Does Your Ad Have Too Many Pictures?

ABSTRACT Are advertisements with more peripheral pictures more memorable than those with fewer pictures? If advertisers' objectives could be accomplished with advertisements containing fewer pictures, significant reductions in advertising-creation and media costs would result. In this paper the authors focus is on long print advertisements that have a low copy-to-picture ratio. They address several research issues, beginning with the fundamental question: Is a longer pictorial ad more effective than its shorter version? Then does a longer multi-picture ad cut through the media clutter more effectively than its shorter version. The moderating influence of reader motivation on the relative effectiveness of a longer versus a shorter ad is the final research question addressed in this study.

[1]  The study of attention value : a review of some available material , 1958 .

[2]  R. Kirk.  Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences , 1970 .

[3]  Alvin J. Silk,et al.  Advertisement Size and the Relationship between Product Usage and Advertising Exposure , 1972 .

[4]  Dominique M. Hanssens,et al.  The Effectiveness of Industrial Print Advertisements across Product Categories , 1980 .

[5]  Terence A. Shimp.  Attitude toward the AD as a Mediator of Consumer Brand Choice , 1981 .

[6]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches , 1981 .

[7]  Gabriel J. Biehal,et al.  Information-Presentation Format and Learning Goals as Determinants of Consumers' Memory Retrieval and Choice Processes , 1982 .

[8]  A. Greenwald,et al.  In search of reliable persuasion effects: II. Associative interference and persistence of persuasion in a message-dense environment. , 1983 .

[9]  Richard Staelin,et al.  The Information Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements , 1983 .

[10]  A. Greenwald,et al.  Audience Involvement in Advertising: Four Levels , 1984 .

[11]  Terry L. Childers,et al.  Conditions for a Picture-Superiority Effect on Consumer Memory , 1984 .

[12]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  Memory as a function of attention, level of processing, and automatization. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  B. Sternthal,et al.  Detecting and Explaining Vividness Effects in Attitudinal Judgments , 1984 .

[14]  A. Paivio.  Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach , 1986 .

[15]  Terry L. Childers,et al.  Picture-Word Consistency and the Elaborative Processing of Advertisements , 1987 .

[16]  Thomas J. Madden,et al.  Attitude toward the Ad: An Assessment of Diverse Measurement Indices under Different Processing “Sets” , 1988 .

[17]  Raymond R. Burke,et al.  Competitive Interference and Consumer Memory for Advertising , 1988 .

[18]  Gilbert A. Churchill,et al.  Recognition versus Recall as Measures of Television Commercial Forgetting , 1988 .

[19]  H. Rao Unnava,et al.  An Imagery-Processing View of the Role of Pictures in Print Advertisements , 1991 .

[20]  R. E. Burnkrant,et al.  Effects of Repeating Varied Ad Executions on Brand Name Memory , 1991 .

[21]  Kenneth R. Lord,et al.  Picture-Based Persuasion Processes and the Moderating Role of Involvement , 1991 .

[22]  Joan Meyers-Levy,et al.  Elaborating on Elaboration: The Distinction between Relational and Item-specific Elaboration , 1991 .

[23]  Deepak Sirdeshmukh,et al.  Reducing Competitive Ad Interference , 1994 .

[24]  R. Frick.  Accepting the null hypothesis , 1995, Memory & cognition.

[25]  S. M. Leong,et al.  Increasing Brand Name Recall in Print Advertising among Asian Consumers , 1996 .

[26]  Jerry C. Olson,et al.  Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude? , 2000 .