The Impact of Comparative Advertising on Levels of Message Involvement

Abstract This study examines the notion that comparative ads containing direct references to a well-known competitor are inherently more “involving” than noncomparative ads. Utilizing an information-processing perspective, findings indicate that the comparative format elicits higher levels of message involvement/processing activity than the noncomparative format. In addition to perceiving the comparative message as being more relevant, subjects viewing that format paid more attention to, elaborated on, and were able to recall more message points than did subjects exposed to a similar, though noncomparative, ad.

[1]  Comparative advertising and counterargument , 1982 .

[2]  Ivan L. Preston.  The Association Model of the Advertising Communication Process , 1982 .

[3]  Larry Percy,et al.  Visual Imaging Ability As a Mediator of Advertising Response , 1978 .

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

[5]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[6]  Cornelia Dröge,et al.  Shaping the Route to Attitude Change: Central versus Peripheral Processing through Comparative versus Noncomparative Advertising , 1989 .

[7]  W. Wells.  Three Useful Ideas , 1986 .

[8]  Operationalizing Involvement As Depth and Quality of Cognitive Response , 1983 .

[9]  Michael Etgar,et al.  An Experimental Investigation of Comparative Advertising: Impact of Message Appeal, Information Load, and Utility of Product Class , 1980 .

[10]  Richard Staelin,et al.  The Effect of Nutritional Information Disclosure in Advertising: An Information Processing Approach , 1984 .

[11]  W. A. Wickelgren.  Human Learning and Memory , 1981 .

[12]  C. Wee,et al.  Comparative Advertising: a Review With Implications For Further Research , 1983 .

[13]  Terence A. Shimp,et al.  The Effects of Comparative Advertising Mediated by Market Position of Sponsoring Brand , 1978 .

[14]  Peter Wright.  Message-Evoked Thoughts: Persuasion Research Using Thought Verbalizations , 1980 .

[15]  H. E. Krugman.  THE IMPACT OF TELEVISION ADVERTISING: LEARNING WITHOUT INVOLVEMENT , 1965 .

[16]  J. Lastovicka.  Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Television Commercial Rating Scales , 1983 .

[17]  Joel B. Cohen.  Involvement and You: 1000 Great Ideas , 1983 .

[18]  J. Bettman.  An information processing theory of consumer choice , 1979 .

[19]  R. D. Wilson,et al.  An Analysis of Cognitive Responses to Comparative Advertising , 1980 .

[20]  William R. Swinyard,et al.  The Interaction between Comparative Advertising and Copy Claim Variation , 1981 .

[21]  David A. Aaker,et al.  Characteristics of TV commercials perceived as informative. , 1982 .

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

[23]  John G. Lynch,et al.  Memory and Attentional Factors in Consumer Choice: Concepts and Research Methods , 1982 .

[24]  John R. Anderson.  A spreading activation theory of memory. , 1983 .

[25]  P. Wright.  The Cognitive Processes Mediating Acceptance of Advertising , 1973 .

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

[27]  Z. S. Demirdjian.  Sales Effectiveness of Comparative Advertising: An Experimental Field Investigation , 1983 .

[28]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement , 1983 .

[29]  C. Mills,et al.  Human learning and memory. , 1984, Annual review of psychology.

[30]  David W. Stewart,et al.  Effective television advertising : a study of 1000 commercials , 1987 .

[31]  Roberta L. Klatzky,et al.  Memory and awareness : an information-processing perspective , 1985 .

[32]  Jonn N. Murpmy,et al.  The Communications—Effectiveness of Comparative Advertising for a New Brand on Users of the Dominant Brand , 1981 .

[33]  William E. Baker,et al.  The Relevance Accessibility Model of Advertising Effectiveness , 1991 .

[34]  A Case for Comparative Advertising , 1975 .

[35]  Larry Percy,et al.  Attitude Change through Visual Imagery in Advertising , 1980 .

[36]  G. Belch,et al.  An Examination of Comparative and Noncomparative Television Commercials: The Effects of Claim Variation and Repetition on Cognitive Response and Message Acceptance , 1981 .

[37]  A. A. Mitchell,et al.  Involvement: a Potentially Important Mediator of Consumer Behavior , 1979 .

[38]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Pro-cessing: A Framework for Memory Research , 1975 .

[39]  J. Rossiter,et al.  Advertising Communication Models , 1985 .

[40]  George M. Zinkhan,et al.  Communications Effects of Specific Advertising Elements: An Update , 1985 .

[41]  Pawel Lewicki,et al.  Nonconscious Social Information Processing , 1986 .

[42]  Joel B. Cohen,et al.  Alternative Models of Categorization: Toward a Contingent Processing Framework , 1987 .

[43]  M. Sujan,et al.  Product Categorization and Inference Making: Some Implications for Comparative Advertising , 1987 .

[44]  Darrel D. Muehling,et al.  The Multi-Dimensionality of Comparative Advertising: Implications for the Federal Trade Commission , 1985 .