300 likes | 479 Views
Affective/Emotional Conditioning. Advertisement (US) --> change in feeling state (UR) Watson & Raynor (1920) Taste aversion Emotional state “automatic” Lack of conscious control. Affect. Little agreement in literature on terminology Bower & Forgas (2000)
E N D
Affective/Emotional Conditioning • Advertisement (US) --> change in feeling state (UR) • Watson & Raynor (1920) • Taste aversion • Emotional state “automatic” • Lack of conscious control
Affect • Little agreement in literature on terminology • Bower & Forgas (2000) • Emotion: intense, short-lived, has identifiable cause • Mood: subtle/diffuse, long-lasting, non-specific causation • “Affect” encompasses both emotion and mood
Advertising • To influence consumers’ brand opinions • Use affect to change brand evaluation • Performance content • Content to convince consumers that the brand is best • Performance void • Visual and/or audio to induce positive feelings
Classical Conditioning Framework • CS = brand • US = something that produces affective state (i.e., the UR) • CR = induced affective state; influences operant decision to purchase • Affective Classical Conditioning (ACC)
Example: Visuals as US • Generate positive feelings • e.g., kitten • For some brands, may also imply brand benefits or quality • e.g., for tissues, kitten may also indicate softness • e.g., for water filter, mountain stream may indicate purity • See: Mitchel & Olson (1981)
Methodology Issue • To control for visuals, use US that produces affect with no potential brand meaning • But, CS and US need to have shared relevance/relatedness in advertising • Hard to generate artificial neutral stimuli
Ad Framing • Presenting positive or negative consequences • Aims to alter affect in consumer • Positive ad framing • Make purchase and receive positive affect • Negative ad framing • Don’t purchase and receive negative affect
Which is Better? • Kahneman & Tversky (1979): Prospect Theory • Argue in favour of negative ad framing • People should react more strongly to potential loss than to potential gains • Displeasure of losing perceived as more consequential than pleasure of gaining • However, majority of research generally shows positively framed messages to be more effective
Affect Priming • Ad framing presents information producing affect-congruent associations • Affect priming is subsequent activation of affect paired with brand • Associationist’s principle of “similarity” • Similar affect-related associations more easily linked
Effects of Affect • Schwarz & Bless (1991) • If individuals feel positive, they believe the environment is safe • Safe subjects are less likely to engage in message elaboration • More likely to rely on “peripheral cues” for judgments, less message elaboration.
Martin, Ward, Achee & Wyer (1993) • Happy people engaged in a task • Believe task is enjoyable, produces the affect itself, continue task longer • Sad people engaged in the same task • Attribute negative affect to task and quit sooner • Mathur & Chattopadhyay (1991) • Happy TV program contexts lead to more attention to ad and message elaboration than sad program context • Transfer to advertisements?
Affect Source? • From advertisement? • From brand? • From context in which advertisement is embedded? • For TV commercial, the TV program • For print advertisement, the magazine, newspaper, etc. • All could be producing ACC effects
Emotional Perspectives • Affective conditioning hypothesis • “Subconscious” • Mood judgment interpretation • Cognitively “active”
Emotional Arousal • From advertisement? • From brand? • From context in which advertisement is embedded? • For TV commercial, the TV program • For print advertisement, the magazine, newspaper, etc.
Effects of Arousal • Yerkes-Dodson effect • Inverted U • Aids memory retention/recall to some point Memory/response Arousal/intensity
Excitation Transfer of Arousal Paradigm • Study effect of arousal on behaviour • Emotion produced by interaction of: • Physiological arousal • Cognitive processing of situation • Emotional effects can be delayed and can linger • Underlying physiology (neurotransmitters, hormones) • Associate arousal with brand/product
Importance of Timing • Park & McClung (1985) • Highly arousing TV program may interfere with commercial’s effectiveness • View arousing TV program, view commercial • No delay: arousal attributed to program • Short delay: mistakenly attribute arousal to commercial • Implication • Be careful when/where you place embedded advertisements
In the “Pod” • First few may not benefit from residual arousal • Later commercials will • Control over ad placement in pod?
Product Evaluation • Hedonic criteria • Product enhances positive affect via self-esteem, social validation, reputation, immediate gratification, etc. • Utilitarian criteria • Product solves a problem • Evaluation parallels “transformational products” and “informational products”
Product Type, Affect Effects • Adaval (2001) • Affect effects re: purchasing appear when product evaluation for hedonic criteria • Less relevant for utilitarian criteria; product performance more significant
Chang (2008) • Sneakers with fictitious brand name in artificial ad • Positively and negatively framed ad messages (re: self-esteem, social recognition) • Folder with sneaker ad and other distracter ads given to subjects • Questionnaire on affect and thoughts on ads and products • Positively framed ads elicit higher levels of positive affect than negatively framed ads
Gresham & Shimp (1985) • Attitude to ads (AAd) • Attitude to brands (AB) • What mediates processes for AAd to influence consumer’s AB? • Central issue for advertisement theory • Four possibilities
Classical conditioning Brand paired with affectively-valenced ad Cognitive Response AAd influences AB indirectly via impact on brand cognitions Effects of arousal Reciprocal Causation AAd & AB are mutually causative Positive/negative attitude held to both product and ad Causative strength varies with consumer and situation No relationship AAd & AB influence choice independently Four Possibilities
Requirements for Classical Conditioning • Affective reaction to ad changes buyers’ AB without altering their cognitive structure (CSB)
Hypothesis 1 • Positive/negative affective ads --> significant influence on AB • But, could AB affect AAd?
Hypothesis 2 • Experimental group (positive/negative affective ad) will have more/less positive AB than control group • But, also must show AB affected by AAd, not by changes in CSB
Hypothesis 3 • No significant difference in experimental and control subjects’ CSBs
Study • Rated 15 TV commercials (supermarket products) on affective scale • Positive, neutral, negative • 5 experimental groups • One ad from each group • Questionnaires for AAd, AB, and CSB • 1 control group • Questionnaires for AB and CSB
Results • Statistically speaking, inconclusive • More generally, trends offer support for classical conditioning interpretation
Design Problems • Used “mature” brands • e.g., Zest, Schlitz, Dr. Pepper • Consumers familiar with product • Drives AB --> AAd • Recommendation • Develop new TV ads for fictional products • Tricky and expensive