to a business than a satisfied customer.
Emotional motivators vary across category, brand, customer segment, position in the customer journey. Emotional-connection-driven growth opportunities exist across customer experience not just in traditional brand positioning/ads
4 POI's =
- Target connected customers - fully connected customers constituted just 22% of customers in the category, they accounted for 37% of revenue (could be a viable growth strategy)
- Quantify key motivators - In this particular study “feel a sense of belonging,” “feel a sense of thrill,” and “feel a sense of freedom” where the key motivators driving category purchase
- Optimize investmetns across funcionts - All funcitons and touchpoints should be examined. Having identified flourishers and mapped their spending habits retailers can now send the personalized messages during the customer journe
- Systematize, measure, and learn - A company should make emotional connection a key performance indicator and including it on the cross-functional senior-management dashboard.
- Native advertising = companies pay to have editorial-style content (or links to that material) featured online
- Issue = differentiating between traditional editorial and advertiser-presented content so readers know where the content is featured due to a brand relationship
- New channels mean companies can reach audiences depending on audience members preference with information that meets their wants/needs but most companies are not making the best use of this
- Just finding new ways to do what they have always done – creating content to promote products/services and misusing the opportunities that are on offer
- E.g. Paying for inauthentic endorsements or fake grass rots content (astroturfing) -e.g. fake Yelp reviews
- Federal Trade Commission is concerned as companies produce content that blurs distinctions between marketing and publishing
- “Marketers have to think in larger terms, not just about what is legally required, but what best serves the audience that the company is seeking to reach and what is the ethical imperative for our industry.”
- Up to marketing professionals to set ethical standards of transparency in content marketing – more than just what is legal as a need to protect own organisations reputations
- Argues that the challenge for brands is to create interesting and relevant content, the ability to do so being significantly impaired with the advent of social media due to the cultural shift it created.
- Before social media, branded content (either content created directly by brands or sponsored entertainment) worked because the entertainment media were oligopolies, meaning that cultural competition was limited.
- However, with the proliferation of social media, crowd-cultures have become much more prevalent, with a platform to engage with like-minded individuals.
- Additionally, entertainment is now almost like a public good, free to access and create. This has reduced the relevance of brands as content creators and rather than be concerned with measuring the impact of social media, brands should be more concerned with maintaining relevance.
- Argues that consumers cannot possibly wish to engage on social media with brands the same way as they do entertainers and as such brands should target crowd-cultures, and find a way to align with their goals.
- One way this can be done is through sponsored content that has nothing to do with the product but is related to issues that the crowd-culture cares about, something that Ford (2015) argues requires transparency to remain ethical.
A recent campaign by McDonald’s. The company worker with the MET office to capitalise on the UK’s unpredictable weather in April. Items from the McDonald’s menu were used to represent the weather, such as fries to represent rain and an unwrapped burger representing the sun. This campaign was effective as it was noticed by consumers but its passive nature meant that it was still low attention enough to be effective and create emotional attachments. It was effective as the weather and the discussion of it is something that people in the UK care about and discuss frequently, but this advertisement did not require direct engagement with the brand.
Pepsi funded ‘The Refresh Project’ instead of creating a television ad for the Superbowl. This was an online campaign where people could submit ideas to improve society and the one that received the most votes would be funded. However, this campaign did not lead to more sales for the brand and therefore the company has returned to focusing on TV campaigns
"The US company Forrester Research has found that the rate of engagement among a brand's Facebook fans is seven in 10,000; for Twitter it is three in 10,000” (Leslie, 2002: P.4).
Coke, a giant in content creation before the social media age, struggled in the aftermath, with their online magazine, Journey, barely registering views. However, they have recently begun, not without controversy, to sponsor and fund nutritional blogs that promote coke as a ‘healthy snack.’