A means-end analysis of brand persuasion through advertising

Abstract This study examines the explanation of brand persuasion through communicating means-end levels on information (attributes, consequences and values) in commercials. It is argued that consumers perceive the personal relevance and desirability of product attributes in terms of their association with personal consequences of product usage. Similarly, the relevance and desirability of personal consequences are derived from their association with a consumer's personal values. It is predicted and supported that the strength of association between means-end information communicated by an ad will contribute to the explanation of brand persuasion. Support is also obtained for the prediction that the effect on brand persuasion of communicating means-end associations will be stronger for those who are not loyal users of the brand, since those persons have more to learn about the personal relevance and desirability of the means-end information provided by the associations betwwen levels.

[1]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion , 1984 .

[2]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. , 1979 .

[3]  S. Chaiken.  Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[4]  N. Miller,et al.  Attitude change : a critical analysis of theoretical approaches , 1970 .

[5]  Jerry C. Olson,et al.  Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude? , 1981 .

[6]  Jerry C. Olson,et al.  Consumer behavior : marketing strategy perspectives , 1987 .

[7]  R. Lutz.  Affective and cognitive antecedents of attitude toward the ad : A conceptual framework , 1985 .

[8]  H. Kelley,et al.  Communication And Persuasion , 1953 .

[9]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[10]  R. Apsler,et al.  Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  L. Festinger.  A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance , 1957 .

[12]  S. Young,et al.  Using the Benefit Chain for Improved Strategy Formulation , 1975 .

[13]  S. Sherman,et al.  Attitude bolstering when behavior is inconsistent with central attitudes , 1980 .

[14]  Ramon J. Rhine,et al.  Ego-involvement, discrepancy, source credibility, and attitude change. , 1970 .

[15]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[16]  Keith P. Sentis,et al.  Advertising and consumer psychology , 1986 .

[17]  J. W. Hutchinson,et al.  Dimensions of Consumer Expertise , 1987 .

[18]  Arthur Judson Brewster,et al.  Introduction to advertising , 1947 .

[19]  J. Gutman.  A Means-End Chain Model Based on Consumer Categorization Processes , 1982 .

[20]  William R. Dillon,et al.  Attitude organization and the attitude–behavior relation: A critique of Bagozzi and Burnkrant's reanalysis of Fishbein and Ajzen. , 1985 .

[21]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Communication and persuasion , 1986 .

[22]  M. Rokeach.  The Nature Of Human Values , 1974 .

[23]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  An Empirical Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context , 1989 .

[24]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations: , 1986 .