.\

‘fl

‘wn-‘m‘. 42:21.4»

.5

r “9'

,ut' ifiaifln

 

.

r4 ‘-§.i "3E:

"fl-41.1 1,» .lm

 

 

‘
~ .4 i

‘ "t . I»!
~ 3:3“

‘.E‘ a pfigt'nw‘

VAL ’
13“”:
,.

 

J.
24 .

 

‘ ~~ ‘5‘. .
emu- aw
.

i _ u»; "3.3”"

‘55.»,

‘ tutu ~ «:5
“A,“ “x.

 

, .
1x6»: -
‘

if?

  

.izc; ,
‘ «yaw -
Ext}?

1“}

. ~- {m

.. 4.3 «11-
F.

 

... _ A ,
s It" 53ng

. ’3‘.“ «1.-
ng‘fil‘g 'v c I
1’,-'~L'

9 u
-. {at a.

4...
\ Liiléfi
.‘ All
1" 'A 35'

I

 

63+ J
n
t
.‘

2"

 

i“
J.

 

a
1
a

“,7“.

\«
v.51.
$95“ 1
.3}
"3

. r
"‘1‘"ng AI'TC .
fififitrwufiw

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

Advertising Clutter and Its Impact on Brand Equity
presented by
Louisa Ha
has been accepted towards fulfillment

of the requirements for

Jh - D- degree in .__Ma.ss_Med.ia

Aflfl

Ma' rofessor /

 

Date ¢f/fé’

MS U is an Affirmatiw Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

IHIHUIIHHIIUIHHHIUIUHIIHlHIHlllllllllllHHlll l/

31293 0102 760

__

Michan State
University

l

LlBRARY

 

PLACE ll RETURN BOX to romovo this chockout from your rooord.
TO AVOID FINES rotum on or boforo doto duo.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

’|:" 71.51996

“fégfinz$fi mmzzsfim7

 

 

 

FEB'Z'B'Z'O'UZ

051‘

#

321102

- 5‘ i7 l
— —

 

——su——_—]|

 

 

#

 

 

 

5—i—

Vi

#

 

#
fl
1

:_____|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_—_—7

 

MSU Io An Afflnnotlvo Action/Emu Opportunlty lnotltwon

WHO‘S-9.1

 

ADVERTISING CLUTTER AND ITS IMPACT ON BRAND EQUITY ~
By

Louisa Shu Ying Ha

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN MASS MEDIA

College of Communication Arts and Sciences

1994

ABSTRACT
ADVERTISING CLUTTER AND ITS IMPACT ON BRAND EQUITY
By

Louisa Shu Ying Ha

Advertising clutter is a pertinent issue in the advertising industry; advertisers
worry their efforts will be diluted by clutter while audiences feel irritated by clutter.
In an attempt to shed light on the controversy about whether or not clutter affects
advertising effectiveness, this dissertation examined the nature of clutter and its impact
on several factors including brand equity in consumer magazines. In this study, clutter
is defined as the density of advertisements in a media vehicle and is proposed here to
consist of three dimensions: quantity, competitiveness, and intrusiveness.

One-way independent group experiments were conducted in order to identify
the effects of the three dimensions of clutter on six advertising effects measures: 1)
attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle, 2) advertising message involvement, 3)
attitudes toward the ad, 4) memory of the ad, 5) resistance to competitive ads, and 6)
brand equity. This study also examined the role of 1) attitudes toward advertising in
general, 2) ad-editorial compatibility, 3) product category involvement, 4) ad execution
quality, 5) familiarity with the brand, and 6) exposure to other media, in
countervailing the effects of clutter.

The subjects of this study were recruited from students in two major

universities. The stimulus material was a 70-page dummy magazine. The direct and
indirect effects among the variables and the validity of the model were examined via
structural equations models. The scales were tested by confirmatory factor analysis.

Results of this study indicate the critical impact of individual differences on the
perception of clutter level among subjects. T-test comparisons suggest that both the
quantity and intrusiveness dimensions of clutter have a moderate direct negative effect
on attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle. There was also a weak negative
direct effect of clutter on memory of the ad. However, clutter did not affect
advertising message involvement, which is largely determined by advertising execution
quality.

Clutter exhibited only indirect effects on brand equity. Brand equity itself was
found to be directly affected by a consumer’s familiarity with the brand, memory of
the ad, product category involvement, and attitudes toward advertising in a given
media vehicle. With the exception of "exposure to other media", all the proposed

countervailing factors appeared to offset the negative effect of clutter on brand equity.

Dedicated to my parents and my husband

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation is the third major project in my life. Just like my past
undergraduate and master’s theses, it took an enormous amount of my blood and tears
to complete. The biggest difference this time was the company of my husband, Kit,
who supported me when I was most frustrated in the process, and helped me
coordinate the data collection.

I am indebted to my dissertation advisor, Dr. E. Lincoln James, who
encouraged me and lit up the path in the course of writing my dissertation. My
guidance committee members, Drs. Thomas Baldwin, Cornelius B. Pratt, and Bonnie '
Reece, deserve my deepest gratitude for their patience with my work and their
invaluable comments. I have to thank Dr. Baldwin especially for introducing me to
the Mass Media Ph.D. Program. The advice from Drs. Stephen Lacy, Gina
Garramone, and Frank Boster helped me find the right track for the study.

I would like to thank Mirijana Jovovic, Hengli Qiao, Yingjie Zhang, Xulin
Zhou, Xiaodi Wang, Lin Xu, Brian Kleiner, and the Mathematics Department of
Bowling Green State University for allowing me to conduct the experiments in their
classes. I also have to thank Freya Katkowsky for her proof-reading of the
dissertation, and my friends Hiromi Manaeka, Kartik Pashupati, Pei-ling Chu, Cinty
Li, and Veronica Tan, for their support. Last but not least, I would like to

acknowledge Melinda, Melissa, and Raphael Chiu’s feedback on the very first test of

the research instruments from a college student’s perspective.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. x
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER l:INTRODUCI‘ION ......................................................................................... 1
Research Problem ..................................................................................................... 1
The Clutter Controversy ........................................................................................... 4
Advertising Effects and Clutter ................................................................................. 8
Three Dimensions of Clutter .................................................................................. 16
Role of Countervailing Factors .............................................................................. 24
Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................. 30
Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 31
Organization of the Dissertation ............................................................................ 35
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 36
Clutter and the Processing of Advertisements ........................................................... 36
Overload Theory ....................................................................................... 36
Interference Theory ................................................................................... 38
Intrusiveness and Resistance to Clutter .................................................................. 43
Advertising Effects .............. 45
Functions and Accessibility of Attitudes ....................................................... 45
Attitudes toward Advertising in a Media Vehicle ......................... 47
Attitudes toward the Ad ................................................................. 48
Advertising Message Involvement ................................................................ 50
Memory of the Ad ....................................................................................... 51
Resistance to Competitive Ads .................................................................. 53
Brand Equity .............................................................................................. 54
Ad Processing Behavior ......................................................................................... 58
Selective Attention and the Screening of Advertisements ........................................ 59
Ad Editorial Compatibility ........................................................................ 64
Attitudes toward Advertising in General .................................................. 65

Involvement Theory ................................................................................. 66

vii

Ad Execution Quality ............................................................................... 69

 

 

Familiarity with the Brand ....................................................................... 7O

Exposure to other Media .......................................................................... 71
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES ........................................... 73
Three Dimensions of Clutter ................................................................................. 73
Research Model ..................................................................................................... 77
Hypotheses for Direct Effects of Clutter ........................................................... :....78
Hypotheses for Indirect Effects of Clutter ........................................................... 82
Hypotheses for Effects of Countervailing Factors .................................................. 86
Assumptions of Research Model ............................................................................. 92
CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY ...... . ..... ................. - - ........ . ........ - - ........ ..94
Research Design ....................................................................................................... 94
Sampling and Procedures ...................................................................................... 95
Operationalization of the Exogenous Variables ......................................................... 98
Operationalization of the Endogenous Variables--- - -- - .--_-_-_107
Questionnaire and Scale Development ................................................................ 114
Pro-test Results ..................................................................................................... 1 15
Modification of Research Design ........................................................................... 118
Statistical Techniques ......................................................................................... 119
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS .................................................................................................. 120
Profile of Sample ................................................................................................. 120
The Stimulus ......................................................................................................... 124
Missing Data. ........................................................................................................ 125
Data Examination and Scale Validation ................................................................. 128
Reliability and Validity ........................................................................................ 132
ManipulationCheck .............................................................................................. 139

Direct Effects of Clutter ....................................................................................... 141
Indirect Effects of Clutter ..................................................................................... 148
Effects of Countervailing Factors ......................................................................... 149
Validity of the Research Model ............................................................................. 151
Multiple Regression Analysis of the Variables ..................................................... 155
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .................................................. 157
Advertising Clutter and Brand Equity ..................................................................... 157
Direct and Indirect Effects of Clutter ........................................................ 158
The Role of Countervailing Factors ............................................................ 160
Three Dimensions of Clutter as Evaluative Measures of Media Vehicles ........... 161

viii

Attitude Transfer from General to Specific ............................................................. 163

Reliability and Validity of the Scales ...................................................................... 164
Implications of the Results ....................................................................................... 165
Theoreticallmplications .............................................................................. 168
Methodological Implications ....................................................................... 172
Practicallmplications ................................................................................ 175
Limitations of this Study ........................................................................................ 177
Suggestions for Future Research .............................................................................. 179
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Research Questionnaires Used in Experiment ....................................... 182
APPENDIX B: Content of Dummy Magazines Used in the Pre-test ............................. 197
APPENDD( C: Research Questionnaire Used in the Screening Session ........................ 201
APPENDD( D: List of Ads Used in the Study .............................................................. 210
APPENDIX E: Content'of Dummy Magazines ................................................................ 212
APPENDDI F: Item-Factor Correlation Matrix .............................................................. 216
BIBLIOGRAPHY- - ....... -- - -- -- ...................................... 227

 

ix

Table 1:

Table 2:

Table 3:

Table 4:

Table 5:

Table 6:

Table 7:

Table 8:

Table 9:

Table 10:

Table 11:

Table 12:

Table 13:

Table 14:

Table 15:

Table 16:

Table 17:

LIST OF TABLES

Demographic Profile of Sample ........................................................... ._121
Magazine Reading Style ....................................................................... 122
Ad Reading Style ................................................................................... 126
T-tests Comparing Cases with Missing and Non-missing Data ........... 127
Normality of Distribution ....................................................................... 129
Linearity of Bivariate Pairs .................................................................... 131
Tests of Multicollinearity ....................................................................... 132
Reliability of the Scales ......................................................................... 136
Validity of the Scales ............................................................................. 138
Scale Items Used in the Final Measurement Model ............................ 140
Manipulation Check T-test Comparing Manipulated Clutter Level

and Perceived Clutter Level (one-tailed test) ....................................... 141
T-tests Comparing Direct Effects of Clutter on Attitudes toward
Advertising in a Media Vehicle (one-tailed tests) ................................ 142
T-tests Comparing Direct Effects of Clutter on Advertising Message
Involvement (one-tailed tests) ............................................................... 143
Memory Performance ............................................................................ 145
Noted Ad Scores .................................................................................... 147
Standardized Parameter Estimates of the Original Model ................... 150
Comparison of Goodness of Fit by Clutter Dimension ....................... 154

Table 18:
Table 19:
Table 20:
Figure 1:
Figure 3:

Figure 4:

Comparison of Goodness of Fit by Memory Measures ....................... 154

Effects of the Variables on Brand Equity ............................................ 155
Multiple Regression of the Variables on Brand Equity ....................... 156
Different Interest in Advertising Effects ................................................ 12
Scale Items Used in the Study ............................................................. 2140
Summary of Hypotheses-testing Results .............................................. 152

xi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2: Research Model ...................................................... 79

Figure 5: Final Model ........................................................... 153

xii

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Research Problem

A pertinent issue in the advertising industry is the problem of advertising
clutter. Advertising clutter may be defined as an advertising message-intensive
environment that may make advertising ineffective (Webb and Ray 1979; Ray and
Webb 1986; Pillai 1990; Brown and Rothschild 1993; Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993).
The public is believed to be irritated by advertising clutter. Its abhorrence of
advertising clutter has resulted in the popularity of non-advertising supported media 3
such as public media and pay media (Owen and Wildman 1992). Advertising clutter
poses a problem to advertisers because they worry that the overwhelming amount of
advertising may turn their audiences away. Indeed, according to Wicks (1989),
"advertisers like to be associated with a quality environment, and viewers resent it
when time is taken away from programs and given to advertising."

Advertising clutter in television has received attention from researchers and
practitioners since the late 19708 when shorter units of commercials were introduced
(Ray and Webb 1986). Today, concern with clutter is so severe that the National
Association of Broadcasters’ Code has limited both the number of interruptions
permissible within programs and the number of commercials allowed during a

commercial break (Surmanek 1989; Wicks 1991). For example, prime-time network

1

2

stations cannot broadcast more than nine and a half minutes of commercials, nor can
they have more than four commercial breaks, within a 60-minute program.

The trade press regularly reports on the change in the clutter level in television
(e.g., Otter 1984; Mandese 1992; Jensen 1993). In contrast, the problem of clutter in
print media such as magazines has generally been overlooked. In a survey of
marketing professionals conducted by Advertising Age and the Roper Organization,
96% believed that magazine readers had no problem with the volume of ads (Fawoett
1993). Instead of being condemned as clutter, magazine advertising page leaders are
hailed as business successes by the trade press (e.g., Donaton 1994).

Such diverse attitudes held by the advertising and media industry toward clutter
in TV and print media may be attributed to different assumptions about the nature of
the audiences of the two media, as well as practitioners’ concerns for the well-being of
consumers. In television, the concern is mainly about the "captivity" of consumers.
Consumers are thought to be unable to escape exposure to commercials. On the other
hand, in self-paced media such as magazines, consumers can skip advertisements
easily, and clutter is believed to have no effect. Advertisers therefore are left to doubt
the readership of their advertisements when they are in magazines with high
advertising clutter (Scissors and Bumba 1993).

The magazine industry has a stake in preserving a high level of clutter.
Advertising provides about 50% of the revenue of consumer magazines, according to
industry estimates (Lawhom 1992). A single magazine has an average about 1000

pages of ads in a year (Magazine Publishers’ Association 1990, cf. Battaglia 1991).

3

Since it is generally true that the more advertising pages a magazine sells, the more
profit it can make, the business goal is to maximize the number of advertising pages
whenever possible. In the magazine industry, very few magazines impose an
advertising-to-editorial ratio policy that sets an upper limit on the number of ~
advertisements in each issue (Ha and Litman 1993). This profit-maximization
orientation of the magazine industry can help explain why the magazine industry
downplays clutter as an issue of concern.

In an attempt to offset the negative effects of clutter, many magazines try to
increase advertising readership by placing advertisements within an article. Advertisers
also use different formats to catch readers’ attention; inserts and different paper
textures, for example, are used to disrupt the natural reading flow of an editorial
article. This infiltration of ads into the editorial domain is a common practice of
many advertising-supported consumer magazines. Although a few magazines, such as
the New Yorker and National Geographic, have tried to reduce the intrusiveness of
clutter by putting ads only before and after the editorial content, inserting
advertisements into editorial matter is still the dominant mode of practice in the
magazine industry.

Another strategy frequently employed by advertisers is to increase the number
of ad insertions in order to compensate for the possible loss of exposure due to clutter.
Such an increase in advertising frequency, however, may only worsen the clutter
problem, since it creates more clutter (Banks 1987; Sibley 1983; Krugman 1986). On

the subject of the increasing usage of shorter TV commercials to increase advertising

4
frequency, Banks (1987) remarks: "we have been decrying clutter, yet at the same

time we contribute to it" (p. 51).
The Clutter Controversy

Whether or not clutter will reduce the effectiveness of an advertisement is ~
controversial among researchers. Most research focuses on whether or not TV
advertising clutter adversely affects an individual’s memory of commercials.
Empirical studies on clutter have yielded inconsistent results. Two schools of thought
have offered competing explanations as to how clutter works against advertising
memory. One school of thought, which employs the overload Emmctive, perceives
clutter as a threat to advertising effectiveness because excessive amounts of advertising
overload consumers with large quantity of information (Ray and Webb 1986; Mord
and Gilson 1985; Schneider, Dumais and Shiffrin 1984; Malhotra, Jain and Lagakos
1982; Scamrnon 1977; J acoby, Speller and Kohn 1974a & b). Generally, researchers
have found that in a low clutter environment, viewers have the highest recall of TV
commercials, and that the effect of advertising is specific to the position of the
commercial in the pod. Webb and Ray (1979) observed TV viewers’ viewing
behavior under high and low clutter conditions and found that attention to commercials
decreased from 56% in the least cluttered condition to 48% in the most cluttered
condition. Commercials in the middle of the pod had the lowest scores of recall in
high cluttered conditions. Cobb (1985) added the advertising message involvement
factor and obtained similar results. Mord and Gilson’s (1985) national study of 5000

adults found that the increase in the number of commercials with shorter units evokes

5

negative consumer reactions and decreases the effectiveness of those commercials.
The other school of thought postulates that competitiveness in a cluttered
advertising environment may create an interference effect and inhibit brand name
recall among consumers (Kent 1990; Burke and Srull 1988; Keller 1987). Burke and
Srull’s (1988) study of print advertising analyzed consumers’ memories of the ads in
competitive ad situations. Interference was found to occur when consumers were
given competitive ads. Nevertheless, in delayed recall conditions, interference reduced
only negatively affected the memory of ad content, not the evaluation of the ad. In
his study of competitive TV commercials, Kent (1990) also found that competitive
interference reduces only the recall, not the recognition of brand name and ad claims.
On the other hand, there are those who contend that clutter has no negative
effect on advertising effectiveness and is not a problem at all. The concept of clutter
is even criticized as one of the "verbal narcotics" of media planners (Priemer 1989)
and is only "confined to the minds of the beholders" (Advertising Age 1993, p.16). The
contention is that audiences will not be affected by an increasing number of messages
because their memory capacity is fixed. Indeed, research findings on selective
exposure and attention have shown that audiences may selectively expose themselves
to ads (Soley and Kurzbard 1984; Kaplan 1985), and that they tend to behave the
same way in both high and low clutter environments. Nevertheless, there are studies
that advocate the flexibility of human memory in difficult environments (Battig 1972,
1979). Battig’s (1979) series of experiments demonstrate that the memory of tasks

learned in difficult environments lasts much longer than those learned in easy

6
environments. Another researcher, Andrews (1988), has proposed that memory

capacity depends upon the motivation of the individual to learn the message;
involvement is the source of that motivation. A recent study (Brown and Rothch
1993) found that the greater the level of clutter, the more commercials a consumer can
recall and recognize.

Such controversy bewilders advertisers, especially magazine advertisers. They
do not know how much weight should be put on advertising clutter as a factor in
evaluating media vehicles. Despite the advantage of national coverage and a strong
target focus, magazines continue to lose the confidence of advertisers who advocate
target marketing. The share of magazine advertising in total advertising expenditure .
has been declining since the 19803 (McCann Erickson Inc., cf. Rukeyser et al. 1991).
Media planning texts such as Scissors and Bumba (1993) do not give definite
guidelines because the effect of clutter seems to be contingent upon different
conditions, such as the strength of the brand and the type of publications. For a strong
brand, clutter may even be desirable, because the brand can capitalize on its
superiority to competitive brands. In business publications, readers may desire more
ads because they read the publication for product information.

Indeed, the controversy over the effect of clutter, together with conflicting
research results, could probably be attributed to the poor conceptualization of clutter
and advertising effects. Researchers and practitioners have also suggested that other
factors such as an ad’s execution quality, positioning, compatibility with the editorial

content, and consumers’ product involvement may counter the effect of clutter during

7
the processing of the ads (Ray and Webb 1986; Cobb 1985; Kaatz 1987b; Upshaw

1990; Pillai 1990). Of these factors, only the countervailing factors of positioning and
product category involvement have been studied empirically. A countervailing factor
may be defined as an independent variable which has an opposite effect from initial
independent variable on the same dependent variable, thereby suppressing the effect of
the initial independent variable on the dependent variable. For example, the first and
the last commercial’s imperviousness to the effect of clutter have been demonstrated
by the studies of Webb and Ray (1979) and Cobb (1985). In Pillai’s (1990) study,
when the factor of product involvement is controlled, the effect of clutter became
insignificant. The remaining suggested factors still await empirical verification. All .
of these countervailing factors ought to be taken into consideration when examining
the phenomenon of clutter. A model is needed to help identify and describe the direct
and indirect effects of clutter on advertising effects.

The proposed study is an attempt to explain, incorporating cognitive and
affective approaches, how clutter could diminish advertising effects. The cognitive
information processing approach has been the tradition in clutter research. This
approach tends to examine how clutter affects memory of ads. It overlooks affective
responses, such as attitudes, that can be elicited by clutter. It has been shown that
attitudes can serve as important heuristics for an individual in making his decision to
process information (Fazio 1989). "Heuristics" is a term used in psychometrics to
describe the simplistic, limited effort rules that an individual use to make decisions or

judgments in daily lives. The inclusion of affective responses could provide a more

8

complete account of the effect of clutter on advertising effects. This study will also
assess the magnitude of countervailing factors in mediating the negative impact of
advertising clutter on advertising effects.
Advertising Effects and Clutter -
How Advertising Works

In order to have an impact on consumers, an advertisement must take the
individual through the six stages of the communication process (McGuire 1985;
Advertising Research Foundation 1961): 1) exposure to the advertising vehicle, 2)
exposure to the advertisements in the vehicle, 3) selective attention to some or none of
the advertisements, 4) processing of the selected messages which includes
comprehension and storage in memory, 5) evaluation of the message, and 6) response.
Advertising clutter may play a significant role during stages two and three. In
cluttered conditions, individuals are confronted with many advertisements which
compete for their attention.
Advertising Effects

Advertising effects are the influences that advertising can have on consumers.
There have been numerous ways to measure advertising effects, based upon the
different stages of the communication process. The most common measures of
advertising effects are recall and recognition of the advertised brand (Leckenby and
Plummer 1983; Stewart et al. 1985). In this study, six measures of advertising effects
have been identified.

At the exposure stage, advertising effects can be measured by attitudes toward

9

advertising in a media vehicle. The attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle may
be defined as the evaluation of advertisements in the context of a media vehicle. At
the attention stage, advertising effects can be measured by the degree of advertising
message involvement (AMI). Advertising message involvement may be defined as the
motivational state inducing ad message processing (Laczniak and Muehling 1993).

At the evaluation stage, advertising effects can be measured both by the
attitude toward the ad (Aad) and memory of the ad. The attitude toward the ad is
defined as the evaluation of a specific ad by the individual. Memory of the ad may be
defined as any indication of remembered exposure to the advertisement of interest in
recognition and aided recall tasks.

The advertising effects in terms of response to the advertising can be measured
by the resistance to competitive ads and brand equity. Resistance to competitive ads
is defined as the degree to which an individual is uninfluenced by competitive ads to
which he/she has been exposed. Such resistance can be inferred from McGuire’s
(1964) inoculation theory, which is analogous to medical inoculation treatment, such
as a vaccine. Individuals can be immunized against competitive persuasion by being
given either counter-attack messages to or supportive arguments for the original
position. Burgoon, Hall and Pfau’s (1991) experiment on Mobil’s advertorials
demonstrated the effect of inoculation in inducing individuals’ resistance to subsequent
attack messages on the company.

The effect of resistance to competitive ads could also be explained by the

inhibition hypothesis. This hypothesis posits that the presence of a target brand’s

10

advertising inhibits the recall of competitive brands. Keller (1987), for example, found
that if a target brand is advertised at the same time with competitive brands, the
presence of the target brand will impede the reader’s retrieval process of competitive
information. The rate of correct recall of claims of the target brand will greatly "
improve.

In this study, brand equity is the bottom-line measure of advertising effects,
because advertising is the major source to build a brand’s equity (Aaker 1991). Brand
equity is defined as the added value with which a brand name and its image endow a
product (Farquhar 1991; Aaker 1991). Brand equity is an advertising effect that
represents the interest of advertisers who employ advertising to boost the short- and
long-term sales performance of a product.

The preceding stages of advertising effects can be critical to the acquisition of
brand equity. For example, attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle (Aav) can
serve as heuristics for consumers to screen advertisements (Fazio 1989; Eagly and
Chaiken 1993). A positive Aav can facilitate the consumer’s advertising message
involvement by creating an expectation of the positive consequence of the advertising
exposure. Advertising message involvement has been found to be positively correlated
to Aad (Laczniak and Muehling 1993). The expanded cognitive efforts lead to better
appreciation of the positive aspects of an ad and increase the likelihood of forming a
positive attitude toward the ad. A positive Aad will facilitate the memory of the ad
because positive attitudes are more accessible than negative attitudes (Pratkanis and

Greenwald 1993). A positive Aad can inoculate consumers against the lure of

ll
competitive ads and build the equity of a brand by the transfer of the positive

evaluation of the ad to the brand (Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992; Machleit and
Wilson 1988). If the ad is well-remembered, then it is also more likely to inhibit the
memory of the competitive ads (Keller 1987) and adds to the value of the target brand
by enhancing its top-of-mind awareness (Moran 1990).

Advertisers, advertising message creators such as copywriters, and advertising
media owners are the key players in the manipulation of the advertising process. They
all try to persuade consumers through advertising. Each performs a unique role in the
advertising process, and therefore has different interests in advertising effects.

Figure 1 summarizes the different interests in advertising effects by different players.

Advertisers provide funding for advertising. They are most interested in the
increase in sales through their advertising efforts. Only those ad effect measures that
closely relate to sales, such as brand equity and resistance to competitive ads, will be
of interest to them. Advertising creators, such as copywriters, are interested in the
success of their communication with consumers. They would like to know whether or
not consumers have positive evaluations of their ads, and whether their ads can both
attract attention and be remembered by consumers. Attitudes toward the ad (Aad),
memory measures, such as recall and recognition, and advertising message
involvement (AMI) can be critical in addressing creative concerns.

Media are carriers of advertising messages. Media owners are responsible only
for creating a favorable environment for consumers to process advertising messages.

Since they cannot control the content and quality of the ads, their interest in

12

advertising effects is mainly in how clutter may affect readers’ receptiveness to their
advertisements. If the advertising is not received positively, the media will lose their
attractiveness to advertisers because the environment would not be favorable to
advertising (Wicks 1991). As a measure of the consumer’s evaluation of the - -
advertising in a media vehicle, Aav can be viewed as a measure of the media’s

performance as an advertising vehicle.

 

 

 

 

 

Media Ad Creators Advertisers
Owners
GOAL Receptiveness to Communication Increase in
ads in the vehicle sales
AD EFFECT OF Attitude toward Advertising Resistance
INTEREST advertising in Message to competitive
a media vehicle Involvement ads
Attitude Brand equity
toward the Ad
Memory

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: Different Interests in Ad Effects

Advertising Processing Behavior

Unlike other learning situations in which an individual is obliged to process the
information, the learning of advertising messages is mostly incidental ('I'horson 1989;
Kent 1990). Consumers seldom are self-motivated to watch or read advertisements
(Batra and Ray 1983). Advertisements are arrayed in the same pod without any

meaningful connections between them. In most cases, consumers will learn through

13

repeated passive exposures to advertising messages.

The basis of this incidental learning perspective on the proceSsing of
advertising is the low involvement learning theory suggested by Krugman (1965).
Television is viewed as a passive medium; consumers pay minimal attention to itsr
commercials. After repeated exposures, an individual may retain the advertising
message without being aware of it. Magazines are considered a high involvement
medium because the audience can easily control the pace of usage. Therefore, the low
involvement theory has not been applied to magazine advertising.

The contrast of high involvement (intentional) and low involvement (incidental)
learning is formalized by the elaboration likelihood model of Petty, Cacciopo and
Schumann (1983). The model posits that the amount of effort to process a message is
dependent upon the message’s relevance to the individual. If the message is
considered relevant, then the individual will follow a central route of processing in
which he/she will make an extensive effort to process the information. If the message
is considered irrelevant, then he/she will follow a peripheral route in which he/she
makes a minimal effort to comprehend the message. Information is only randomly
stored in the memory.

Screening and Selective Attention

Selective attention has been a well-recognized component in the human
information processing phenomenon. All incoming messages are screened before an
individual determines which messages to process; this is an innate protective

mechanism allowing an individual to allocate his/her limited attentional resources

14
(W arshaw 1978; Seamon 1980). Warshaw’s (1978) study of multiple versus single

channel presentation in television advertising demonstrates the problem of paying
attention to both audio and visual information at the same time. Although multiple
channel presentation may attract attention, the higher demand of attentional resources
offset this advantage and hampers the absorption of the messages.

A new ad processing framework, which emphasizes the opportunity and
motivation to process an ad, has been proposed by MacInnis and Jaworski (1989). In
their framework, an individual’s selective attention to advertisements can be explained
by the utility and the expressive needs that the ads can fulfil. If an advertisement
1) provides useful information about a product that interests a consumer (Telser 1978;
Atkin 1985; Thorson 1989), 2) complements the editorial content (Compaigne 1982;
Yi 1990), or 3) contains an aesthetic value which appeals to any of the five senses of
a consumer (W alston and Moriarty 1992), then it can pass through the screening
process and be selectively attended to by the consumer. I

Telser (1978), in his economic theory of advertising, argues that the legitimacy
or economic value of advertising lies in its information value . Advertisers have to
compensate for the non-utility of their ads to consumers in an advertising medium by
sponsoring the cost of media production. Atkin (1985) also contends that an
individual’s attention to messages is goal-directed and is based on the information that
is needed at the time of media consumption. Thorson (1989) also notes that consumers
pay attention only to advertising that interests them.

Compaigne’s (1982) analysis of the magazine industry found that the

15

proliferation of special interest magazines is accompanied by the growth in advertising
volume in these magazines. An inference can be drawn about the acceptance of
readers of such advertising-heavy special interest magazines. The positive effect of
the compatibility between advertising and advertising effectiveness has been termed
"contextual priming" (Schumann and Thorson 1989; Yi 1990, 1993). When the
advertisements complement the editorial content, they will be perceived as more
relevant to the individuals, and the advertised product attributes will be more
accessible (Yi 1990, 1993).

Walston and Moriarty (1992) proposed that a high aesthetic value in
advertisements could break through clutter by attracting audience attention. They
developed a marketplace aesthetic matrix which predicted the effect of an
advertisements’s aesthetic value on a brand’s market performance. Their findings
show that all the 12 brands best-rated in aesthetic value are also successful in sales
performance.

Apart from these factors, the opportunity to selectively expose and attend to
messages has been found to determine the screening process (MacInnis and J aworski
1989). If the effort to select or skip TV advertising is high, such as without a remote
control device, an individual is less likely to exhibit commercial avoidance behavior.
This has been supported by the studies on commercial avoidance behavior in television
(e.g., Moriarty 1991b; Abernethy 1991).

In the present study, clutter is proposed to affect information processing in two

ways. First, clutter could stimulate the screening process of advertisements by eliciting

16

a negative attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle. Second, clutter may
possibly reduce the advertising message involvement of an individual through the
perceived threat of overload, interference, and violation of the freedom of his media
content consumption. ~
Three Dimensions of Clutter

There are three possible dimensions of clutter that can account for its negative
effects on information processing. Advertising clutter is the density of advertisements
in a media vehicle. The overload perspective posits that the quantity of advertisements
affects the processing of advertisements. This explanation suggests a quantity
dimension to clutter. Quantity is both defined as the number of advertisements and .
the proportion of ad space in a media vehicle.

The interference viewpoint explains the effect of clutter in terms of the
competitiveness of the advertisements. Competitiveness may be defined as the degree
of similarity of the advertised products and the distance between the advertisements
of competitive brands in the same product category in a media vehicle. The similarity
of the advertised products in a media vehicle is one of the two factors that could cause
the interference. When products are similar, consumers could easily confuse one
product with the other. For example, Keller’s (1987, 1991) studies of competitive ads
show that individuals mistake competitive brands as the target brand when the target
brand is placed together with the competitive brands. Another factor that may cause
interference is the proximity between competitive advertisements. This view is based

on theories of perceptual grouping. Pomerantz’s (1981) study of perceptual

17

organization found that individuals tend to group stimuli by their proximity to one
another. Such grouping can help an individual to comprehend the stimuli quickly.
His experiment shows that there is a lower interference effect when the stimuli are set
far apart than when they are closely adjacent because the distance facilitates an -
individual to differentiate the stimuli.

On top of these two dimensions, it is proposed in this study that the
interruption during the audience’s consumption of editorial content caused by the
infiltration of advertisements constitutes a third dimension of clutter -- intrusiveness.
Intrusiveness is defined as the degree to which advertisements in a media vehicle
interrupt the flow of an editorial unit. Reactance theory posits that individuals like to
preserve their freedom to evaluate an object. When this freedom is threatened, they
will resist persuasion. In a study on reactance by Brehm ( 1966), it was found that
when subjects were given coercive statements to conform with the arguments of the
message, they were less persuaded than subjects without coercive statements. The
ego-defensive theory of Freud (1946) also suggests that an individual’s tendency is to
defend against any threats to self-esteem (ego). Nonetheless, this ego-defense theory
lacks empirical support (Eagly and Chaiken 1993). Applying these theories in
advertising contexts, the psychological discomfort caused by the infiltration of ads into
the editorial domain could make the clutter intrusive to readers. When a reactance
effect occurs, readers could try to establish their freedom (control) by skipping the ads.

Past studies on consumers’ response to clutter (Webb and Ray 1979; Cobb

1985; Mord and Gilson 1985; Pillai 1990; Brown and Rothschild 1993; Pratkanis and

18
Greenwald 1993) have employed a cognitive approach to explaining the effects of

clutter. Webb and Ray’s (1979) study found that the increase in clutter level led to a
significant decline in the recall of those commercials located in the middle of an ad
capsule. Cobb (1985) found similar results, but she observed that there were *
interaction effects between message involvement and clutter level in the recall of the
ads. These studies implied the lowering of attention and the elicitation of negative
affective responses from consumers in a highly cluttered condition, but none of them
addressed how negative affective responses affect the processing of advertising
messages.

It is apparent that neither the overload nor the interference perspectives
provide a satisfactory defense to the challenge of the selective attention of messages.
The conclusions of past clutter research were all based on forced exposure
experiments. The selective attention mechanism was overlooked. By considering the
selective attention behavior of consumers, this study proposes that an individual can
expect the negative consequences of overload and interference in cluttered situations.
The individual will avoid these threats of overload and interference in high clutter
situations by reducing advertising message involvement instead of becoming their
victim. In other words, the effect of clutter may occur before the ads are processed.

Besides the inherent weakness in the captive audience assumption, past
research on clutter has several limitations and assumptions that need to be addressed:
1) the unidimensionality of clutter, 2) the relationship between clutter and memory,

3) the equality in the amount of cognitive effort on ad processing, 4) the equality of

19

attractiveness of advertisements, 5) information as the only value of advertisements,
and 6) equality in both information needs and reactions toward all advertisements.

Definitions of clutter in past clutter studies reveal that researchers assumed the
phenomenon to be unidimensional. Clutter has usually either been defined on the -
quantity dimension as the number of ads or non-programming materials (Webb and
Ray 1979; Cobb 1985; Pillai 1990; Mandese 1992; Brown and Rothschild 1993); on
the competitiveness dimension as the number of competitive product advertisement
(Kent 1993), or on the intrusiveness dimension as the number of commercial breaks
(Mord and Gilson 1985; Wicks 1991). While each dimension is distinct in itself, such
unidimensional views held by the researchers show that there is no consensus of what
clutter is. Comparison of results across studies is difficult with such varied
dimensions.

The examination of the relationship between clutter and memory is the theme
of past clutter research. Memory has been treated as the only measure of the effect of
clutter and clutter is assumed to create a direct effect on memory. However, the
memory of advertising is regarded as the penultimate stage in the advertising process.
With the understanding of the selective attention theory, it is hard to accept that
memory is the best measure of the effect of clutter. Findings about the decrease in
memory (output) may be spuriously caused by non-exposure (no input), and not by the
interference or overload effect that researchers have suggested. Measures on clutter
effects should involve variables that represent other stages of advertising information

processing such as advertising message involvement and should include affective

20

responses, such as attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle.

In the same vein of selective attention, some ads require more cognitive effort
than others because the messages vary greatly and an individual’s interests in each ad
may be different. However, past clutter studies have assumed the cognitive effort is
spent equally across the board, so that the inability to recall can be attributed to the
variation of clutter level and not to the differential cognitive effort paid to different
advertisements. Without measuring the differential cognitive effort allocated to each
ad, the effect of clutter on memory may be a misattribution.

One major factor in explaining the individual’s attention to advertisements is
the execution quality of the ad such as beautiful visuals. If the ad’s execution is
unconventional in that product category, it may also attract the attention of the
individual (Goodstein 1993). Some advertisements score much better in terms of
attractiveness than other advertisements. This factor of inequality in attractiveness in
different advertisements has not been either controlled or compared in clutter research.
The attractiveness of the advertising stimuli selected can greatly influence the results
of a clutter study. If all the advertisements are not attractive at all, recall may be
low. If advertising stimuli are attractive, then recall may be high.

The screening process of advertisements which was discussed earlier has
highlighted the multiple values of advertisements to a consumer. Information is only
one of the values, and mainly applies to the consumers who are looking for
information to make a decision. In most cases, consumers read an ad because of its

entertainment value and are not interested in the information on product features. Yet

21

previous clutter research only measured memory of the ad in terms of product
knowledge such as advertising claims. Other non-information elements of an ad, such
as execution quality and attitudes toward the ad, have been neglected completely.
Such bias on information need will limit the assessment of the impact of clutter irrthe
product knowledge arena because the other non-information needs are excluded from
the advertising communication process.

Even if product information acquisition is the only interest, clutter studies still
have the weakness of ignoring individual differences in both information need from
and reactions to an ad. In these studies, consumers were asked only to report their
memory of the brand or brand claim. If they do not have the same information
interest as the researcher, their exposure to the ad is not tapped. A consumer who is
going to buy the advertised product may look into the price and distribution of the
product in the ad. On the other hand, someone who just browses the ad for fun may
be more interested in the provoking headline and design of the ad. Moreover,
interpretation of advertising messages vary by individual. It is not realistic to limit the
scope of consumers’ reactions to advertising clutter to cognitive memory only.
Advertising Clutter and Brand Quit!

Brand equity is a summarized judgment about a brand as a result of
knowledge of a brand from a wide variety of sources (Fortini-Campbell 1993; Keller
1993). Among these sources, advertising plays an important role in building equity
for a brand. Heavy spending on advertising has created powerful brands such as

Coca-Cola, IBM, and McDonald’s which dominate the world market and can

22
withstand the pressure of price-cuts (Biel 1992; de Chematony and McDonald 1992;

Farquhar 1991; Jones 1986). As Biel (1992) contends, brand equity is the "premium a
consumer would pay for a branded product or service compared to an identical
unbranded version of the same product." Jones (1986) also suggests that brand equity
be measured in terms of the price difference between the brand and the average of its
competitors, and by blind tests of products. Established strong brands have the
competitive advantage of achieving advertising effects with one exposure only, but
new brands need multiple exposures to achieve similar effects (Jones 1986). Farquhar
(1991) identifies positive brand evaluations, accessible brand attitudes, and consistent
brand image as the three determinants for building a strong brands. In the present
study, only customer-based brand equity will be addressed. Brand equity consists of
four dimensions: 1) positive association with the brand, 2) loyalty, 3) perceived
quality, and 4) top—of-mind awareness (Aaker 1991).

Positive association with the brand is the creation of a favorable image of a
brand to the consumer; an example is the positioning of Rolex Watch as a symbol of
success. The consumer can expect pleasant consequence from the ownership of the
product. Loyalty is the consistent commitment to a brand. Brand loyalty is
characterized by no or low brand-switching behavior in purchase and by the
willingness to pay a premium price for the brand. Perceived quality is the perceived
superiority of the performance of a brand over other brands. This perception can
either be based on past product usage experience, or indirect experience such as

advertising. Top-of-mind awareness is the readiness to retrieve a brand from memory

23

under probing situations.

These four dimensions contribute to the maintenance and increase of a
product’s market share. Brand equity is of utmost concern to advertisers who expect
that their advertising investment will ultimately lead to more sales for the advertised
brand. The choice of brand equity as the bottom-line measure of advertising effect in
this study is a recognition of the importance of brand equity to advertisers.
Advertisers’ support to advertising vehicles is determined by their judgment of the
effectiveness of the advertising vehicle in building their brand equity.

The effect of clutter on brand equity is indirect. It is mediated by memory,
attitude toward the ad, and resistance to competitive ads. Advertising clutter is
hypothesized to indirectly inhibit the memory of the advertised brand because little or
no attentional resources are allocated to process advertising messages. Wickens’s
(1984) multiple resource theory posits that attentional resources can be differentiated
by mode of presentation. If two tasks demand the same type of attentional resource
from an individual, each task will receive less attentional resource than tasks
demanding different type of resources. Smith and Buchholz (1991) extend this theory
by adding the factor of involvement as a determinant of attentional resource allocation.

Clutter may also indirectly create a negative attitude toward specific ad. This
is based upon the findings of Laczniak and Muehling (1993) that advertising message
involvement is positively correlated to Aad. An individual ad embedded in a
cluttered environment may fail to achieve its goals of immunizing the individual from

the lure of competitive ads (Stewart 1992) and building equity for the brand (Aaker

24
1991; Jones 1986).

Role of Countervailing Factors
Ad-editorial Compatibility

In addition to the negative effects that clutter may pose on the consumer’s ~
response to individual advertisements, many extemal factors may countervail the effect
of clutter on advertising. One strong countervailing factor would be the compatibility
of the clutter to the editorial content. This is particularly important for magazines,
since most of them have both special editorial interests and a distinct group of readers.
Ad-editorial compatibility is defined as the degree to which the ads are perceived by
readers as part of the editorial content or complement it. For example, the many
computer ads in PC Magazine may be viewed as part of the content of the magazine
and as compatible with the editorial content. If the clutter is viewed as highly
compatible with the editorial content, negative feelings may be diminished even
though the level of clutter may be high.

Such compatibility between the advertised product and the editorial content has
been suggested as a favorable media context factor in facilitating advertising message
involvement and in priming consumers for processing advertisements (Compaigne
1982; Burkrant and Sawyer 1983; Kamins, Marks and Skinner 1991; Celuch and
Slama 1993; Schumman and Thorson 1989; Yi 1993). For example, Burkrant and
Sawyer (1983) propose that meaningfulness of the message increases the processing
intensity of that message. The compatibility of the advertising message with the

vehicle can enhance the meaningfulness of the advertising message. Schumman and

25

Thorson’s (1989) selection processing model posits that consistent affect induction and
polar affect induction are the two effects on commercial effectiveness of viewing
contexts. Consistent affect induction occurs when the commercial’s mood is consistent
with the program. If the program is liked by the person, the person will also like its
commercials. However, if there is a disjunction between the mood of the program and
the commercials, then a polar induction effect occurs. Either the commercials will be
much better liked by the individual than the program, or vice versa. Yi’s (1993)
experiment also demonstrated a significant effect of media context in print
advertisements among moderately knowledgeable consumers. The compatibility of the
editorial content with the advertisements can prime readers by making the advertised _
product’s attributes more accessible to the prior knowledge structure of the consumer.
However, the media contexts effect may diminish sharply among both lowly and
highly knowledgeable consumers. The lowly knowledgeable consumer cannot relate
the content and the message at all, while the highly knowledgeable consumer has an
established knowledge of the product and does not need to use the context as
reference.
Attitudes toward Advertising in General

Advertising has become an important social institution in modern society
(Sandage and Leckenby 1980). The public forms an attitude toward advertising in
general, and it has opinions on it. Attitudes toward advertising in general (Aag) is
defined as the evaluation of advertising as an institution and an instrument without

reference to specific media or specific ads. Researchers have generally assumed the

26

effect of attitude toward advertising in general on consumers’ processing of
advertising. For example, Muehling (1987); Abemethy and Rotfeld (1991); Andrews,
Lysonski and Durvasula (1991); and Mittal (1993) all justify their studies on attitudes
toward advertising by the potential effects of these attitudes on the evaluation of f
advertisements. Such presumed effect has not been empirically tested.

The attitude transfer hypothesis held by researchers on Aad and brand attitude
(Mitchell and Olson 1981; Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986; MacKenzie, Lutz and
Belch 1986) laid down a foundation for the transfer of attitudes from one object to a
related object. Attitude transfer typically occurs in low involvement processing
situations. In such situations, consumers do not spend any cognitive effort to analyze
the brand, and attitudes toward the ad become a convenient heuristics for individuals
to evaluate a brand (Mackenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986). The extent to which attitude
is transferred from the general to the specific depends on the accessibility of such an
attitude in the evaluation process (Wilson and Hodges 1992; Woodside and Trappey
III 1992; Fazio 1989). For example, Woodside and Trappey III (1992) found that only
those attributes of a store that are accessible to consumers can affect consumers’
choice. The inference is that when Aag is highly accessible, it can affect Aav because
the negative Aag will be transferred to the evaluation of advertising in a media
vehicle.

The association system theory also posits that individuals who associate one
object with another related object will tend to hold similar attitudes toward both

objects (Carlston 1992; Shaw and Wright 1967). A consumer holding a negative

27
attitude toward advertising in general is believed to be cynical also about the

advertising in a media vehicle. That person is less likely to be persuaded if he/she
associates the ad with his/her attitude toward advertising in general.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the experiment conducted by James and
Kover (1992) did not support the negative effect of a negative attitude toward
advertising in general on advertising processing. Their experiment examined
individuals’ advertising message involvement in 15 print ads projected on a screen and
found that negative attitudes can facilitate the advertising message involvement of an
individual. However such results should be interpreted with care because the measure
of involvement was only a single measure of the time spent in reading the
advertisements. Moreover, their results were obtained in a group viewing situation.
Motivational factors such as product category involvement or execution factors, such
as ad execution quality, also have not been controlled.

Product category involvement '

Product category involvement is another important countervailing factor which
stresses the motivation of the audience member. Product category involvement may
be defined as the degree of relevance of the advertised product to the individual
(Ratchford 1987; Zaichowsky 1985). Many studies have found that because of
consumers’ need for product information, higher product involvement facilitates the
attention and learning of advertising messages (Andrews 1988; Laczniak, Muehling
and Carlson 1991; Page, Thorson and Heide 1990; Celsi and Olson 1988; Craig 1988;

Bumkrant and Sawyer 1983). In print media, the role of product class involvement in

28

the learning of advertisements may be more pronounced than in electronic media
because individuals are free from the time constraint of advertising exposure (Andrews
1988).
Ad Execution Quality ~
Apart from the information value of ads, as posited by the theory of
involvement, execution quality of an advertisement provides entertainment and
aesthetic satisfaction to consumers (Lannon 1993; Wells 1993; Walston and Moriarty
1992; Olney, Holbrook and Batra 1991). For example, Olney, Holbrook and Batra
(1991) measure the Aad of consumers by asking whether the ads are "entertaining" or
"interesting." Ad execution quality is defined as the rating of an advertisement ’s
craftsmanship and the skillful use of attention-getting devices. Ad execution quality
serves as an attention-getting device in facilitating advertising message involvement
and forms the basis of consumers’ attitude toward the advertisement (Lannon 1993).
"Advertising that has aesthetic impact touches people’s feelings and minds with
artistic expressions that are personally moving and highly memorable...This is the
quality...that is central to the aesthetic response of pleasingness or liking" (Walston
and Moriarty (1992, p. 215). Although many researchers and practitioners alike realize
the importance of this factor in predicting the recall of an ad and Aad (e.g., Weir
1993; Kent 1990; Stewart and Koslow 1989; Gelb and Pickett 1983; Starch 1966;
Advertising Research Foundation 1962; Ruldoph 1947), few have provided empirical
evidence on the degree of importance execution quality has in determining the

effectiveness of an advertisement. Stewart and Koslow’s (1989) study on the effect on

29

recall and comprehension of 160 execution factors on 1,017 TV commercials is
perhaps one of the most recent largest scale studies in this area. Their study found
that brand differentiating technique is the most effective execution factor in increasing
the recall and comprehension of advertising messages. Biehal, Stephens and Curlo’s
(1992) study on brand choice showed the direct effects of ad picture quality on both
Aad and brand attitudes.
Familiarity with the Brand

Advertising is not the single source of information about a product. There are
many occasions on which a consumer may encounter a product: through product usage
experience, or through word-of-mouth recommendation, for example. All these direct
or indirect experiences may constitute an individual’s familiarity with the brand.
Familiarity with the brand is defined as the number of brand-related experiences that
has been accumulated by the consumer (Alba and Hutchinson 1987). Researchers on
Aad and brand attitudes have found that prior knowledge or familiarity with an
advertised brand or product will lessen the effect of an advertisement in building
equity for the brand (Yi 1993; Baker et a1. 1986; Cox and Locander 1987; Edell and
Burke 1986; Gill, Grossbart and Laczniak 1988; Machleit and Wilson 1988; Moore
and Hutchinson 1983; Alba and Hutchinson 1987). For example, Machleit and Wilson
(1988) compared the effect of Aad on brand attitudes between two unfamiliar brands
and two familiar brands. The effect of Aad was found to be significant on brand
attitudes only when the brands were unfamiliar to the respondents. Familiarity served

as an alternative cue for consumers to determine the value of a brand. It also

30

reinforced memory of the advertised brand as a repetition (Unnava and Burkrant
1991).
Exposure to Other Media

It is important to note that in a natural environment, consumers will be exposed
to many advertising messages through exposure to multiple media. Relative to the
media vehicle of interest, exposure to other media is defined as the exposure to any
editorial media which contain both editorial content and advertising. Such exposure,
according to the theory of interference, could impair the recall of the advertised brand
in one media vehicle by the addition of new information from exposure to another
media vehicle. Consumers may confuse one message with another after exposure to
different messages at different points in time. The situation may be worsened if an
individual encounters similar product messages in these different media - (Kent 1990;
Postman 1975). In a sense, such exposure to other media may be viewed as adding
more clutter to the minds of consumers. A
Mse of the study

This study is a field experiment that examines the construct of advertising
clutter and its impact on brand equity. The distinction between quantity,
competitiveness, and intrusiveness as the three dimensions of clutter could help clarify
the impact of clutter on advertising effectiveness. Moreover, the role of countervailing
factors in suppressing the effect of clutter in the advertising communication process
will be assessed. Unlike past studies on clutter which attributed clutter to be the only

cause of decreased advertising memory, this study will examine the interactions among

31

media factors (e. g. clutter and ad-editorial compatibility), creative factors (execution
quality), and audience factors (product involvement). It will provide a comprehensive
explanation of the advertising process.

This study postulates that the three dimensions of advertising clutter stimulate
the screening out of ads by consumers because clutter could directly affect a
consumer’s attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle (Aav) and his/her
advertising message involvement (AMI). Indirectly, advertising clutter could adversely
affect Aad and memory of the ad through the mediation of an attitude transfer process
and through advertising message involvement respectively. The indirect negative
impact of clutter on memory of the ad and on Aad could make an ad fail to achieve
its goal of building brand equity.
Sigm'frcance of the Study

This study represents a novel approach toward resolving the controversy over
the impact of advertising clutter. Past efforts have adopted a cognitive approach to
show the direct effect of advertising clutter on the memory of advertised brands. This
study is a departure from this approach because it incorporates both cognitive variables
(memory and involvement) and affective variables (attitudes) to explain the process of
how clutter affects the different stages of advertising effects. The inclusion of
countervailing factors in the research model can reconcile the conflicting views
between selective attention and captive audience in explaining the effect of clutter.

By linking the issue of clutter with brand equity, this study could shed light on

the three major questions of advertising researchers in the 19905 that have been

32
discussed by Bell (1988) and Stewart (1992): 1) What are the effects of an advertising

campaign in an environment of multiple, competing messages? 2) How is brand equity
built, and how should it be measured? 3) How can an ad’s quality be measured? The
question of clutter directly addresses the problem of competing messages. The study
also investigates the process of how advertising can build a brand’s equity and the
impact of clutter in this process. By incorporating execution quality as a variable in
the study, this study offers a measure of "ad quality" as perceived by the consumer.

The choice of magazines as the subject of this study is a digression from the
assumption of a captive audience in past clutter research. Different answers on the
impact of clutter thus may be obtained from this study. Moreover, magazines are also
a specialized interest medium. Their specialized electronic media counterparts, such as
cable TV channels and the new interactive media, may also benefit from the results of
this study because their distinct program emphasis and special interest audience base
are very similar to the situation of magazines. For example, Cable News Network can
be viewed as the cable TV version of Newsweek. The learning from the effect of
clutter in magazines may be applied to these specialized electronic media.

Another theoretical contribution that this study may have is that it could clarify
the attitude transfer hypothesis, from general to specific, which has been assumed by
researchers about attitudes toward advertising. Both the extent to which the attitude
toward advertising in general (Aag) is transferred to attitude toward advertising in a
media vehicle (Aav), and how much this Aav will be transferred to specific

advertisement (Aad) could probably be identified through the results of this study. The

33

relationships between Aag, Aav, and Aad are not treated simply as transfers from one
attitude to another, but also are treated as heuristics for consumers to make judgments
(Fazio 1989; Goodstein 1993). This study examines both how these attitudes will
affect consumers’ decisions on whether to read the advertisements and whether to use
their evaluations of the ad to determine their rating of a brand’s equity.

Methodologically, this study is a field experiment which simulates the real
reading environment of magazine advertising by allowing subjects to read the stimulus
material at their leisure time. It may generate more generalizable results than past
Studies on clutter which wed conducted in laboratory setting. The stimulus materials
are a reconstructed full version of a magazine with a complete set of editorial contents
and ads from three popular consumer magazines. The results of this study could be
much closer to reality and more generalizable than most studies on magazine
advertising, which only used advertisements without editorial content as the stimuli.

This study employed a one-way independent group design. The three
dimensions of clutter were manipulated in three treatments. Subjects of this study
were recnrited from college students enrolled in general education classes to represent
the college population. The subjects were assigned randomly to experimental and
control groups. The experiment was disguised as a survey of potential subscribers for
a newly launched magazine for college students.

The application of the technique of structural equations modeling in explaining
the direct and indirect relationships among the variables in this study is also a new

method of statistical analysis employed in clutter research. The structural equations

34

model is a technique much superior to traditional statistical analyses, such as AN OVA,
in explaining the relationships among multiple dependent variables and in examining
the measurement model used in experimental designs (Bagozzi and Yi 1989; Hunter
and Schmidt 1990). ~

Moreover, the composite indices on clutter, the scales of brand equity, ad-
editorial compatibility, attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle, and ad execution
quality developed in this study could be used in future studies on these topics. Their
validity and reliability were examined closely by confnmatory factor analysis. This
study also adapts scales such as advertising message involvement used by other
studies. The success of the adaptation can refine these scales.

Practitioners will also benefit from the practical values of the results of this
study to improve their advertising practice. The understanding of the role of the
factors countervailing the effects of clutter which are examined in this study could
enable advertisers to use these countervailing factors as clutterbusters in their
advertising placement. The identification of the quantity, competitiveness, and
intrusiveness dimensions of clutter and their impacts on advertising effectiveness can
serve as a guideline for media owners to optimize the arrangement of advertisements.
Media owners may be able to use the results of the multi-dimensionality of clutter and
its impact on brand equity to create a favorable environment for advertisers to get their
message across, while not intimidating their readers. Finally, the three dimensions of
advertising clutter, ad-editorial compatibility, and attitude toward advertising in a

media vehicle employed in this study could offer advertisers new measures to evaluate

35

media vehicles.
Organization of the Dissertation

This dissertation consists of six chapters. The research problem and its
significance are introduced in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 reviews past research literature on
clutter and the processing of advertisements, advertising effects, ad processing
behavior, selective attention, and the screening of advertisements. Based on this
literature review, a research model with a series of hypotheses is presented in
Chapter 3. Chapter 4 explains the methodology employed in this study. The results
of the study are reported in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 discusses the impact of advertising
clutter on brand equity, the direct and indirect effects of clutter, and the role of
countervailing factors in mediating the effect of clutter on brand equity. The three
dimensions of clutter as evaluative measures of media vehicles, the attitude transfer
process from general to specific, and the reliability and validity of the scales employed
in this study are also examined. The dissertation concludes with a discussion on the

implications of the results of this study. and suggestions for future research.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

Clutter and the Processing of Advertisements

The advertising clutter level of a media vehicle provides the context wherein
advertisements are processed by consumers. Clutter is considered a difficult media
environment in which consumers have to process the advertisements because multiple
messages are competing for their limited information processing resources (Pratkanis
and Greenwald 1993; Kent 1993; Cobb 1985; Batra and Ray 1983; Webb 1979). The
shift from 30-second to lS-second commercials, which increases the number of
commercials (the clutter level) in television, stimulated research on clutter in the late
19703 (Ray and Webb 1986). Most of these studies on clutter have shown that the
higher the clutter level, the poorer is the subsequent memory of advertisements. These
studies were either based on the theory of overload or the theory of interference.
Overload Theogy

The application of overload theory to marketing and advertising research was
initiated by researchers on brand choice. This theory of overload, which stresses the
limited capacity of individuals to process information, is based upon the psychological
literature on cognitive information processing (Miller 1956; Malhotra, Jain and
Lagakos 1982). When an individual is overloaded with information, such as too many

advertisements, the absorption of one piece of information will be at the expense of

36

37
another piece of information (Schneider, Dumais and Shiffrin 1984). The result is that

individuals will not be able to make the ideal choice for themselves. This theory has
a "best choice" paradigm that assumes the existence of objective criteria to determine
the best brand for every consumer. In advertising contexts, consumers will make poor
decisions when information overload distracts consumers from the objective criteria for
the "best" brand (Jacoby, Speller, and Kohn 1974a and b; Scammon 1977). The
overload theory has been criticized for its confusion of the number of brands with the
number of messages in its definition of overload. The validity of its measurement of
best choice is also questionable (Summers 1974; Wilkie 1974).

Pillai’s (1990) experiment in India conceptualized the effect of clutter as
stimulating the perceptual defense of consumers. Consumers avoid commercials when
they perceive a threat of overload. His first experiment was a field experiment of
face-to-face interviews with viewers after they had watched a TV program at home.
He found that advertising clutter affected older viewers only, and that its effect was
contingent upon the positioning of the commercials. Such results may be confounded
by the method that the study employed. Recall measures could be unfair to older
respondents who learn new messages slower than younger respondents. The use of a
checklist of advertisements as the recall measure may have led to the over-reporting of
exposure. The presence of experimenters when subjects were viewing the program
also might have affected the results. Clutter was also found to affect the viewership
of advertising in his study. Average viewership of advertising dropped from 45% for

low clutter level to 36% for high clutter ad capsule. In his second experiment, using

38

forced exposure, the target ad was an ad of a new brand placed among some other ads
of established brands. Recall of the test ad declined significantly in high clutter
conditions. The overload effect was more apparent with the passage of time. The
motivational factor of involvement was found to moderate the effect of overload on
information processing (Malhotra, Jain and Lagakos 1982). High product involvement
was found to enhance the sustaining of brand memory under a highly cluttered
environment (Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993; Cobb 1985; Ray and Webb 1986).

An alternative perspective has been offered by the recent experiment of Brown
and Rothschild (1993) which found no significant difference between high and low
clutter in unaided recall. In their study, clutter was differentiated into three levels:
low, moderate, and high. Their study simulated the advertising clutter level in a
normal television program setting. A significant positive effect was even found
between clutter and recognition of brands. This made the issue of overload more
intriguing. It may imply that the threshold of overload may differ across individuals.
Their study, however, had not used controls for other mediating factors such as
product involvement and the execution quality of the advertising stimuli.

Interference Theog

The theory of interference posits that when an individual encounters multiple
message processing tasks, the messages interfere with one another and confuse the
individual. The interference may be caused by the quantity of messages or the
similarity of messages (Seamon 1980). The theory of overload is similar to the theory

of interference in that both are cognitive-based and both postulate that additional

39

message stimuli will inhibit the efficiency of processing information. They differ from
each other in that the theory of interference stresses the similarity of the messages and
the confusion of multiple messages, while the theory of overload stresses the
detrimental effect of the amount of information on an individual’s ability to make:-
"good" decisions.

The origin of the interference theory in explaining human information
processing is Stroop’s (1935) classic experiment of distinguishing different color
names in non-matching color inks or color chips (O’Leary and Barber 1993). In
Stroop’s (1935) interference experiment, subjects confused the ink color with the color
names in the identification of a color name. The concurrent tasks in processing
created distraction and required more attentional resources from the subjects (Seamon
1980). Because of the limited resources available to process incoming information
(W ickens 1984), the consumer was confused by the multiple advertising messages.
The memory of the new ones take over, inhibit, and distort the memory of the old
ones (Postman 1975; Srull and Burke 1988; Alba and Chattopadhyay 1985; Kent 1990;
Keller 1991). Such interference may occur when either the target ad is read before the
other ads (proactive interference) or the ad is read after the other ads (retroactive
interference). Both types of interference exert similar negative effects on memory
measures (Postman 1975; Kent 1990). The source of interference may come from a
mere increase either in the number of messages or in the number of similar messages
(competitive ads).

Early studies on clutter explored only the effect of the increase in the number

40
of messages on the memory of the advertised brand. Webb and Ray (1979) found that

television advertising clutter reduced the attention to, recall of, and cognitive responses
toward the advertisements. They recruited 200 subjects to view two half-hour
programs in four clutter level treatements ranging from standard clutter to very heavy
clutter. The attention level of subjects was observed through a one-way mirror. Their
results showed that the effect of clutter was specific to the position of the
advertisements and to the attractiveness of the advertisements. The first commercial
shown was affected least by clutter. It is not clear whether the lower recall that they
found was due to the lower attention (non-exposure) or due to message interference in
the processing of advertisements. A follow-up study by Cobb (1985) also found that
positioning affected the recall of a commercial in high clutter situations.
Predetermined involvement in the commercial mediated the effect of positioning in
high advertising clutter situations on commercial recall in only three out of the four
tested commercials. Cobb (1985) suggested that product involvement was a better
construct than involvement in the commercial in mediating the effects of positioning in
high clutter condition. Her study showed that the greater the number of commercials
in a commercial break, the greater the negative feelings towards the advertisements.
However, the effect of such affective responses on the attention of advertisements was
not addressed. The study also did not report how familiarity with the advertised
brands might affect the recall of the advertisements.

Mord and Gilson (1985) extended the study of clutter to a national sample of

5000 adults aged 18-34. Even with the same duration of 90 seconds, the increase in

41

the number of commercials from three 30-second commercials to six lS-second
commercials still evoked negative responses from the consumers because they thought
that more time was taken away from programming. Longer commercials were warmer
and less confusing to viewers. Equipped with control devices such as videoocassette
recorders and remote-control, consumers were found to be more sensitive to
advertising clutter.

Recent attempts to study the interference effect of clutter has shifted attention
from the quantity of advertisements to the similarity of messages in advertising clutter.
Burke and Srull (1988) found that subsequent exposure to competitive advertisements
reduces the salience of the advertisement. They distinguished two types of brand
processing objectives. If a consumer processes an ad for the attributes of one brand
only, then the consumer is said to have "within-brand processing." If a consumer
processes an ad for choice between different brands, then the consumer is said to have
"between-brand" processing. When the consumer has a within-brand processing
objective, he/she is less subject to competitive interference. Competitive interference
exerts its effect only on the memory of the content of the ad, not on the evaluation of
the ad. Kent (1990) extended the study to the television medium and obtained similar
results. Competitive interference was found to reduce recall and recognition of brand
names. "Within brand processing" facilitated the recall of ad claims because this goal
required a deeper understanding of an advertisement for one brand only. "Between
brand" processing facilitated the recall of brand names because the task is to broaden

the range of brands when making a choice among brands of the same product

42
category.

The competitiveness of the advertising environment recently has been
advocated as the problem of current television advertising clutter (Kent 1993).
Competitive clutter was defined as a multitude of ads for brands which may be ‘
considered to be substitutes for one another and which are physically similar. Over
30% of prime-time network TV commercials within the same hour were found to be
competitive with one another (Kent 1993). It also does not consider the factor of
spatial distance between competitive ads in constituting the interference. In perceptual
organization literature, individuals tend to group objects in adjacency (Pomerantz
1981). The effects of competitive interference should be more pronounced when the _
competitive ads are clustered together in adjacency than when they are farther apart.
Kahneman and Treisman (1984) also found that interference was inversely related to
the spatial distance among the stimuli. The practice of product exclusivity in
television commercials that competitive products will not be shown in the same
commercial break is a recognition of this idea of spatial interference. However in
print media, there is no such restriction.

All these studies on clutter have assumed that consumers read or watch all the
advertisements and that all the ads are of equal attractiveness to consumers. Indeed,
mest of the researchers recognize the possible effect of advertising execution quality in
affecting their study results (Kent 1990; Machleit and Wilson 1988; Cobb 1985).
Notably, all of these studies were conducted under forced exposure environments, and

all employed independent groups design with post-tests only. No subject by treatment

43

interaction has so far been examined. The effect being accounted for may be the
result of individual differences among the subjects rather than the variation of clutter.
The immediate recall results obtained with only one exposure in laboratory settings
can hardly be generalizable to real-er settings. Moreover, the sole reliance on recall
measures as the effect of clutter are vulnerable especially to the problem of individual
differences in memory capacity (Bransford et a1. 1979; Leckenby and Plummer 1983;
Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991). Ceiling effects and floor effects can contaminate
the results easily. For instance, Brown and Rothschild’s (1993) study exhibits the
problem of a floor effect in their tapping of subjects’ recognition of brands.

Another problem faced by researchers on clutter is the lack of consensus about
the Operationalization of clutter level. The clutter level being operationalized is
somewhat arbitrary in each study, making results difficult to compare across studies.
For example, low clutter can consist of 10 commercials (two in each break) within a
30-minute program segment (Brown and Rothschild 1993); 12 commercials in within
three breaks and one between-program break (two to four in each break) in two 30-
minute program (Webb and Ray 1979), 12 commercials in a row between two
programs (Pillai 1990), or four commercials in one break (Cobb 1985).

Intrusiveness and Resistance to Clutter

With a strong focus on the cognitive processing of advertising in clutter
research, researchers overlook the intrusiveness that advertising clutter may pose to the
audience. Intrusiveness is the degree to which the advertisements in a media vehicle

interrupt the flow of an editorial unit. Although a few clutter studies have

44
conceptualized clutter as the number of interruptions (Wicks 1991; Mord and Gilson

1985), they have not examined this intrusive dimension of clutter. They have
continued to employ the traditional overload approach to explain the effect of clutter.
The negative responses of consumers towards increasing interruptions have been ~
mentioned only very briefly.

A new approach to examining the effects of clutter can be to examine it from
its intrusiveness dimension. The self-defensive mechanisms of individuals suggested
by reactance theory (Brehm 1966, 1981) and by ego-defensive theory of Freud (1946)
can shed light on the effect intrusiveness of clutter on individuals. Reactance theory
posits that individuals like to preserve their freedom to evaluate objects. When this _
freedom is perceived to be threatened by persuasive messages, they will resist such
messages.

Freud’s ego-defensive theory also addresses the perceived threat from any other
forces that may assault an individual’s ego (self—esteem). When an individual
perceives his ego to be threatened by internal or external forces, he will resist and will
react negatively to those forces. Applying such theoretical thinking of defensiveness
toward threats in the context of media consumption, the freedom or ego of an
individual is his/her autonomy in his/her editorial content consumption. The
interruption to the consumption caused by intrusive clutter could be viewed as a threat
to his/her freedom or ego, and he is likely to resist the clutter and develop a negative

response, such as the skipping of the advertisements.

45

Advertising Effects

A crucial task in the research of clutter is to identify what the possible effects
of clutter are and to delineate the phenomenon’s direct and indirect effects. As shown
in past studies, recall and recognition effects yield different results. It is important to
distinguish the difference between the two measures and to explore other measures of
the effect of clutter. The linkage between the memory of an ad and the presence of
advertising clutter involves many steps in the communication process from encoding to
rehearsal to retrieval (Seamon 1980). A direct effect proposition in past studies is
likely to generate inconsistent results with the omission of mediating variables.
McGuire (1985) has termed this distant linkage of effects and omission of mediating .
variables as the "distal step fallacy."

Given the ample evidence of affective responses to advertising clutter, a review
of the literature of attitude theories will enable our understanding of the preceding
stages of advertising effects before memory occurs.

Functions and Accessibiligy of Attitudes

Attitudes have dominated social psychological research as a construct to
explain the information processing of individuals (McGuire 1985; Greenwald 1989).
Attitudes are significant in advertising research because they serve as heuristics for
consumers to save cognitive efforts in screening information and in making decisions
(Goodstein 1993; Chaiken, Liberman and Eagly 1989; Greenwald 1968). Although
there are different propositions on the functions of attitudes to an individual, the four

most common ones are (Snyder and DeBono 1989):

46

1) Ego-defensive - protect an individual from undesirable stimuli,
2) Knowledge/object appraisal -- help an individual to organize information efficiently
by giving meaning to object,
3) Value-expressive -- allow the person to express his or her values, likes and ~
dislikes,
4) Social-adjustive - facilitate an individual’s gaining of acceptance by peers and
fitting into a social situation.

There are over 500 operational definitions of attitude, which confuse more than
clarify the construct (McGuire 1985). The general consensus that has been reached is
the evaluative nature of the attitude, such as "the affect associated with a mental
object" (Greenwald 1989) and "a person’s evaluation of an object of thought"
(Pratkanis 1989; Zanna and Rempel 1989; Shaw and Wright 1967). Attitudes are
affective constructs which play an important role in cognitive processing (Sherman
1987). In the past, many functional attributes have been added to the definitions of
attitude which postulate how attitudes determine behavior. Unlike the previous firm
conviction about the direct linkage between attitudes and behavior, researchers now
realize the effect of attitudes on behavior is highly conditional. Attitudes affect
behavior only when the attitude is accessible to the individual or can be automatically
activated (Fazio 1989; Bargh 1989). Attitudes also have great impact when an
individual resorts to heuristic rules for making a judgment rather than going through
systematic cognitive processing (Chaiken, Liberman and Eagly 1989).

Accessibility of an attitude is determined by several factors: 1) The strength of

47
the attitude (Fazio 1989), 2) prior knowledge of the attitude object (Pratkanis 1989), 3)

congruence between the function of the attitude and the goal of the individual (Fazio
1989; Snyder and DeBono 1989), and 4) persistence of the attitude in the memory
(Pratkanis 1989). Before utilizing attitude theories to explain any advertising “
phenomena, it is necessary to discern the attitude objects. In advertising, there are
four types of attitudes based on the attitude objects: 1) attitudes toward advertising in
general (Aag), 2) attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle (Aav), 3) attitudes
toward the specific ad of interest (Aad), and 4) attitudes toward the advertised brand
(Ab). They are related to one another: the latter ones are the subsets of the former
ones. According to the associated systems theory (Carlston 1992), the attitude towards
one representation is affected by the attitude toward another presentation in associated
systems.

Attitudes developed from direct experience will be permanent in conceptual
memory and are more likely to affect behavior (Carlston 1992; Bargh 1989).
Advertisements are a form of mediated communication and an indirect experience in
the formation of attitudes. The resultant attitude’s effect on behavior is usually weak
and requires both the reinforcement by repetition (Berger 1993), and the presence of
other factors favorable to the purchase of a product, such as easy availability.
Attitudes toward Advertising in a Vehicle (Aav)

Although attitudes toward advertising in general have been a flourishing
research area, the extent to which a negative attitude toward advertising in a media

vehicle may negatively affect attention to the ads and the subsequent processing of the

48
advertising messages has not been studied. Abemethy and Rotfeld (1991) suggested

this negative consequence and made an attempt to specify the attitude toward radio
advertising (ATRA). However, their study on attitudes toward radio advertising is still
too general for consumers to show their attitude to advertising in specific media '
contexts because it refers to radio in general, not to specific stations which differ
widely in terms of programming. For example, a listener may be more receptive to
advertising in a news station than a rock music station.

Attitudes toward advertising in a vehicle (Aav) are temporary constructions.
Their direction may change when the clutter level changes in the advertising vehicle
because different clutter levels are different contextual stimuli to the consumer.
Advertising media generally believe that the attitude toward the advertising in a media
vehicle is a lowly accessible attitude. The accessibility of that attitude is highly
dependent on the context that the attitude will be activated. A high level of
advertising clutter may activate the consumer’s attitude toward the advertising in a
media vehicle and become highly accessible in his/her screening of advertisements.
Attitudes toward the Ad (Aad)

Attitudes toward the advertisement (Aad) have become a factor commonly used
to explain the persuasive power of an advertisement to consumers (Shimp 1981; Gelb
and Pickett 1984; Cox and Locander 1987; Burton and Lichtenstein 1988; Gill,
Grossbart and Laczniak 1988; Machleit and Wilson 1988; Yi 1990; Muehling,
Laczniak and Stoltman 1991). Apparently, the attitude object in Aad is the

advertisement itself, nothing else. This assumption is far from correct because

49

researchers have applied the concept to two different aspects of an ad: the content of
the advertising message (MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986; Cox and Locander 1987),
and the presentation of the advertising message (Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992).
A favorable attitude toward the ad cannot indicate which aspect of the advertisement
forms such attitude toward the advertisement.

Olney, Holbrook and Batra (1991) propose a three-component model of Aad
which includes the hedonism, utilitarianism, and interestingness of an ad in forming a
global Aad. Execution quality of an ad creates hedonistic value and interest in an ad.
It has been found to be an important antecedent of Aad (Biehal, Stephens and Curio
1992; Walston and Moriarty 1992).

The distinctions between these different aspects of Aad are crucial to
advertisers who make advertising strategy decisions. If a positive attitude toward the
advertisement consists of only the positive attitude toward the presentation of the
advertisement, then advertisers can focus on improving only the execution techniques
while presenting the same message and adding variation to it. In fact, this view is
widely held among the advertising industry. The likability of the advertisement has
become the sole criterion used in predicting the effectiveness of an advertisement.
These disciples of likability of the advertisement also use it to explain why some
consumers are hostile to advertising in general: it is the execution of the
advertisements they do not like, not the nature of advertising as a persuasive
instrument or social institution.

The bulk of the literature focuses on the effect of Aad on Ah, but Aad and Ab

50

are not qualified as two distinct constructs because they lack discriminant validity
against the test of multi-trait multi-method (Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986).
Recent studies of Aad are moving away from the simple direct relationship between
Aad and Ab. The effect of Aad on Ab is not merely an attitude transfer, Aad also
provides the information input for the cognition of a product which also affects Ab
(MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986). Researchers also have discovered that product
familiarity (prior knowledge) is a major factor mediating the effect of Aad on Ab.
The role of brand familiarity in the processing of ads will be discussed under the
rubric of the countervailing factors to clutter.

Advertising Message Involvement (MI)

Advertising message involvement is the consumers’ involvement in the content
of the advertisements, a motivational state for a deeper level of information processing
(Laczniak and Muehling 1993). Involvement in an ad may be due to its message or
its execution (Lutz 1985; MacKenzie and Lutz 1982). There are quite a number of
measurement problems in AMI. Some researchers employed product involvement
measures to measure AMI because product involvement is thought to be the
antecedent of advertising message involvement (Muehling, Laczniak and Stoltman
1991). Others used task assignment to manipulate the variable indirectly (Gardner,
Mitchell and Russo 1985; Park and Young 1986; Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993).
Recently, researchers began to study AMI as a concept in its own right. It is
conceptualized as the motivational state inducing message processing (Laczniak and

Muehling 1993) or the level of attention (James and Kover 1992). As a moderating

51

variable, AMI is found to have a positive direct effect on Aad but an insignificant
effect on brand beliefs (Laczniak and Muehling 1993). It also moderates the direct
effect of Aad on Ab (Muehling, Laczniak and Stoltman 1991), providing further
support to the dual mediation hypothesis of MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch (1986), which
argues that Aad affects both the knowledge of and attitudes toward the brand.

Memo

Memory of the advertised brand or of the ad has been an important measure of
advertising effects since the inception of advertising research (Stewart et al. 1985;
Leckenby and Plummer 1983). It is the basis for consumer decision making (Alba,
Hutchinson and Lynch 1991; Bettrnan 1979). The importance of memory of the brand
in the decision-making process of consumers has received rich empirical support. In
situations where consumers have no clues to determine which brand to choose, the
brand that is most readily retrievable from memory will be chosen (Alba, Hutchinson
and Lynch 1991; Haugtvedt, Leavitt and Schneier 1993). This is called a memory-
based decision. Choosing a store for shopping is an example of such decision.

There are other situations, such as shopping in a grocery store, in which
abundant information or product cues are available. Decisions may be based upon the
stimuli such as the product package, a price discount, or point of purchase display.
Even in such situations, the memory of a brand and its advertisements will increase
the chances of that brand to be among the choices of the consumer (Wells 1993).
Usually, consumers possess in their memory a evoked set that consists of multiple

brands in a product category. They choose from a set of brands for consideration

52
depending on their needs and the situation (Alsop 1989; Assael 1992; Krishnan and

Chakravarti 1993).

Recall and recognition are the two most common tests of memory (Brown
1975; Singh, Rothschild and Churchill 1988). Since the basic requirement of a ~
successful brand is brand identity, recall and recognition of the advertised brand have
been the most common measures of advertising effectiveness (Krugman 1986;
Leckenby and Plummer 1983). A more elaborate test is one of recall and recognition
of both the claims of the advertisements (Kent 1990) and feelings toward the
advertisements (Edell and Moore 1993; Srull 1990). According to the two-factor
theory (Tulving 1975) or generation-discrimination theory (Brown 1975), recall is the
retrieval of the memory target without the presence of the target; recognition is the
discrimination of the target from a list of choices where the target is present. The
general belief is that the task of recognition is easier than recall because recognition
does not require the respondent to organize their memory of the brand. Moreover, the
presence of the target facilitates the memory retrieval process. There are researchers
(e.g., Singh, Rothschild, and Churchhill 1988; Kent 1990) who argue that recognition
can be as difficult as recall tasks if all the choices given to the subjects are plausible
answers.

The choice between recall and recognition as measures of memory should be
determined by the type of purchase decision (Leckenby and Plummer 1983; Alba,
Hutchinson and Lynch 1991). In memory-based decision conditions, recall is a better

measure of brand memory. In stimulus-based decision conditions, recognition is a

53

better measure. The inference is that recognition may be a better measure for fast-
moving consumer goods, while recall is a better measure for services and durable
goods. Unless a study is limited to only one type of products, both measures should

.

be used to examine the memory of the brand or ad.
Resistance to Commtitive Ads

Resistance to competitive ads is another important measure of the advertising
effects of a brand. As Stewart (1992) points out, advertising research has generally
overlooked the fierce competitive pressure in the real world of advertising. The
advertising effort of one brand may be diluted by the advertising of another brand. To
have an impact on consumers, an ad not only has to sell its own product, but also
should be able to withstand the lure of competitive ads (Stewart 1992).

One approach to explain the resistance to competitive ads is the inoculation
theory proposed by McGuire (1964), which uses a medical inoculation analogy. The
basic premise of this theory is that if an individual has been exposed previously to the
refutation message of the opposing argument, he will not be affected by the opposing
argument that he would later encounter. This theory has received considerable support
in research on negative political advertising (Pfau 1990) and corporate advertising
(Burgoon, Hall and Pfau 1991). However, there is also conflicting evidence that
reveals the limitation of the inoculation theory in advertising research. Goldstein
(1982) found that the theory does not work in advertising contexts in which the
advertising message of one brand is not in direct conflict with that of another brand.

The theory seems to be confined to comparative advertising, and is unable to explain

54

why the majority of non-comparative ads in advertising can help one brand to resist
competitive ads in the consumer’s mind.

Reinforcement through repetition of the same message is another explanation
for the resistance of competitive challenge (Berger 1993; Burgoon and Miller 1990).
For example, Berger (1993) found that both attitude and behavior can become
consistent when the message is repeated. Repetition both increases the size and
changes the content and structure of a brand in an individual’s memory.

The inhibition hypothesis also may shed light on this resistance phenomenon.
It posits that when cues are given, the number of brands that an individual can recall
will greatly diminish (Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991). The presence of cues of a
particular brand confines or inhibits the recall of other competitive brands (Alba and
Chattopadhyay 1985). Advertising can exert this inhibition effect by building a
regular presence in the mind of the consumer so that the competitor is less likely to be
recalled or given attention. Studies of first-mover advantage (e. g., Carpenter and
Nakamoto 1989) also supported this hypothesis. Established brands can define the
criteria of product evaluation for the consumer. Later brands either have to develop a
whole new set of criteria or have to invest in much heavier advertising in order to
overcome this disadvantage.
Brand ui

Brand equity has become one of the hottest topics in marketing and advertising
research (Aaker and Biel 1993; Cook 1992; Marketing Research Institute 1991; Bell

1988). The construct has been proposed to revive advertisers’ declining confidence in

55

advertising’s effect on sales amid the growth of other promotion efforts (Aaker 1993;
Keller 1993). Brand equity is an intangible resource that maintains the competitive
advantage of the firm (Chatterjee and Wemfelt 1991; Mahoney and Pandian 1991;
Grant 1985). It safeguards the profitability of the product and protects the ~
manufacturer from the growing power of intermediaries and retailers (de Chematony
and McDonald 1992). It also serves as a justification for brand extension because the
cost of establishing a new brand is much higher and riskier than that of extending the
product line of an established brand (Baldinger 1990; Biel 1992; Tauber 1993;
Wansink and Ray 1993; de Chematony and McDonald 1992).

The strong accounting flavor in the construct of brand equity differentiates it
from its predecessors, such as brand attitude, brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand
image, and brand knowledge. As the added value with which a brand and its image
endow a product (Farquhar 1991), brand equity can be appreciated or depreciated by
advertising and promotion efforts. A monetary value can be calculated for the equity
of a brand as an asset for a company. The most successful cases of brand equity can
be found in international contexts where brands such as Xerox, McDonald’s, and
Coca-Cola have become the common language across nations (Macrae 1991; de
Chematony and McDonald 1992).

From a consumer’s perspective, Aaker (1991) has proposed four dimensions of
brand equity which include: 1) positive association, 2) loyalty, 3) perceived quality,
and 4) top—of-mind awareness. Positive association is the expectation of a pleasant

consequence from the image of owning a brand. Brand loyalty is the commitment to a

56
brand. Perceived quality is the perceived superiority of the performance of an

advertised brand over that of other brands. T op-of-mind awareness is the readiness
and promptness to retrieve an advertised brand under a probing situation. A brand that
scores high in all these dimensions can be considered to have a high brand equity.“
Many empirical studies on brand equity to-date concentrated mainly on the
positioning of the product on the consumers’ perceptual map. Researchers use open-
ended questions to encourage consumers to generate thoughts on the brand (Aaker
1991). Another common approach to demonstrate the effect of brand equity on sales
is to use case studies (e.g., Aaker 1991,1993; Macrae 1991; Jones 1986). Other
studies simply equate brand equity with brand attitude (Edell and Moore 1993) or
brand personality (Lannon 1993). Despite the strong claims of researchers about the
close relationship between advertising and brand equity, the measures that have been
used to measure brand equity measured only one of the four dimensions of brand
equity. If the four dimensions are complimentary to one another, a composite index
should be available to give a complete measurement of brand equity. Despite the
accounting origin of the construct, only Martin and Brown (1991), Park and Srinivasan
(1994) have attempted to measure brand equity quantitatively from the consumer’s
perspective. Martin and Brown (1991) conceived perceived quality, perceived value,
image, trustworthiness, and commitment to be the five dimensions of brand
impression. Products that are extensions of an established brand in the same product
category have a higher impression score than products with a new brand name. Park

and Srinivasan (1994) measured brand equity by comparing the difference between an

57

individual’s consumer’s overall brand preference and his/her subjective attribute and
non-attributed based preference of the brand based on objectively measured attribute
levels.

Advertising has long been recognized as an investment to generate more ‘
consumer demand of a product. The various advertising response functions proposed
by researchers (e.g., Dittus and Kopp 1991; Jones 1986; Zufryden 1986) and the
positive correlations between advertising expenditure and market share suggest that
advertising will invariably lead to the success of a product. This is an oversimplistic
view that warrants scrutiny. It assumes that advertising will generate only positive
evaluation of a product and that all advertising campaigns are successful. In reality, ,
many advertising campaigns have been failures, such as Nissan’s Infiniti advertising
campaign or Oldsmobile Achiever’s comparative advertising with Honda Accord.
Most of the failures have not been reported, because the public focuses on the glamour
of the successful ones. Although advertising agencies put the blame for the failures on
the product or other elements in the marketing mix, the problems also may be due to
poor execution of advertising or wrong strategy for the products.

The basic aim of advertising is to create a favorable presence and a sense of
familiarity in the minds of consumers (Moran 1990; Bogart and Lehman 1973). Such
presence is best expressed in terms of brand equity building (Kirmani and Zeithaml
1993). Only good advertising will build brand equity, inducing consumers to think
positively about the brand, to be loyal to the brand, to feel that the product is of

higher quality, and to retrieve the brand right away from top of their mind. However,

58

good advertising must be able to reach its desired audience in order to be effective.
Advertising clutter may pose as a cognitive and affective barrier to convey the
advertising message, because an ad may get overlooked or lost in the dense advertising
environment. ‘

Directly, advertising clutter may discourage consumers from reading the many
advertisements, thereby reducing their advertising message involvement. Such non-
exposure implies the loss of both readership and communication opportunity with the
consumers. The advertisement will fail to achieve its goal of building brand equity.
By reducing advertising message involvement, clutter may indirectly affect negatively
the attitude toward the ad,‘ and the subsequent memory of the brand, as well as the
resistance to competitive ads, which may be the antecedents of brand equity.
Ad Processing Behavior

The basis of learning or information processing in advertising can be traced to
Krugman’s (1965) proposition of low-involvement learning of television commercials.
Under the low-involvement learning proposition, the effects of advertisements are
caused by repetition. Repetition increases an individual’s awareness of the
advertisement and induces purchase, without changing the consumer’s attitude
significantly. The conception of involvement was the conscious "bridging experience":
connections or personal reference that the audience makes between their own lives and
the stimulus (Krugman 1965).

The elaboration likelihood model developed by Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann

(1983) is a formalized model based on the hemispheral lateralization (the division of

59

labor between the right and the left brain) to explain high- and low-involvement
learning. According to this model, high-involvement learning follows a central route
of persuasion in which consumers comprehend, learn, and evaluate the attributes about
a product in the left brain. The advertisements processed in a high-involvement ‘
learning mode will have a high chance of elaboration in the consumer’s mind. In
other words, consumers exert more cognitive effort to process the arguments in the
message. Advertisements processed in a low-involvement learning mode follow a
peripheral route of persuasion. Consumers are affected by the non-product message
characteristics of the advertisements, such as the context or creative execution of the
advertisement. Such processing of images and sensation arousal are in the right brain
of the audience (Schiffman and Kanuk 1991).
Selective Attention and the Screening of Advertisements

While the mainstream of research on clutter argues for the negative impact of
clutter on information processing, some critics challenge the captive audience
assumption of such research with the selective attention mechanism in human
information processing. Selective attention to objects by an individual is a protective
mechanism of which human beings use to allocate their limited attentional resources
according to their needs (Wickens 1978; Seamon 1980; Wheeless and Cook 1985;
Smith and Buchholz 1991). Literature on audience’s uses of and gratifications from
advertising can shed light on the values which advertising can offer to an individual.
These values are incentives for attention that may moderate the impact of clutter on

advertising effects. MacInnis and Jaworski (1989) suggest a framework of ad

60

processing based on the need, motivation, and opportunity to process advertisements.

Under the following three conditions, advertising will not be considered a negative

extemality but a desirable content because it provides. uses and gratifications for the

consumer: ‘

1. Advertising as product information -- advertising provides useful information
about the product that a consumer is interested in (Telser 1978; Atkin 1985;
Thorson 1989). Telser’s (1978) economic theory of advertising argues that the
legitimacy or economic value of advertising lies in its information value.
Advertisers have to compensate the audience for their advertising’s non-utility in an
advertising medium by sponsoring the cost of media production. Atkin (1985)
also contends that an individual’s attention to messages is goal-directed and is based
on the information that is needed at the time of media consumption. Thorson (1990)
also believes that consumers pay attention only to advertising that interests them.
The theory of involvement posits that product cawgory involvement is
the motivating force with which consumers use advertisements as a product
information source.

2.-Advertising as media content -- advertising is viewed as part of the content of a
media vehicle. For example, in a gourmet magazine, restaurant ads contain
information that complement the editorial content of the magazine. The ads may be
perceived by the readers as part of the editorial content. The effect of clutter has

been suggested as contingent upon the compatibility perceived by the readers

between advertisements and editorial content (Scissors and Bumba 1993;

61
Compaigne 1982). Compaigne’s (1982) analysis of the magazine industry found

that the proliferation of special interest magazines is accompanied by the growth in
advertising volume in these magazines. Inference can be made on the

acceptance of readers of such advertising-heavy special interest magazines. The
positive effect of the compatibility between advertising on advertising

effectiveness has been termed as "contextual priming" (Schumann and Thorson
1989; Yi 1990, 1993). When the advertisements complement the editorial content,
they will be perceived as more relevant to the individuals, and the advertised
product attributes will be more accessible (Yi 1990; 1993).

3. Advertising as art and entertainment - advertising contains aesthetic value that ‘
appeals to the five senses of the consumer. This aesthetic value is created by the
craftsmanship of a well-executed advertisement. The aesthetic value and
entertainment function of advertising can be a major factor that can explain why
non-customers of a product read its advertisement (Wells 1993; Lannon
1993). This inference is also consistent with the peripheral route to the information

processing model of Petty, Cacciopo, and Schumann (1983) that non-
product related cues in an ad are better remembered by low involvement
consumers. Even for customers, the entertainment value of an ad enhances their
interest in processing the product information (Goodstein 1993).
Walston and Moriarty (1992) propose that the high aesthetic value in
advertisements can break through clutter by attracting audience’s attention. They

develop a marketplace aesthetic matrix which predicts the effect of an advertisements’s

62

aesthetic value on a brand’s market performance. Their findings show that all the 12
brands best-rated in aesthetic value have also been successful in sales performance.

Apart from these factors, the opportunity to have selective exposure and
attention can detemiine the screening process (MacInnis and Jaworski 1989). If the
effort to skip an advertisement and the risk of missing the editorial content is high, the
consumer is less likely to exhibit avoidance behavior. For example, when tuning in to
a new cable TV channel, a consumer will not know when the commercial break will
start and end. He may pay high attention to the commercials in order not to miss the
program. In print, if the advertisements are intrusive - embedded inside the editorial
content rather than in the cover positions -- the opportunity to skip the advertisements
is lower because readers find it more time-consuming to skip an advertisement than to
browse it.

In comparison to television clutter, clutter in print media is more likely to
stimulate avoidance behavior because of the relative ease to skip advertisements in
print. The reading pace is set by the readers, not the medium. Although consumers
may find it difficult to control the pace of television broadcasting, TV commercials are
more predictable than print advertisements because there is a somewhat fixed pattern
of commercial breaks and the commercials are shown consecutively.

Indeed, these reasons to read an ad are the countervailing factors that have
generally been overlooked by researchers on advertising clutter. The effect of clutter
has been linked directly to the memory of target advertisements without controlling

these important factors. It is not surprising that research results on the impact of

63

clutter on recall are inconclusive.

Without the presence of the conditions listed above, advertising will become a
negative extemality to consumers. Many surveys found that the public’s attitude
toward advertising in general has been quite negative (Haller, 1974; Sandage and ‘
Leckenby 1980; Fawcett 1993; Mittal 1993). Advertising has a notorious reputation of
puffery, vulgar contentiousness, and hustlerism, as well as taking away editorial space
and influencing the integrity of the media editorial content (Packard 1957; McGuire
1985; Soley and Craig 1992). Advertisers have to compensate for the time of non-
customers to read their advertisements by subsidizing the price for consumers to use
the media (Telser 1979). Steiner’s (1966) pioneering study on consumer behavior
towards advertisements showed that people often avoid TV commercials by doing
other things during commercial breaks. Increase in advertising clutter may increase
this negative attitude toward advertising and discourage consumers from reading the
advertisements in a media vehicle.

The annoyance created by clutter has been best recognized in the television
industry (Advertising Age 1993). The code of practice developed by the National
Association of Broadcasters imposes a limit on the duration of commercials within a
break. Most TV network affiliates have followed this rule even after the deregulation.
They have maintained an average of 13 minutes of commercials per hour and 4 to 8
commercials per break (Wicks 1991). In contrast, print media do not impose any self-
restriction on the amount of advertising and very few adopt a fixed advertising-to-

editorial ratio policy (Ha and Litman 1993). While there are numerous studies on the

64

television commercial avoidance behavior such as the zipping and zapping of
television commercials (e.g., Heeter and Greenberg 1985; Kaplan 1985; Kitchen 1986;
Kahtz 1987a; Lamond 1987; Stout and Benedicta 1989; Cronin and Menelly 1992;
Zufryden, Pedrick and Sankaralingam 1993), advertising avoidance behavior in print
media has been an area neglected by researchers. This study on clutter in print media
can fill the void in this area and examine how clutter may stimulate the avoidance of
advertisements.

To explain the process of how clutter may or may not create a negative impact
on brand equity and other effect measures, six major factors that countervail the effect
of clutter during the processing of advertisements have been identified in the scattered
literature: 1) ad-editorial compatibility, 2) attitudes toward advertising in general,

3) product class involvement, 4) ad execution quality, 5) familiarity with the brand,
and 6) exposure to other media. The inclusion of these factors can accommodate the
selective attention perspective in the study of the effect of clutter.

Ad-Editorial Compatibilig

The concept of ad-editorial compatibility has been studied by researchers as
contextual involvement or mood congruency (Lord and Burkrant 1988; Srull 1990;
Norris and Colman 1992; Celuch and Slama 1993) -- the effect of interest in the
editorial content environment on advertising messages that are embedded in it.

Studies on contextual involvement such as involvement in television prograrrrs found
that viewers’ involvement in television programs has a spillover or distraction effect

on the commercials shown during breaks within programs. Lord and Bumkrant (1988)

65

explain how the role of involvement in programs affects the processing of
commercials by program elaboration effects. They have found that consumers who are
highly involved in the television programs they watched reduce their processing ability
and efficiency in television commercials, but increase their advertising recognition“
level. Incorporating different findings on the effects of contextual effect, Schumann
and Thorson (1989) propose that context magnifies the positive or negative evaluation
of advertisements. Empirical findings supported this notion of the magnifying effect
when the mood between the viewing context and the commercials is congruent
(Kamins, Marks and Skinner 1991).

The importance of ad-editorial compatibility in magazines to create a favorable
advertising environment for readers has been suggested by Compaigne (1982). Yi
(1990, 1993) found a priming effect of compatible magazine editorial articles on the
evaluation of the advertised brand. A compatible article makes the advertised product
attributes more accessible to the reader. Such a priming effect is more pronounced
among moderately knowledgeable consumers.

Attitudes toward Advertising in General (Aag)

Research on attitude toward advertising in general stems from the interest in
the public perception of the social effects of advertising (Haller 1974; Mittal 1993).
Advertising is viewed as a social institution and an instrument to promote products
(Sandage and Leckenby 1980; Muehling 1987). Consumers’ attitudes toward
advertising in general is now a regular item in surveys sponsored by the trade press

such as Advertising Age.

66

Early studies on attitudes toward advertising only measure and describe the
attitude without any theoretical inference. Recently, researchers have been attempting
to examine the effect of such attitude on advertising message involvement (James and
Kover 1992) and have found an inconsistency between attitude and behavior: negative
attitudes toward advertising is correlated with high advertising message involvement.
Their explanation is that individuals holding negative attitudes toward advertising are
more interested in exploring an ad for the purpose of identifying the "bad" things that
advertisements carry. Yet their results should be interpreted with caution because their
measure of involvement is only a single measure of the time spent on reading the
advertisements and the items in their attitude measure have mixed attitudes toward
advertising in a vehicle with attitudes toward advertising in general. Neither product
involvement nor motivational factor has been included in their measures. Overall,
these studies on attitude toward advertising in general view attitudes as a relatively
stable construction with cultural differences (Andrews, Lysonski and Durvasula 1991;
Parks 1993; Wentz 1993). For example, Americans hold a more positive attitude
toward advertising than Europeans. Moreover, the attitudes of consumers toward
advertising vary by media (Fawcett) and product type (Mittal 1993).

Involvement Theog

Unlike other learning situations in which an audience member is prepared to
process information, the learning of advertising messages is mostly incidental (Thorson
1989; Kent 1990). Different advertisements are arrayed in the same pod to form a

cluster where there is no meaningful connection among them. Seldom are consumers

67

self-motivated to watch or read the advertisements (Batra & Ray 1983). Involvement
theory can be an explanation of how consumers learn from advertisements under these
unfavorable conditions.

Involvement is the interest and perceived personal relevance of the involvement
object to an individual (Gill, Grossbart and Laczniak 1988; Vaughn 1987 ; Leigh and
Menon 1987; Zaichkowsky 1985; Lastovika and Gardner 1979). Involvement is
viewed as an important motivational factor that facilitates the attention toward and
comprehension of information (Celsi & Olson 1988; Andrews 1988; Greenwald and
Levitt 1984; Andrews, Durvasula and Akhter 1990; Laczniak, Muehling, and Carlson
1991; Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993). As the theory of involvement develops, the
construct of involvement becomes more sophisticated and different perspectives have
been offered to use this construct. The first controversy is whether involvement
should be measured as a dichotomous construct of high and low involvement or as a
continuum (Muehling, Laczniak and Stoltman 1991). Until now, most of the
involvement studies contrasted high and low involvement only. Even when moderate
involvement is taken into consideration (e.g., Zaichkowsky 1985), the classification of
involvement level is arbitrarily assigned by a certain percentage of involvement scores
of respondents rather than based on theory (Muehling, Laczniak, and Stoltman 1991).
The inability to contrast moderate involvement with high and low involvement led to
the abandonment of efforts to further investigate the appropriate measurement of
involvement as a continuum or dichotomy. The dichotomy of high versus low

involvement continues to dominate involvement studies.

68

However, this problem must be tackled before the construct can be adopted for
theoretical explanation of advertising information processing. The dichotomous
conception of involvement is based on left and right brain processing. Yet the essence
of the involvement construct should be the intensity of motivation or degree of -
personal relevance (Andrews, Durvasula and Akhter 1990; Ratchford 1987; Vaughn
1986; Zaichkowsky 1985), if the construct is to be employed as an intervening
variable for information processing research. If we adOpt the viewpoint of
involvement as a matter of intensity, then the appropriate measure of involvement
should be seen as a continuum.

Audience members undergoing different levels of involvement are subject to
different learning processes. Several studies have found that individuals learn
information involving their interests much faster and deeper than those who are not
involved (e.g., Bumkrant & Sawyer 1983; Gardner, Mitchell and Russo 1985; Ha
1986). When individuals are not involved, they learn passively through repetition
(Krugman 1986). Identifying the involvement level of audience to the message and
the medium will also enable us to understand how consumers’ involvement can
moderate the negative effect of advertising clutter.

Product class involvement theory posits that different types of product classes
engender consumers’ different involvement levels. Products that are perceived as
high-risk or high-cost, and require consumers to exert much effort in gathering
information are usually considered to be high involvement products to consumers.

Products that are perceived as low-risk or low-cost of which consumers do not exert

69

any effort to gather information are classified as low involvement products (Assael
1992). When consumers hold a strong belief on a product, no matter whether it is
positive or negative, their involvement in the product class is high. In advertising
research, product class involvement is often identified by the audience’s attention to
the product attribute information in the advertisements. The problem of such measure
is that product class involvement is a predispositional factor before exposure to
advertisements, attention to product attributes may be a result of interest in the product
caused by the advertising execution.
Ad Execution Qualig

Previously discussed in the selection and screening of advertising, ad execution
quality can be an important criterion for the ad to be selected for attention (Moriarty
1991a). This is especially so for the non-customer general readers because they are
not looking for shopping information when consuming the media. They browse the
ads in a magazine and those ads that provide entertainment or aesthetic value with
high execution quality will capture their attention (Wells 1993). From a marketer’s
viewpoint, non-customers may not be their target for persuasion, however, no one can
predict whether non-customers will be converted to customers at a later point in time.
A surplus of expected readership is always welcome.

Studies on ad execution quality are plagued by the lack of theoretical guidance.
Many of them were fragmented pieces examining the impact of various execution
factors on increasing attention and readership (Ruldoph 1947; Advertising Research

Foundation 1962; Starch 1966; Shimp and Yokum 1981; Houston and Scott 1984;

70
Reid et al. 1984; Stewart and Furse 1986; Gelb and Pickett 1983; Stewart and Koslow

1989; Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992). Rudolph’s (1947) pioneering attempt at this
type of research investigated the advertising effectiveness in terms of coupon replies
and recognition ratings of over 20 execution factors of 2,500 magazine ads. The -
presence of the execution factors such as narrative copy and humor are found to be
positively correlated to advertising effectiveness.

The recent largest scale research of this kind is Stewart and Furse’s (1986)
study and its replication (Stewart and Koslow 1989) on the effect of 160 execution
factors on recall and comprehension of brand name and ad claim. Both studies found
that brand differentiation is the technique that facilitates the most recall and
comprehension of the advertising message. They found only weak or no correlation
between most of the factors and effectiveness measure. The reason for this low
correlation may be caused by the wrong assumption that the execution factors in all
the commercials have been well-executed to represent the factors. Such assumption
may not be valid in most cases because the execution of that factor may vary greatly
in each commercial. One commercial may try to use the humor appeal, but'the
audience may not find it humorous if it is not executed skillfully. Relying on expert
judgment, these studies of execution quality generally lack an audience perspective and
presuppose the quality.

Familiarig with the Brand
Familiarity with the brand has been found to be an important moderator

between Aad and Ab (Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986; Cox and Locander 1987; Gill,

71

Grossbart and Laczniak 1988; Machleit and Wilson 1988). It weakens the association
between Aad and Ab. For example, Aad has the strongest effect on Ab in unfamiliar
brands but its effect greatly diminishes when the brand under study is a familiar brand.
Some of the research on familiarity, in fact, is a comparison between the persuasion
effect of the direct experience of product usage and the persuasion effect of the
indirect experience of advertising exposure (e.g., Edell and Burke 1986; Machleit and
Wilson 1988; Cox and Locander 1987; Yi 1993). Brand familiarity facilitates the
memory of a brand. A familiar brand is much more likely to be in the evoked set of a
consumer than unfamiliar brands (Baker et al. 1986).
Mm to Other hied_i_a

Exposure to other media is an area relatively undermined by advertising
researchers who use forced exposure settings in the laboratory to generate their results.
In real-life settings or field experiments, this is an important contaminating factor that
may jeopardize the results. The increase in message input to the individual can be
expected by his/her exposure to other media. Unfortunately, in most studies which
have measured delayed recall or advertising effects over time (e.g., Burke and Edell
1986; Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993), this factor of exposure to other media has not
been controlled or measured. Inference about the effect of exposure to other media
may be made from the literature on forgetting and interference.

The literature on forgetting is primarily based on the limited capacity of human
memory (Miller 1956; Seamon 1980). New messages will replace the old messages

unless these message have been stored in the long-term memory. A message

72

important to the individual is stored in the long-term memory and is less likely to be
subject to the forgetting effect (Battig 1979). Interference theory explains the
deleterious effect of exposure to other media by the interference between new and old
messages coming from several sources (Postman 1975). An individual will become
confused with the messages in the retrieval process. This confusion will worsen if the
messages are highly similar to one another (Keller 1991).

In short, a review of the literature indicates the inherent weaknesses in past
clutter research are its captive audience assumption and the narrow unidimensional
view of clutter. The selective attention to ads may be facilitated by factors such as
ad-editorial compatibility, attitudes toward advertising in general, product class
involvement, ad execution quality and brand familiarity. The negative effect of clutter
may be magnified by exposure to other media. How powerful these factors are in
countervailing the effect of clutter in magazines is a key question to be explored in

this study.

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES
Three Dimensions of Clutter

The literature review section points out that the problem of past
conceptualization of clutter is its failure to incorporate the selective attention behavior
of audiences. The effect of clutter can be countervailed by factors that affect selective
attention. These factors include ad-editorial compatibility, attitude toward advertising
in general, product category involvement, ad execution quality, familiarity with the
brand, and exposure to other media. To explain the effect of clutter in its entirety, it i
is proposed in this study that clutter should be viewed as having three dimensions --
quantity, competitiveness, and intrusiveness.

Advertising clutter is the density of advertisements in a media vehicle. It is the
context for consumers to evaluate the overall advertising environment in a media
vehicle. As many researchers (e.g., Webb 1979; Houston and Scott 1984; Ray and
Webb 1986; Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993) have pointed out, high clutter level
creates a difficult media environment in which consumers process advertising
messages. Due to the preoccupation with TV clutter in research on clutter, clutter has
been defined as "mass of commercials...which compete for listeners’ or viewers’
attention and the combination of which lessens the impact of any commercial single

message" (Irnber and Toffler 1987). This definition is a manifestation of overload

73

74

theory in explaining how advertising clutter impairs the processing of advertisements.
A weakness of such overload theory is that the psychological threat of overload may
occur even before the messages are processed. This threat may stimulate audience
members to become more selective to the advertisements in high clutter conditions-
than in low clutter situations. Moreover, the theory cannot explain why, under
cluttered conditions, some of the advertisements are still able to be remembered and
recognized (Brown and Rothschild 1993).

Traditionally, clutter has been viewed as a unidimensional concept that refers to
either the amount of non-editorial content or number of advertisements in a media
vehicle. It is synonymous with the degree of commercialization or advertising
intensity in a media vehicle. This is the way clutter was treated in studies conducted
by the industry and by many academic researchers (Mandese 1992; Otto 1984; Ray
and Webb 1979; Cobb 1985; Pillai 1990; Brown and Rothschild 1993). However, this
quantitative conception of clutter does not distinguish the difference between the
number of advertisements and the proportion of advertisements in the media vehicle.
In magazines, this distinction is important because some magazines try to compensate
the editorial space taken up by advertising clutter by increasing the number of editorial
pages to maintain the ad-editorial ratio.

While the quantitative dimension of clutter may explain the consumers’
overload in processing the advertising messages, the interference caused by clutter is
explained by the competition of similar messages (Kent 1990, 1993; Srull and Burke

1988; Keller 1987). The similarity of messages is conceptualized as the similarity of

75

the advertised products. This interference theory posits that consumers will group the
advertisements into different product categories during their processing of the
advertisements. Those that are in the same category will cause more interference than
those that are not. Similarity of stimuli will increase the likelihood of the forgetting
of messages because it demands high attentional resources from an individual (Seamon
1980). If advertising clutter actually affects the processing of advertisements because
of the similarity of the products, then a competitive dimension has to be added to the
quantitative dimension in the conceptualization of clutter.

The competitive dimension of clutter addresses the process during which
advertisements are being processed by the consumers. It can constitute a second
dimension of clutter. The impact of this competitive dimension of clutter has not been
tested empirically in advertising contexts. It is necessary to examine this competitive
dimension to see whether it complements the quantitative dimension of clutter in
causing the negative effect of clutter on ad processing. For the interference theory to
be valid, the competitive ads must be in the same pod or within close distance to
create that interference effect. This spatial dimension of competitiveness is based on
the perceptual organization of human beings (Pomerantz 1981; Kahneman and
Treisman 1984). Human beings tend to group things in close proximity as a unit. The
degree of competitiveness is unit-based. The spatial distance between the competitive
ads can enrich our understanding of the intensity of the competitiveness of the clutter.
In television, for example, the practice of product exclusivity within the same

commercial break presupposes that interference only occurs within the same break. In

76

print media, there are no such guidelines. The competitive ads may be next to each
other and at a few pages’ distance. It is reasonable to suspect that the closer the two
competitive ads are, the more interference will occur between the ads. Intrusiveness
is the third dimension of clutter that has been occasionally employed by researchers.
The degree of intrusiveness of advertising clutter is the extent to which clutter ,
interrupts the natural reading flow of the editorial content by cutting across the articles
with ads. Such intrusiveness in clutter has been observed by some researchers on TV
clutter who have defined clutter as the number of commercial breaks or interruptions
(Wicks 1991; Mord and Gilson 1985). This is similar to the distraction argument in
interference theory (Seamon 1980). A reader’s primary task in reading a magazine is
to read its editorial content. If an advertisement blocks the flow of an article, then the
article-reading task of an individual will be disrupted. An individual has to detemrine
whether to accept such interruption or avoid the interruption by not paying attention to
the ad. Applying the reactance theory to intrusive clutter situations, individuals will
resist the interruptions of their media consumption by intrusive clutter if the
intrusiveness is high enough to create that threat.

In this study, clutter will include all of these three dimensions to clarify its
impact on brand equity. It is posited that clutter exerts its effects on ad processing
before the ads are actually processed by stimulating the avoidance and screening of
advertisements. A combination of cognitive and affective approaches are employed to
explain the effect of clutter. Clutter affects first the affective component in advertising

processing -- attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle -- then it lowers an

77

individual’s motivation to process the advertisements. The three dimensions of clutter
that have been identified in this study are used to explain the three properties of clutter
that create such effects. It should be noted that such modifications of the overload
and interference theory do not preclude situations where actual processing of multiple
ads do occur. For instance, an individual who reads all the ads or most of the ads
with full attention in a magazine may directly apply the original overload and
interference theory in explaining ad processing.
The Research Model

The basic framework of this study is that advertising clutter affects brand
equity indirectly through affecting the attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle _
and advertising message involvement. Attitudes toward the ad, memory of the ad, and
resistance to competitive ads, which are affected by the attitude toward advertising in
a media vehicle and advertising message involvement, affect a brand’s equity.
However, with the presence of the countervailing factors, the effect of clutter on an
advertised brand’s equity can be greatly reduced. The magnitude of the effects of
such countervailing factors will be assessed in the study.

The research model in this study consists of three sets of factors: 1) the three
dimensions of clutter, 2) countervailing factors and other exogenous factors, and
3) measures of advertising effects. In total, seven exogenous variables and six
endogenous variables are studied in the model. The exogenous variables are l) clutter
level in three dimensions, 2) ad-editorial compatibility, 3) attitudes toward advertising

in general (Aag). 4) product category involvement, 5) advertising execution quality,

78

6) familiarity with the brand, and 7) exposure to other media. The six endogenous
variables (advertising effect measures) are 1) attitudes toward advertising in a vehicle
(Aav), 2) advertising message involvement (AMI), 3) attitudes toward the Ad (Aad),
4) memory of the ad, 5) resistance to competitive ads, and 6) brand equity. Figure‘2 is
an illustration of the research model for this study.

Hymtheses for Direct effects of Advertising Clutter

Clutter provides the context for consumers to evaluate the advertising
environment. The three dimensions of clutter explain the different mechanisms of how
clutter exerts its effects. Despite the different explanations, it is proposed that the
three dimensions yield the same negative impact on attitudes toward advertising in a
media vehicle and advertising message involvement.

Attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle (Aav) is a situation-specific
attitude which is formed when consumers are presented with a specific advertising
environment of a media vehicle. It is not as enduring as attitudes toward advertising
in general which are much broader in scope. This unstable nature of Aav can account
for change of attitudes over time when the individual introspects his/her attitude or
encounters new experiences (Carlston 1992; Wilson and Hodges 1992). Advertising
message involvement is the motivational state for a deeper processing of advertising
messages.

The quantity dimension of clutter is based on the overload theory that too .

many messages impair the processing of advertisements (Pillai 1990; J acoby, Speller

79

.332 .5533:
. ~ meant
to of Emzou manage; cm<
EoEozoE. ommmmoE m:_m_tm>c< _s_<
o_oEo> «52: a e. 93:33 c526“ 3353 >m<
Enema 5 ago??? “.533 3.553 m3.
Quint; «accomoccmv Scots 9.33323 .o 3.332

Quinta) maocomofiv wagons. 9:323:38 E

30595) maocomoxmv .256 he 2.29885

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

          

 

s - , , s
WM >H=NDO uCOEOZO>£ . -
peso 2: 5? 8.586 comes 3
bee___eod . 3 6:85 b___e_oee5o
1 3:23...
a» A
n.»

 

      
 

 

55cc _ u
985 mmocozmazc.
35258.5
535:0

        

 

 

    

 

no , -
n n: J.” some N w
0252.58 8 .850 Cu mmd‘
8833.3. 238.6

 

 

80
and Kohn 1974a and b; Ray and Webb 1986). Rather than restricted to an actual

overload, the notion of overload should be extended to the psychological threat of
possible overload to explain the effect of clutter. The high quantity of advertisements
heightens the alertness of an individual to the consequence of overload. Such ~
expected negative consequences of overload will foster that person to develop a
negative attitude .toward the clutter and also demotivate him/her from involving in the
advertising messages. This conforms to the notion of selective exposure in information
processing. However, in low quantity clutter condition, there is no threat of overload
and consumers will have a more positive attitude toward the advertisements in the
vehicle. Consumers will be more likely to become involved in an advertisement that .
interests them.

The competitive dimension of clutter is based on interference theory. The
theory also needs to be extended to an individual’s judgment of the competitiveness of
the advertisements before the actual processing of the ads. Research on competitive
interference has shown that there are differential interference effects by processing
goals. A between brand processing goal will facilitate the processing of competitive
advertisements because consumers have to compare brand information. By the same
token, consumers with a within brand processing goal will not welcome competitive
advertisements because their attentional resources on the brand of interest are taken
away from competitive ads. They will not be receptive to competitive ads. Kent
(1990) and Goodstein (1993) both demonstrate that the emphasis of one processing

goal can determine the depth of the processing of advertising messages. Similarity of

81

the messages can cause confusion. Such expected confusion may also divert the
interest in the ads and may generate a negative attitude toward advertising in a media
vehicle.

Intrusiveness of clutter is created by the need of the advertising industry to
increase the captivity of the audience. The intrusiveness of clutter makes it more
difficult for audience members to skip the ads. As discussed in Chapter 2 regarding
the conditions that consumers will read an advertisement, the perceived high efforts to
skip the advertisements can deter the advertising avoidance behavior. The effect of
the intrusiveness of advertising clutter is based on the individual’s psychological
discomfort and reluctance to submit to the interruption of ads when he/she is reading
editorial content. Inferred from reactance theory (Brehm 1966) and ego-defensive
theory (Freud 1946), such discomfort can create a negative attitude toward advertising
in a media vehicle because one of the functions of attitudes is ego—defensive (Fazio
1989).

Consumers’ perception of the intrusiveness of the clutter can occur before or
after the individual ads are being processed. Even though audience members may
reluctantly notice the ad because of inconvenience in intrusive clutter, they may not
process the ad deeply. The reason is that intrusiveness may foster a negative attitude
towards the clutter in the vehicle and lower the advertising message involvement of
the consumers. Such distinction between noted readership and high attention
readership has been well-recognized in Starch’s (1966) ad readership tests.

In short, the hypotheses on the effects of the three dimensions of clutter is a

82

modification of the cognitive-based theories of overload and interference. The
psychological-affective perspective of reactance and ego-defense are added to explain
the effects of intrusiveness of clutter. The general hypothesis is that the problem
created by clutter is not the difficulty in the actual processing or retrieval of '
information, but the creation of a psychological barrier to process the advertisements.
H1. The higher the clutter level, the more negative the attitude toward the
advertising in a media vehicle.

H2. The higher the clutter level, the lower the advertising message involvement.
Hypgtheses for Indirect Effects of Clutter

Brand equity is the bottom-line measure of advertising effects. It is
hypothesized that advertising builds a brand’s equity by inducing resistance to
competitive ads, creating a positive Aad, and making a presence in the memory of the
consumer. The indirect effects of clutter on brand equity is built upon the
relationships among different stages of advertising effects which include Aad, memory
of the ad, and resistance to competitive ads. These antecedents to brand equity are
affected by advertising message involvement. Advertising message involvement is
also affected by attitudes toward advertising in media vehicle. By affecting Aav and
AMI, advertising clutter affects a brand’s equity indirectly.

Attitudes serve a heuristic function in the screening of advertisements by
reducing efforts to process an individual ad through a evaluation of the general
advertising environment (Bargh 1989; Snyder and DeBono 1989; Fazio 1989;

Goodstein 1993). A positive Aav creates a pleasing environment for deeper processing

83

of advertising messages. It is predicted that the more positive the attitude toward

advertising in a vehicle is, the higher the advertising message involvement is.

H3a. The more positive the attitude toward advertising in a vehicle, the higher the
advertising message involvement. ~

Advertising message involvement is a motivational state for deeper ad
processing. Laczniak and Muehling (1993) found that individuals with higher
advertising message involvement have greater certainty regarding their judgments on
ads and have a more positive attitude toward the ad because of the deeper processing.
Deeper processing allows an individual to have an informed evaluation on a brand via
the central processing route. It is predicted in this study that similar results will be
obtained: higher message involvement will lead to a more positive Aad.

H3b. The higher the AMI, the more positive the Aad.

The impact of Aad on brand choice has been well articulated by the attitude
transfer hypothesis that a positive attitude toward the ad transfers to a positive attitude
toward the brand (e.g., Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992). A further extension of this
proposition is that this positive attitude facilitates the memory of an ad because a
positive memory is easier to be retrieved in memory tasks. In delayed recall situations
such as this study, memory of the ad is affected by the evaluation of the ad because a
positive evaluation increases the accessibility of the ad in memory retrieval. This has
been demonstrated in recent studies on the positive effect of Aad on memory
(Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993). It is predicted that the more positive the attitude

toward the ad is, the better the memory of the ad is.

84
H30. The more positive the attitude toward the ad, the better the memory of the ad.

The basic function of advertising is to distinguish a brand from another and
immunize consumers from competitive influence (Stewart 1992; Aaker 1991).‘
Inoculation theory has been offered as an explanation of how exposure to an ad can
fend off competitive ads: prior exposure to two-sided arguments induces resistance to
accept another competitive message (Pfau and Burgoon 1990; McGuire 1964).

Such a theory has not been supported by empirical evidence in product
advertising. In an attempt to apply the inoculation theory in general advertising
contexts, Goldstein (1982) shows that the theory is not appropriate for advertising in
general. Many ads are not direct comparisons between products and many consumers
do not pay much attention to the arguments in the ad. Moreover, many ads are not
information-based, making it difficult to apply the inoculation argument. It has also
been shown that both comparative and monadic advertising can achieve similar effect
in attitude change (McCollum Spielman Worldwide 1993). In fact, most ads offer
their own distinct perspective on the product to the consumers rather than compare
brands.

An alternative explanation of resistance to competitive ads by exposure to the
ad is the strength of the positiveness toward the ad. If a consumer buys into an ad, he
will have a strong positive Aad and this Aad will reduce the acceptance of another ad.
It is predicted that the more positive the attitude toward the ad is, the stronger the

resistance to the competitive ads in the same vehicle is.

85

H3d. The more positive the attitude toward the ad, the stronger the resistance to the
competitive ads in the same media vehicle.

The proposed research model will also test the inhibition hypothesis of the
effect of recall on the evoked set of consumers (Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991-).
According to this hypothesis, in a task calling for the retrieval of brand memory, the
presence of cues of one brand will inhibit the memory of the other brands although the
consumers may be familiar with all the brands. This inhibition will create a barrier in
the recall of competitive ads to the target ad to which the subject has been previously
exposed. It is predicted that the better the memory of the ad is, the stronger the
resistance to competitive ads is.
H3e. The better the memory of the ad, the stronger the resistance to competitive ads. .

Literature on Aad and brand attitude has established the positive association
between the two through the attitude transfer hypothesis (Shimp 1981; Aaker 1991;
Farquhar 1991; Machleit and Wilson 1988; Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986;
MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986) and the dual mediation of both Aad and cognition
of the brand (MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986). Aad also serves as an effort-saving
heuristic to make brand judgment (Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992; Fazio 1989)
because consumers can use an overall evaluation instead of assembling pieces of
product information to make decisions. It is predicted that the more positive the
attitude is toward the ad is, the higher the brand equity the advertised brand is.
H3f. The more positive the attitude toward the ad, the higher the brand equity of

the advertised brand.

86

The ability of a brand to stand against competitive messages is a prerequisite to
a high brand equity (Stewart 1992). When consumers can resist competitive messages,
it means that the persuasion of the advertised brand is successful. The degree to which
the consumer can resist competitive ads can indicate the strength of an ad. This ~
strength serves as the input in building a brand’s equity. It is predicted that the
stronger an individual’s resistance to competitive ads is, the higher the brand’s equity
to the individual is.
H3g. The stronger the resistance to competitive ads, the higher the brand equity.

Research on consumer choice has emphasized the importance of memory in the
consumer decision-making process. Many decisions are memory-based and brand
information is readily retrievable when consumers need to make a purchase decision
(Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991; Bettman 1979). The brand’s presence (Moran
1990) and the accessibility of the brand (W oodside and Trappey III 1992) determine
whether the brand will be in the consumer’s evoked set in making decisions. Since
brand equity is the rating of the value of a brand to an individual, it is predicted that
the better the target brand’s ad is remembered by the individual, the higher the brand
equity.
H3h. The better the memory of the ad, the higher the brand equity.
Hymtheses for Effects of Countervailing Factors

Selective attention plays an important role in the processing of advertisements.
When consumers are confronted with multiple messages, they can select messages

based on whether the ads are compatible with the content, their attitudes toward

87

advertising in general, their product category involvement, the execution quality of the
ads, and their familiarity with the brand.
A. Ad-editorial Compatibility

Ad-editorial compatibility is defrned as the degree to which the ads are ~
perceived by readers as part of the editorial content or complement the editorial
content. It is a contextual factor that affects the evaluation of advertisements in a
media vehicle. Compaigne (1982) compares the difference between ads that are
compatible with the editorial those that are not compatible. He concludes that ads that
are compatible with the editorial content of a magazine will be more effective because
readers are receptive to advertising in this situation. Such a view is shared by other
researchers on the impact of editorial environment on advertising effectiveness. The
congruity hypothesis States that editorial content can prime the audiences’ processing
of the advertisement if the editorial contents and advertisements are congruent to each
other (Celuch and Slama 1993; Kamins, Marks and Skinner 1991; Schumann and
Thorson 1989; Yi 1993). Based on such a hypothesis, it is predicted that the more
compatible with the editorial content the clutter is, the more positive the attitude
toward advertising in a media vehicle is.
H4. The more compatible the clutter with the editorial content, the more positive the

attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle.

B. Attitudes toward Advertising in General

Attitudes toward advertising in general (Aag) is defined as the overall

evaluation of advertising as an institution and instrument in the society without

88

reference to a particular vehicle or specific ad. Attitude researchers have drawn
inference on the linkage of one attitude to another related attitude by the attitude
transfer hypotheses (MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986; Abemethy and Rotfeld 1991)
and the associated system theory (Carlston 1992). In the absence of alternative -
explanations, such attitude transfer hypotheses will be tested in this study. It is
predicted that the more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the more
positive the attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle.
H5a. The more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the more positive
the attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle.

It has been assumed by researchers on advertising attitudes that a favorable
attitude toward advertising in general should facilitate the processing of
advertisements. Empirical evidence has been contradictory to this conventional
wisdom. In their study, James and Kover (1992) found that a "negative attitude toward
advertising arouses curiosity and efforts to critically examine the advertisements rather
than a positive attitude. It may be measurement problems that have caused this result
because only one measure of advertising message involvement is used in terms of time
spent on reading the ad. Nevertheless, this research model will follow their results
and predicts that the more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the lower
the advertising message involvement.

H5b. The more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the lower the
advertising message involvement.

C. Product Category Involvement

89

Product category involvement is defined as the degree of relevance of the
advertised product category to the readers of a media vehicle. A product category is
a group of products that serves the same function to a consumer, with similar shapes,
formats, or textures and can be substituted for one another in use. For example, *
though coffee and liquor are beverages, they are of different product categories
because they have different textures. The motivational function of product category
involvement has been stressed in information processing literature (Andrews 1988;
Batra and Ray 1983; Bumkrant and Sawyer 1983; Celsi and Olson 1988; Craig 1988).
Product involvement motivates people to search for product information and facilitates
their learning process. It is predicted that product category involvement countervails
the effect of clutter by increasing the advertising message involvement of the audience
of the involved product category.

H6. The higher the product category involvement, the higher the advertising
message involvement.
D. Advertising Execution Quality

Advertising execution quality is the rating of an advertisement ’s craftsmanship
and skillful use of attention-getting devices. The importance of execution factors to an
ad’s success has been recognized by many researchers (W alston and Moriarty 1992;
Stewart and Koslow 1989; Advertising Research Foundation 1962; Starch 1966;
Rudolph 1947). Their conception of execution quality, however, is the choice of a
wide variety of execution strategies such as brand-differentiating. messages and product

foci, not the craftsmanship that practitioners strive for. This approach is rather

90

fragmented because the presence of the execution factors does not mean that the
factors are well executed. The low explanatory power of ad execution devices on
recall and comprehension of the ad in Stewart and Koslow’s (1989) study shows the
weakness of such a approach in examining execution quality. ~
From another perspective, Unnava and Bumkrant (1992) illustrate that varying
execution can arouse and sustain interest in repeated advertising messages, countering
the wear-out of commercials. To assess the aesthetic value and attention-getting
devices of advertisements, a consumer’s rating is more relevant because he/she is the
target audience of the advertisements. Applying the uses and gratifications explanation
of media usage (Atkin 1985), high execution quality provides the sensory-satisfaction,
utility, and hedonic value of reading the ad (Olney, Holbrook and Batra 1991). It is
predicted that the better the perceived execution quality of the ad, the higher the
advertising message involvement. The aesthetic value of the ad arouses the
consumer’s interest in the ad and motivates him/her to process the ad more deeply. It
is also predicted that the satisfaction from the execution quality of the ad is caused by
its aesthetic and entertaining value. An individual will have a positive evaluation of
the ad if it is well-executed.
H 7a. The better the rating of the execution quality of the ad, the higher the
advertising message involvement.
H 7b. The better the rating of the execution quality of the ad, the more positive the
attitude toward the ad.

E. Familiarity with the Brand

91
Familiarity with the brand is defined as the number of brand-related

experiences that has been accumulated by the consumer (Alba and Hutchinson 1987).
Based on the mediation hypothesis of brand familiarity on attitude towards the ad and
brand equity (Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986; Cox and Locander 1987; Gill, *
Grossbart and Laczniak 1988; Machleit and Wilson 1988), familiarity with a brand
will lessen the positive effect of Aad on brand attitude. Since a positive brand attitude
is an essential component of brand equity, it is expected that if a respondent is
familiar with the focal brand, the effect of the Aad on brand equity will be decreased.
H8a. The higher the familiarity with the advertised brand, the lower the correlation
between attitude toward the ad and brand equity.

Studies on memory have confirmed the importance of familiarity in facilitating
the retrieval of memory. Familiar objects are recalled much better than unfamiliar
objects (Postman 1975; Brown 1975). Moreover, theories on reinforcement also
suggest that brand familiarity provides extra clues for the consumer to retrieve the
brand from memory as a result of repeated exposure to the brand (Berger 1993; Alba,
Hutchinson and Lynch 1991; Scissors and Bumba 1993). It is predicted that higher
familiarity with the brand leads to a better memory of the ad.

H8b. The higher the familiarity with the advertised brand, the better the memory of
its ad.
F. Exposure to other media
Exposure to other media is defined as the reported exposure to other editorial

media during the period of treatment. It serves as an exogenous moderating factor

92

rather than a countervailing factor because it magnifies the impact of advertising
clutter on brand equity. The exposure to other media means exposure to additional
advertising messages from other media. This factor has not been included in other
studies on clutter because they are conducted in laboratory settings with forced *
exposure. However, in field experiments, this distracting factor can greatly affect the
amount of advertising message input. It is also a common problem that advertisers
face when they place their ads. Their ads have to survive not only within a vehicle,
but also have to compete with other advertising messages in many vehicles that their
consumers are exposed to during the period. This negative effect of exposure to other
media on the memory of the ad can be explained by both the interference theory and
the overload theory. Interference theory will predict that exposure to other media
means new messages. These messages cause a retroactive interference effect by
weakening the recallability of old messages. Information overload theory predicts an
increase in information load after exposure to other media. Such an increase in
message load may overload the consumers. The expected result will be a loss of
memory of the ad because sufficient memory resource is not given to the focal ad.
H9. The more the exposure to other media, the poorer the memory of the focal ad.
Assumptions of the research model

The research model proposed in this study has made the following assumptions
based on past advertising literature:
1. The primary reason for a consumer to consume a media vehicle is to read its

editorial content. Very few readers seek only advertisements in editorial

93
media (Batra and Ray 1983; Thorson 1990).

2. Editorial content and advertisements are two distinct domains in a reader’s mind.
Otherwise, the notion of intrusiveness of advertising clutter would not be valid.

3. Consumers are able to identify similar product categories in their processing of ‘
advertisements. This list identification ability of the consumers is the foundation
of competitiveness (Postman 1975).

4. Non-customers of an advertised product will only be interested in the entertainment

value of the ad while customers will be interested in both the entertainment
and information value of the ad (Wells 1993; Lannon 1993).

5. Under a leisure environment, most individuals will browse the pages before
deciding what to read. They will form a general impression of the advertising
clutter level in a media vehicle before reading specific ads.

6. Attitudes toward advertising in general are a more stable and enduring construct.
Attitudes toward advertising in a vehicle are situation specific, and attitudes toward
the ad is ad-specific and change with different ads.

7. If an attitude does not exert any effect, the inference will be that the attitude is not
strong enough to be accessible to affect decision or behavior. The effect of an
attitude depends on its strength and accessibility at the time of decision-making

(Fazio 1989; Snyder and DeBono 1991).

Chapter 4
METHODOLOGY
Research Design

Experimental designs allow a researcher to make a causal inference by
observing different outcomes from the manipulation of the treatment variables and
control for other variables (Cook and Campbell 1979). To test the proposed research
model on the effect of clutter, a field experiment with three different treatments was
conducted on consumer magazines. Each treatment manipulated one of the three
dimensions of advertising clutter -- quantity, competitiveness, and intrusiveness, while
controlling for the other two dimensions. Brand equity and other measures of
advertising effects of a focal brand in a magazine were compared between high and
low clutter levels. If the focal brand could not be recalled, then the best-remembered
brand was used as a substitute.

Initially, the experiment was a three-wave pretest-posttest within-subjects
design. Such a design can detect any ceiling and floor effect of the subjects and
measure the subjects by treatment interaction. Moreover, it has a much higher
statistical power than a between-subjects design because complete data are available
accounting for a change after the treatment (Hunter and Schmidt 1990). It is
particularly appropriate in advertising research because repeated exposure to an

advertising stimulus is a common experience among consumers. To avoid the problem

94

95

of history and other threats to internal validity of the measurement in pretest-posttest
design, equivalent but not identical stimulus materials were employed in each stage
(Campbell and Stanley 1966).

The stimulus materials for the experiment were two issues of a dummy 70-page
weekly magazine created by the author which was tailored to the taste of college
students (The contents of the magazine are listed in Appendix B). Each issue was a
mix of articles and advertisements excerpted from different issues of three popular
magazines read by college students: Details, Selfi and Mademoiselle. Except for the
necessary deletion of two editorial articles in high quantity clutter manipulation, and
the preservation of the natural pagination of the ads, the editorial contents of the
dummy magazines were basically identical in all treatments in each issue.

The ads chosen for this study were comprised of 41 ads of 32 product
categories which actually appeared in the real magazines. The products encompassed
the top ten advertising product categories in magazines and represented magazine
advertisers in the US. The choice of real magazine articles and ads ensured the
professional quality of the stimulus materials and added realism to the experiment.
Sampling and Procedures

The sample for the experiment were recruited from students enrolled in
university general education classes, such as College Algebra and The Role of
Language in Human Society. This could ensure that subjects constituted a
representative sample of the college population. Subjects voluntarily participated in

the study. As an incentive to encourage participation, each respondent receive a small

96
gift of a retractable ball point pen after completing the experiment. The expected total

sample size was 150, 50 for each clutter dimension treatment.

The focal brand in this study was Spiegel, a catalog clothing brand. It was
selected because it was the highest rated advertisement in product involvement and
execution quality, but relatively low in brand familiarity in a screening session. In the
screening session, a group of 10 college students rated 19 ads with competitive ads
available to the author and rated 10 proposed titles of the dummy magazine. College
Voice was chosen as the title because it was the best rated title in that session. Before
the actual study, a pre-test was conducted on another group of 18 students in a
midwestem university. Subjects reported no difficulty in understanding and answering
the questions in a feedback questionnaire. A few of the subjects did not skip after the
screening questions as instructed and their answers in inappropriate questions were
dropped. To avoid this problem in screening questions, clearer instructions with
examples were given in the questionnaires in the actual experiment. For example, all
skip instructions were in bold type. All these students did not participate in the actual
experiment.

Before the experiment, subjects filled out a questionnaire on information of
predispositional variables such as their general attitudes toward advertising,
demographic variables such as sex and family income, psychographic variables such as
introvertlextrovert, and their general magazine reading habits. The study was
conducted under the guise of a preview of a new magazine for college students.

Subjects were told to evaluate the magazine as potential subscribers and were given

97

the dummy weekly magazine for a weekend to examine. They were asked to read the
magazine as much as they wanted during their own leisure time. The reasons for
asking students to read the magazine during weekends were to approximate the reality
of magazine reading as a leisure activity and to avoid the confounding effect of '
students’ busy schedule during weekdays. After the weekend, information about their
responses to the magazine and advertisements was collected in a questionnaire. They
were then given another issue of the magazine for examination and answered an
almost identical questionnaire again in the following week referring to the second
issue that they read. The difference between the second and the third questionnaire
was that the third questionnaire contained manipulation check questions. The third
questionnaire also asked about any sensitization effect of the second questionnaire on
their magazine reading and answering to the third questionnaire. Altogether, each
subject was given two issues for two consecutive weeks with a high level and a low
level in either dimension of clutter, respectively, and had to answer three
questionnaires.

To control for the possible sensitization to the repeated exposure of the
research instruments, high and low clutter conditions were randomly assigned to half
of the subjects in each experimental session. The treatment was also randomly
assigned to the subjects. The ads used in the low clutter level would be used again in
the high clutter level while different or more ads would be inserted in the high clutter
level as appropriate. The position of the focal ad was to be rotated among different

copies to control for the positioning effect of the advertisements. All the

98

advertisements used in the experiment were full-page four color ads which are the
most common form of magazine advertising unit. The potential confounding effect of
ad size could thus be avoided. Moreover, none of the ads used in this study were
comparative advertising, so that the resistance to competitive ads would not be caused
from the creative approach of the ad. The effect of repeated exposure to the ads and
the amount of time spent on reading the magazine would be controlled statistically.

The questionnaires employed in the study contained measures of both the
variables in the research model and several filler questions about the content quality of
the magazine, to distract the subjects from the real purpose of the study. This could
avert a heightened alertness to the ads during the experiments. To avoid the effect of
prior exposure to the content of the magazine on subjects’ responses, data from
subjects who reported reading more than three articles in the dummy magazine
previously were excluded from the analysis.
Omrationalization of Exogenous Variables
Advertising clutter

Advertising clutter is defined as the density of advertisements in a media vehicle.
Such density is constituted by three dimensions: quantity, competitiveness, and
intrusiveness. Most of the past studies only operationalized clutter as the number of
commercials within the commercial break of a short TV program segment (Brown and
Rothschild 1993; Pillai 1990; Cobb 1985; Webb and Ray 1979). The number of
advertisements counted as high or low clutter was arbitrarily determined. This study

attempts to correct this arbitrariness by using composite indices. The indices include

80
and Kohn 1974a and b; Ray and Webb 1986). Rather than restricted to an actual

overload, the notion of overload should be extended to the psychological threat of
possible overload to explain the effect of clutter. The high quantity of advertisements
heightens the alertness of an individual to the consequence of overload. Such ~
expected negative consequences of overload will foster that person to develop a
negative attitude .toward the clutter and also demotivate him/her from involving in the
advertising messages. This conforms to the notion of selective exposure in information
processing. However, in low quantity clutter condition, there is no threat of overload
and consumers will have a more positive attitude toward the advertisements in the
vehicle. Consumers will be more likely to become involved in an advertisement that _
interests them.

The competitive dimension of clutter is based on interference theory. The
theory also needs to be extended to an individual’s judgment of the competitiveness of
the advertisements before the actual processing of the ads. Research on competitive
interference has shown that there are differential interference effects by processing
goals. A between brand processing goal will facilitate the processing of competitive
advertisements because consumers have to compare brand information. By the same
token, consumers with a within brand processing goal will not welcome competitive
advertisements because their attentional resources on the brand of interest are taken
away from competitive ads. They will not be receptive to competitive ads. Kent
(1990) and Goodstein (1993) both demonstrate that the emphasis of one processing

goal can determine the depth of the processing of advertising messages. Similarity of

81

the messages can cause confusion. Such expected confusion may also divert the
interest in the ads and may generate a negative attitude toward advertising in a media
vehicle.

Intrusiveness of clutter is created by the need of the advertising industry to
increase the captivity of the audience. The intrusiveness of clutter makes it more
difficult for audience members to skip the ads. As discussed in Chapter 2 regarding
the conditions that consumers will read an advertisement, the perceived high efforts to
skip the advertisements can deter the advertising avoidance behavior. The effect of
the intrusiveness of advertising clutter is based on the individual’s psychological
discomfort and reluctance to submit to the interruption of ads when he/she is reading
editorial content. Inferred from reactance theory (Brehm 1966) and ego-defensive
theory (Freud 1946), such discomfort can create a negative attitude toward advertising
in a media vehicle because one of the functions of attitudes is ego-defensive (Fazio
1989).

Consumers’ perception of the intrusiveness of the clutter can occur before or
after the individual ads are being processed. Even though audience members may
reluctantly notice the ad because of inconvenience in intrusive clutter, they may not
process the ad deeply. The reason is that intrusiveness may foster a negative attitude
towards the clutter in the vehicle and lower the advertising message involvement of
the consumers. Such distinction between noted readership and high attention
readership has been well-recognized in Starch’s (1966) ad readership tests.

In short, the hypotheses on the effects of the three dimensions of clutter is a

82

modification of the cognitive-based theories of overload and interference. The
psychological-affective perspective of reactance and ego-defense are added to explain
the effects of intrusiveness of clutter. The general hypothesis is that the problem
created by clutter is not the difficulty in the actual processing or retrieval of "
information, but the creation of a psychological barrier to process the advertisements.
H1. The higher the clutter level, the more negative the attitude toward the
advertising in a media vehicle.

H2. The higher the clutter level, the lower the advertising message involvement.
Hypotheses for Indirect Effects of Clutter

Brand equity is the bottom-line measure of advertising effects. It is
hypothesized that advertising builds a brand’s equity by inducing resistance to
competitive ads, creating a positive Aad, and making a presence in the memory of the
consumer. The indirect effects of clutter on brand equity is built upon the
relationships among different stages of advertising effects which include Aad, memory
of the ad, and resistance to competitive ads. These antecedents to brand equity are
affected by advertising message involvement. Advertising message involvement is
also affected by attitudes toward advertising in media vehicle. By affecting Aav and
AMI, advertising clutter affects a brand’s equity indirectly.

Attitudes serve a heuristic function in the screening of advertisements by
reducing efforts to process an individual ad through a evaluation of the general
advertising environment (Bargh 1989; Snyder and DeBono 1989; Fazio 1989;

Goodstein 1993). A positive Aav creates a pleasing environment for deeper processing

83

of advertising messages. It is predicted that the more positive the attitude toward

advertising in a vehicle is, the higher the advertising message involvement is.

H3a. The more positive the attitude toward advertising in a vehicle, the higher the
advertising message involvement. ~

Advertising message involvement is a motivational state for deeper ad
processing. Laczniak and Muehling (1993) found that individuals with higher
advertising message involvement have greater certainty regarding their judgments on
ads and have a more positive attitude toward the ad because of the deeper processing.
Deeper processing allows an individual to have an informed evaluation on a brand via
the central processing route. It is predicted in this study that similar results will be
obtained: higher message involvement will lead to a more positive Aad.

H3b. The higher the AMI, the more positive the Aad.

The impact of Aad on brand choice has been well articulated by the attitude
transfer hypothesis that a positive attitude toward the ad transfers to a positive attitude
toward the brand (e.g., Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992). A further extension of this
proposition is that this positive attitude facilitates the memory of an ad because a
positive memory is easier to be retrieved in memory tasks. In delayed recall situations
such as this study, memory of the ad is affected by the evaluation of the ad because a
positive evaluation increases the accessibility of the ad in memory retrieval. This has
been demonstrated in recent studies on the positive effect of Aad on memory
(Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993). It is predicted that the more positive the attitude

toward the ad is, the better the memory of the ad is.

84
H3c. The more positive the attitude toward the ad, the better the memory of the ad.

The basic function of advertising is to distinguish a brand from another and
immunize consumers from competitive influence (Stewart 1992; Aaker 1991)..
Inoculation theory has been offered as an explanation of how exposure to an ad can
fend off competitive ads: prior exposure to two-sided arguments induces resistance to
accept another competitive message (Pfau and Burgoon 1990; McGuire 1964).

Such a theory has not been supported by empirical evidence in product
advertising. In an attempt to apply the inoculation theory in general advertising
contexts, Goldstein (1982) shows that the theory is not appropriate for advertising in
general. Many ads are not direct comparisons between products and many consumers
do not pay much attention to the arguments in the ad. Moreover, many ads are not
information-based, making it difficult to apply the inoculation argument. It has also
been shown that both comparative and monadic advertising can achieve similar effect
in attitude change (McCollum Spielman Worldwide 1993). In fact, most ads offer
their own distinct perspective on the product to the consumers rather than compare
brands.

An alternative explanation of resistance to competitive ads by exposure to the
ad is the strength of the positiveness toward the ad. If a consumer buys into an ad, he
will have a strong positive Aad and this Aad will reduce the acceptance of another ad.
It is predicted that the more positive the attitude toward the ad is, the stronger the

resistance to the competitive ads in the same vehicle is.

85
H3d. The more positive the attitude toward the ad, the stronger the resistance to the

competitive ads in the some media vehicle.

The proposed research model will also test the inhibition hypothesis of the
effect of recall on the evoked set of consumers (Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 19913.
According to this hypothesis, in a task calling for the retrieval of brand memory, the
presence of cues of one brand will inhibit the memory of the other brands although the
consumers may be familiar with all the brands. This inhibition will create a barrier in
the recall of competitive ads to the target ad to which the subject has been previously
exposed. It is predicted that the better the memory of the ad is, the stronger the
resistance to competitive ads is.
H3e. The better the memory of the ad, the stronger the resistance to competitive ads.

Literature on Aad and brand attitude has established the positive association
between the two through the attitude transfer hypothesis (Shimp 1981; Aaker 1991;
Farquhar 1991; Machleit and Wilson 1988; Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986;
MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986) and the dual mediation of both Aad and cognition
of the brand (MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986). Aad also serves as an effort-saving
heuristic to make brand judgment (Biehal, Stephens and Curlo 1992; Fazio 1989)
because consumers can use an overall evaluation instead of assembling pieces of
product information to make decisions. It is predicted that the more positive the
attitude is toward the ad is, the higher the brand equity the advertised brand is.
H3f. The more positive the attitude toward the ad, the higher the brand equity of

the advertised brand.

86

The ability of a brand to stand against competitive messages is a prerequisite to
a high brand equity (Stewart 1992). When consumers can resist competitive messages,
it means that the persuasion of the advertised brand is successful. The degree to which
the consumer can resist competitive ads can indicate the strength of an ad. This -
strength serves as the input in building a brand’s equity. It is predicted that the
stronger an individual’s resistance to competitive ads is, the higher the brand’s equity
to the individual is.
H3g. The stronger the resistance to competitive ads, the higher the brand equity.

Research on consumer choice has emphasized the importance of memory in the
consumer decision-making process. Many decisions are memory-based and brand
information is readily retrievable when consumers need to make a purchase decision
(Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991; Bettrnan 1979). The brand’s presence (Moran
1990) and the accessibility of the brand (Woodside and Trappey III 1992) determine
whether the brand will be in the consumer’s evoked set in making decisions. Since
brand equity is the rating of the value of a brand to an individual, it is predicted that
the better the target brand’s ad is remembered by the individual, the higher the brand
equity.
H3h. The better the memory of the ad, the higher the brand equity.
Hymtheses for Effects of Countervailing Factors

Selective attention plays an important role in the processing of advertisements.
When consumers are confronted with multiple messages, they can select messages

based on whether the ads are compatible with the content, their attitudes toward

87

advertising in general, their product category involvement, the execution quality of the
ads, and their familiarity with the brand.
A. Ad-editorial Compatibility

Ad-editorial compatibility is defined as the degree to which the ads are *
perceived by readers as part of the editorial content or complement the editorial
content. It is a contextual factor that affects the evaluation of advertisements in a
media vehicle. Compaigne (1982) compares the difference between ads that are
compatible with the editorial those that are not compatible. He concludes that ads that
are compatible with the editorial content of a magazine will be more effective because
readers are receptive to advertising in this situation. Such a view is shared by other
researchers on the impact of editorial environment on advertising effectiveness. The
congruity hypothesis-states that editorial content can prime the audiences’ processing
of the advertisement if the editorial contents and advertisements are congruent to each
other (Celuch and Slama 1993; Kamins, Marks and Skinner 1991; Schumann and
Thorson 1989; Yi 1993). Based on such a hypothesis, it is predicted that the more
compatible with the editorial content the clutter is, the more positive the attitude
toward advertising in a media vehicle is.
H4. The more compatible the clutter with the editorial content, the more positive the

attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle.

B. Attitudes toward Advertising in General

Attitudes toward advertising in general (Aag) is defined as the overall

evaluation of advertising as an institution and instrument in the society without

88

reference to a particular vehicle or specific ad. Attitude researchers have drawn
inference on the linkage of one attitude to another related attitude by the attitude
transfer hypotheses (MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch 1986; Abemethy and Rotfeld 1991)
and the associated system theory (Carlston 1992). In the absence of alternative -
explanations, such attitude transfer hypotheses will be tested in this study. It is
predicted that the more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the more
positive the attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle.
H5a. The more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the more positive
the attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle.

It has been assumed by researchers on advertising attitudes that a favorable
attitude toward advertising in general should facilitate the processing of
advertisements. Empirical evidence has been contradictory to this conventional
wisdom. In their study, James and Kover (1992) found that a negative attitude toward
advertising arouses curiosity and efforts to critically examine the advertisements rather
than a positive attitude. It may be measurement problems that have caused this result
because only one measure of advertising message involvement is used in terms of time
spent on reading the ad. Nevertheless, this research model will follow their results
and predicts that the more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the lower
the advertising message involvement.

H5b. The more positive the attitude toward advertising in general, the lower the
advertising message involvement.

C. Product Category Involvement

89

Product category involvement is defined as the degree of relevance of the
advertised product category to the readers of a media vehicle. A product category is
a group of products that serves the same function to a consumer, with similar shapes,
formats, or textures and can be substituted for one another in use. For example, '
though coffee and liquor are beverages, they are of different product categories
because they have different textures. The motivational function of product category
involvement has been stressed in information processing literature (Andrews 1988;
Batra and Ray 1983; Bumkrant and Sawyer 1983; Celsi and Olson 1988; Craig 1988).
Product involvement motivates people to search for product information and facilitates
their learning process. It is predicted that product category involvement countervails
the effect of clutter by increasing the advertising message involvement of the audience
of the involved product category.

H6. The higher the product category involvement, the higher the advertising
message involvement.
D. Advertising Execution Quality

Advertising execution quality is the rating of an advertisement 's craftsmanship
and skillful use of attention-getting devices. The importance of execution factors to an
ad’s success has been recognized by many researchers (Walston and Moriarty 1992;
Stewart and Koslow 1989; Advertising Research Foundation 1962; Starch 1966;
Rudolph 1947). Their conception of execution quality, however, is the choice of a
wide variety of execution strategies such as brand-differentiating. messages and product

foci, not the craftsmanship that practitioners strive for. This approach is rather

9O

fragmented because the presence of the execution factors does not mean that the
factors are well executed. The low explanatory power of ad execution devices on
recall and comprehension of the ad in Stewart and Koslow’s (1989) study shows the
weakness of such a approach in examining execution quality. ~
From another perspective, Unnava and Bumkrant (1992) illustrate that varying
execution can arouse and sustain interest in repeated advertising messages, countering
the wear-out of commercials. To assess the aesthetic value and attention-getting
devices of advertisements, a consumer’s rating is more relevant because he/she is the
target audience of the advertisements. Applying the uses and gratifications explanation
of media usage (Atkin 1985), high execution quality provides the sensory-satisfaction,
utility, and hedonic value of reading the ad (Olney, Holbrook and Batra 1991). It is
predicted that the better the perceived execution quality of the ad, the higher the
advertising message involvement. The aesthetic value of the ad arouses the
consumer’s interest in the ad and motivates him/her to process the ad more deeply. It
is also predicted that the satisfaction from the execution quality of the ad is caused by
its aesthetic and entertaining value. An individual will have a positive evaluation of
the ad if it is well—executed.
H7a. The better the rating of the execution quality of the ad, the higher the
advertising message involvement.
H 7b. The better the rating of the execution quality of the ad, the more positive the
attitude toward the ad.

E. Familiarity with the Brand

91
Familiarity with the brand is defined as the number of brand-related

experiences that has been accumulated by the consumer (Alba and Hutchinson 1987).
Based on the mediation hypothesis of brand familiarity on attitude towards the ad and
brand equity (Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986; Cox and Locander 1987; Gill, '
Grossbart and Laczniak 1988; Machleit and Wilson 1988), familiarity with a brand
will lessen the positive effect of Aad on brand attitude. Since a positive brand attitude
is an essential component of brand equity, it is expected that if a respondent is
familiar with the focal brand, the effect of the Aad on brand equity will be decreased.
H8a. The higher the familiarity with the advertised brand, the lower the correlation
between attitude toward the ad and brand equity.

Studies on memory have confirmed the importance of familiarity in facilitating
the retrieval of memory. Familiar objects are recalled much better than unfamiliar
objects (Postman 1975; Brown 1975). Moreover, theories on reinforcement also
suggest that brand familiarity provides extra clues for the consumer to retrieve the
brand from memory as a result of repeated exposure to the brand (Berger 1993; Alba,
Hutchinson and Lynch 1991; Scissors and Bumba 1993). It is predicted that higher
familiarity with the brand leads to a better memory of the ad.

H8b. The higher the familiarity with the advertised brand, the better the memory of
its ad.
F. Exposure to other media
Exposure to other media is defined as the reported exposure to other editorial

media during the period of treatment. It serves as an exogenous moderating factor

92

rather than a countervailing factor because it magnifies the impact of advertising
clutter on brand equity. The exposure to other media means exposure to additional
advertising messages from other media. This factor has not been included in other
studies on clutter because they are conducted in laboratory settings with forced '
exposure. However, in field experiments, this distracting factor can greatly affect the
amount of advertising message input. It is also a common problem that advertisers
face when they place their ads. Their ads have to survive not only within a vehicle,
but also have to compete with other advertising messages in many vehicles that their
consumers are exposed to during the period. This negative effect of exposure to other
media on the memory of the ad can be explained by both the interference theory and
the overload theory. Interference theory will predict that exposure to other media
means new messages. These messages cause a retroactive interference effect by
weakening the recallability of old messages. Information overload theory predicts an
increase in information load after exposure to other media. Such an increase in
message load may overload the consumers. The expected result will be a loss of
memory of the ad because sufficient memory resource is not given to the focal ad.
H9. The more the exposure to other media, the poorer the memory of the focal ad.
Assumptions of the research model

The research model proposed in this study has made the following assumptions
based on past advertising literature:
1. The primary reason for a consumer to consume a media vehicle is to read its

editorial content. Very few readers seek only advertisements in editorial

93
media (Batra and Ray 1983; Thorson 1990).

2. Editorial content and advertisements are two distinct domains in a reader’s mind.
Otherwise, the notion of intrusiveness of advertising clutter would not be valid.

3. Consumers are able to identify similar product categories in their processing of ‘
advertisements. This list identification ability of the consumers is the foundation
of competitiveness (Postman 1975).

4. Non-customers of an advertised product will only be interested in the entertainment

value of the ad while customers will be interested in both the entertainment
and information value of the ad (Wells 1993; Lannon 1993).

5. Under a leisure environment, most individuals will browse the pages before
deciding what to read. They will form a general impression of the advertising
clutter level in a media vehicle before reading specific ads.

6. Attitudes toward advertising in general are a more stable and enduring construct.
Attitudes toward advertising in a vehicle are situation specific, and attitudes toward
the ad is ad-specific and change with different ads.

7. If an attitude does not exert any effect, the inference will be that the attitude is not
strong enough to be accessible to affect decision or behavior. The effect of an
attitude depends on its strength and accessibility at the time of decision-making

(Fazio 1989; Snyder and DeBono 1991).

Chapter 4
METHODOLOGY
Research Design

Experimental designs allow a researcher to make a causal inference by
observing different outcomes from the manipulation of the treatment variables and
control for other variables (Cook and Campbell 1979). To test the proposed research
model on the effect of clutter, a field experiment with three different treatments was
conducted on consumer magazines. Each treatment manipulated one of the three
dimensions of advertising clutter -- quantity, competitiveness, and intrusiveness, while
controlling for the other two dimensions. Brand equity and other measures of
advertising effects of a focal brand in a magazine were compared between high and
low clutter levels. If the focal brand could not be recalled, then the best-remembered
brand was used as a substitute.

Initially, the experiment was a three-wave pretest-posttest within-subjects
design. Such a design can detect any ceiling and floor effect of the subjects and
measure the subjects by treatment interaction. Moreover, it has a much higher
statistical power than a between-subjects design because complete data are available
accounting for a change after the treatment (Hunter and Schmidt 1990). It is
particularly appropriate in advertising research because repeated exposure to an

advertising stimulus is a common experience among consumers. To avoid the problem

94

95

of history and other threats to internal validity of the measurement in pretest-posttest
design, equivalent but not identical stimulus materials were employed in each stage
(Campbell and Stanley 1966).

The stimulus materials for the experiment were two issues of a dummy 70-page
weekly magazine created by the author which was tailored to the taste of college
students (The contents of the magazine are listed in Appendix B). Each issue was a
mix of articles and advertisements excerpted from different issues of three popular
magazines read by college students: Details, Self and Mademoiselle. Except for the
necessary deletion of two editorial articles in high quantity clutter manipulation, and
the preservation of the natural pagination of the ads, the editorial contents of the
dummy magazines were basically identical in all treatments in each issue.

The ads chosen for this study were comprised of 41 ads of 32 product
categories which actually appeared in the real magazines. The products encompassed
the top ten advertising product categories in magazines and represented magazine
advertisers in the US. The choice of real magazine articles and ads ensured the
professional quality of the stimulus materials and added realism to the experiment.
Sampling and Procedures

The sample for the experiment were recruited from students enrolled in
university general education classes, such as College Algebra and The Role of
Language in Human Society. This could ensure that subjects constituted a
representative sample of the college population. Subjects voluntarily participated in

the study. As an incentive to encourage participation, each respondent receive a small

96
gift of a retractable ball point pen after completing the experiment. The expected total

sample size was 150, 50 for each clutter dimension treatment.

The focal brand in this study was Spiegel, a catalog clothing brand. It was
selected because it was the highest rated advertisement in product involvement and
execution quality, but relatively low in brand familiarity in a screening session. In the
screening session, a group of 10 college students rated 19 ads with competitive ads
available to the author and rated 10 proposed titles of the dummy magazine. College
Voice was chosen as the title because it was the best rated title in that session. Before
the actual study, a pre-test was conducted on another group of 18 students in a
midwestem university. Subjects reported no difficulty in understanding and answering
the questions in a feedback questionnaire. A few of the subjects did not skip after the
screening questions as instructed and their answers in inappropriate questions were
dropped. To avoid this problem in screening questions, clearer instructions with
examples were given in the questionnaires in the actual experiment. For example, all
skip instructions were in bold type. All these students did not participate in the actual
experiment.

Before the experiment, subjects filled out a questionnaire on information of
predispositional variables such as their general attitudes toward advertising,
demographic variables such as sex and family income, psychographic variables such as
introvert/extrovert, and their general magazine reading habits. The study was
conducted under the guise of a preview of a new magazine for college students.

Subjects were told to evaluate the magazine as potential subscribers and were given

97

the dummy weekly magazine for a weekend to examine. They were asked to read the
magazine as much as they wanted during their own leisure time. The reasons for
asking students to read the magazine during weekends were to approximate the reality
of magazine reading as a leisure activity and to avoid the confounding effect of “
students’ busy schedule during weekdays. After the weekend, information about their
responses to the magazine and advertisements was collected in a questionnaire. They
were then given another issue of the magazine for examination and answered an
almost identical questionnaire again in the following week referring to the second
issue that they read. The difference between the second and the third questionnaire
was that the third questionnaire contained manipulation check questions. The third
questionnaire also asked about any sensitization effect of the second questionnaire on
their magazine reading and answering to the third questionnaire. Altogether, each
subject was given two issues for two consecutive weeks with a high level and a low
level in either dimension of clutter, respectively, and had to answer three
questionnaires.

To control for the possible sensitization to the repeated exposure of the
research instruments, high and low clutter conditions were randomly assigned to half
of the subjects in each experimental session. The treatment was also randomly
assigned to the subjects. The ads used in the low clutter level would be used again in
the high clutter level while different or more ads would be inserted in the high clutter
level as appropriate. The position of the focal ad was to be rotated among different

copies to control for the positioning effect of the advertisements. All the

98

advertisements used in the experiment were full-page four color ads which are the
most common form of magazine advertising unit. The potential confounding effect of
ad size could thus be avoided. Moreover, none of the ads used in this study were
comparative advertising, so that the resistance to competitive ads would not be caused
from the creative approach of the ad. The effect of repeated exposure to the ads and
the amount of time spent on reading the magazine would be controlled statistically.

The questionnaires employed in the study contained measures of both the
variables in the research model and several filler questions about the content quality of
the magazine, to distract the subjects from the real purpose of the study. This could
avert a heightened alertness to the ads during the experiments. To avoid the effect of
prior exposure to the content of the magazine on subjects’ responses, data from
subjects who reported reading more than three articles in the dummy magazine
previously were excluded from the analysis.
Ogrationalization of Exogenous Variables
Advertising clutter

Advertising clutter is defined as the density of advertisements in a media vehicle.
Such density is constituted by three dimensions: quantity, competitiveness, and
intrusiveness. Most of the past studies only operationalized clutter as the number of
commercials within the commercial break of a short TV program segment (Brown and
Rothschild 1993; Pillai 1990; Cobb 1985; Webb and Ray 1979). The number of
advertisements counted as high or low clutter was arbitrarily determined. This study

attempts to correct this arbitrariness by using composite indices. The indices include

99

all essential elements underlying each dimension, and measure the essence of each
clutter dimension completely. Clutter level can be compared by the indices.

Quantity of clutter is defined as the number of advertisements and the
proportion of space in an advertising vehicle. The basis for determining high and low
clutter level for this study is the result from Ha and Litrnan’s (1993) study of
advertising density in consumer magazines. In their study, a 50% ad-editorial ratio is
the point of negative returns for circulation over a period of 10 years. Those such as
TV Guide who impose ad-editorial ratio limits set 30% as their maximum limit. Thus
in this study, 50% of the total number of pages is considered high quantity clutter and
30% of the total number of pages is considered low quantity clutter. The high
quantity clutter condition had 35 ads that constituted half of the total number of pages.
The quantity index was 0.5 x 35 = 17.5. The low quantity clutter condition has only
21 ads that constituted 30% of all pages. The quantity index was is 0.3 x 21 = 6.3.
Quantity Index = number of ad pages/total number of pages

X number of advertisements

Competitiveness of clutter is defined as the degree of similarity of the product
categories and the distance between the advertisements of competitive brands in the
same product category in a media vehicle. A product category is defined as a group
of products sharing similar product attributes and using the same competitive strategies
such as low-price models (Kent 1993). The more diversified the product categories in
the ads, the fewer the number of ads in the same product category, and the further

away between competitive ads, the less competitive the clutter.

100

In this study, the competitiveness of the clutter is a composite index
comprising of: 1) the number of product categories in the issue (NP), 2) the number of
the ads within the dominant product category (NA), and 3) the average number of
pages (distance) between the preceding ad and the successive competitive ad in the
dominating product category (ND,+ND,/n). The higher the index, the higher the
clutter’s competitiveness is. In this study, the competitive product categories were
subcompact cars (Saturn, Toyota Corolla, and Ford Escort), apparel (Spiegel, Jacques
Moret, Union Bay, and Guess), skincare products (Wellbody and Jergens), shampoo
(Pantene Pro-V and Vibrance), diet drinks (Slim-Fast and Nestle Sweet Success), and
liquor (Jose Cuervo, Smirnoff, Stoli, Finlandia, Beefeater, Hennessy). There were 8 ’
product categories with six liquor ads in high competitive clutter condition, and the
average distance is four pages between the preceding and the successive competitive
ads. The competitiveness index in the high competitive clutter condition was -2. In
the low competitive clutter condition, there were 20 product categories, two apparel
ads. The average distance between the two apparel ads was eight pages. The index
was -26.

Competitiveness Index = NA - NP - (ND,+ND,)In
High Competitiveness Index = 8 - 6 - 4 = -2
Low Competitiveness Index = 2 - 20 - 8 = -26 I
Intrusiveness of advertising clutter is defined as the degree to which
advertisements interrupt the flow of an editorial unit. It was operationalized as the

sum of advertisements cutting across each editorial unit (a magazine article) and

101

advertisements in different paper texture from the paper used for the editorial content
(e. g., inserts). Inserts were not tested in this study because their double-sidedness
would introduce a size factor to the dimension. In the experiment, the intrusiveness
index was 0 under low intrusiveness condition that no ads cut across an article. In
high intrusiveness condition, the index was 12 with 12 ads cutting across the articles.
Since there were only 21 ads in the issue, 12 ads meant over 50% of the ads were
intrusive. Those ads that were inserted between the articles were not counted as
intrusive ads.
Intrusiveness Index
= No. of ads within an article + no. of ads in different texture
II. Ad-editorlal compatibility

Ad-editorial compatibility is defined as the degree to which the ads are
perceived by readers as part of the editorial content or complement the editorial
content. It was measured by an average of the scores on three items rated by the
readers. Two of the items were statements about the compatibility of the ads with the
content on a seven-point Likert-scale (e.g., "I think the ads in this issue of College
Voice fit well with the content. ") The third one is a five-point equal interval on the
percentage of ads in the magazine that readers feel are compatible to the content. This

third item would be converted to a seven-point scale in subsequent statistical analysis.

102
III. Attitudes toward advertising in general (Aag)

Attitude toward advertising in general is defined as the overall evaluation of
advertising as an institution and instrument without reference to a particular vehicle
or specific ad. It consists of both beliefs and feelings such as like or dislike. A ‘
simplified version of Muehling’s (1987) 31-item Aag scale was used in this study.
Belief is an acceptance of a proposition as truth and the outcome of that proposition is
expected. When a belief reflects the preference of the individual, then it becomes an
attitude (Shaw and Wright 1967). Muehling’s (1987) scale has the merit of
highlighting the difference between beliefs and attitudes. His scale also distinguishes
the institutional and instrumental aspect of advertising as an attitude object. However,
many adjective pairs in his semantic differential scale are awkward and lack face
validity such as advertising is "dirty/clean," and "weak/strong." These items were not
used in this study.

Other items used to form the Aag scale of this study were drawn from James
and Kover’s (1992) study of overall attitudes toward advertising which include both
attitudes toward advertising in general and attitudes toward advertising in a media
vehicle. This study measured Aag with an average index of twelve items on a seven-
point Likert scale, four of which were global attitude statements such as "advertising is
good" and eight were belief statements such as "advertising saves my time to search
for product information." Half of the items were reverse scored to avoid acquiescence
bias, a problem commonly found in attitude studies (Bearden, Netemeyer and Mobley

1993).

103
IV. Product Category Involvement

Product category involvement is defined as the degree of relevance of the
advertised product category to the individual. It acts as a motivational force to process
information about the product category in advertisements. The major controversy in
the measurement of the construct is whether product category involvement is
unidimensional or multidimensional (Bearden, N etemeyer and Mobley 1993).

Zaichkowsky’s (1985) Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) scale and its spin-
offs (McQuarrie and Munson 1987 and 1991; Higie and Feick 1989; Flynn and
Goldsmith 1993; Gainer 1993) are representatives of unidimensional product
involvement scales. Product involvement refers solely to the relevance of the product
to the consumer. They all use semantic differential adjective pairs to describe the
relationship of a product to the respondent. The number of items ranges from 10 to
22. Their scales achieve high test-retest reliability and internal consistency. However,
some of the items in these scales are not related to the product itself, but the result of
product usage such as "boring-interesting," "fascinating-mundane," "exciting-
unexciting." Their face validity is low.

Traylor and Joseph’s (1984) General Scale to Measure Involvement with
Products (GSMI) is another unidimensional scale. It consists of a six-item summative
index on a seven-point Likert scale. Involvement is conceptualized as a response to a
product as an expression of an individual’s sense of self and identity. Although it is

simple to use and it achieves high internal consistency, the scale actually tests the

meaning of a product rather than an individual’s involvement with the product. The

104

scale cannot serve as a valid measure to examine the relationship of product
involvement and message involvement.

Lastovicka and Gardner’s (1979) Components of Involvement (CP) are a
multidimensional measure of involvement. They defined involvement as composed of
normative importance and commitment. The scale consists of 22 items, of which
seven are familiarity statements, four are commitment statements, and 12 are
importance items. The drawback of the scale is that it confuses familiarity with
involvement and the weight of each component is uneven in the scale without
explanation.

Laurent and Kapferer’s (1985) Consumer Involvement Profiles (CIP) and
subsequent modifications (e.g., Jain and Srinivasan 1990; Kapferer and Laurent 1993;
Rodgers and Schneider 1993) are the most popular multi-dimensional measures of
product involvement. Involvement was conceptualized as consisting of 5 dimensions:
1) hedonic value, 2) symbolic value, 3) interest, 4) perceived risk and importance, and
5) perceived risk probability. There are 16 items on a 5-point Likert scale representing
each dimension equally.

Involvement in a product class is enduring in a person’s life, according to
Bloch, Sherrell, and Ridgeway’s (1986) Enduring Involvement Index. The index
consists of two dimensions: importance of a product to an individual’s life and career,
and the interest in the product. It is a five-item index measured on different scales.
However, the scale has different weights for each dimension. It is also doubtful that

the enduring assumption is valid across products.

105

Although so many product involvement scales are available, the unidimensional
FCBI scale (Ratchford 1987, Vaughn 1986) which is a summative index of three-item
seven-point semantic differentials was employed in this study because of its proven
high validity and parsimony. It has been tested in more than 20 countries on over100
products (Ratchford 1987). The immediacy of the task of product purchase, "I plan to
buy this product category within ...(time)", was a separate item added to measure
product involvement for comparison with other studies because it is also a common
measure of product involvement used by many researchers (e.g., Pratkanis and
Greenwald 1993).
V. Advertising execution quality

Advertising execution quality is the rating of an advertisement’s craftsmanship
and the skillful use of attention-getting device. In this study, the rating is determined
by the subjects, unlike past studies which predetermined the quality by experts. In
fact, consumers’ judgment on quality is more important than professional judgment
because the consumers are the target receivers of the message. Their appreciation of
the execution quality can facilitate the processing of the message. The importance of
execution quality in determining advertising effectiveness has been well recognized by
practitioners and advertising researchers alike (e. g., Walston and Moriarty 1992;
Stewart and Koslow 1989; Gelb and Pickett 1983; Advertising Research Foundation
1962; Ruldoph 1947). Most of them used predetermined execution elements such as
brand differentiation (Stewart and Koslow 1989) to predict the effects of advertising,

rather than how well these elements were executed.

106

In contrast to past studies which have measured the numerous possible
execution factors, this study adopted a back-to-basics approach by asking respondents
to rate the five basic elements of a print ad (Weir 1993; Moriarty 1991a; Reid et a1.
1984): 1) picture, 2) layout, 3) headline, 4) copy, and 5) typography. Subjects would
rate the execution quality of the focal ad in five seven-point semantic differentials
such as "the picture in the ad is attractive/unattractive." A global rating of
craftsmanship was added to the rating scale as well to obtain a general evaluation of
the execution quality. The ratings of respondents on the execution quality were an
average score of the ratings of each element and the global rating of the execution
quality of the advertisement.

VI. Familiarity with the brand

Familiarity with the brand is defined as "the number of brand-related
experiences that has been accumulated by the consumer [italics mine]" (Alba and
Hutchinson 1987). In this study, familiarity is the past knowledge level of the focal or
best-remembered brand before the treatment. Such brand knowledge can be learned
directly by product usage or indirectly through advertising and other promotional
messages (Keller 1993; Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991). The degree of familiarity
was measured in a three-item average index of the frequency of seeing and using the
brand, and the frequency of seeing its advertising. The higher the frequency of past

exposure experience is, the higher the familiarity is.

107
VII. Exposure to other media

Exposure to other media is defined as the reported exposure to other editorial
media during the period of treatment. It is measured by the average time that a
respondent spent on each medium. This study only includes exposure to editorial *
media (television, radio, newspaper, and magazines) because their editorial contents
and advertising constitute two separate domains. Each domain competes for attention
from audience members. It is also a general belief that the primary reason for the
consumption of editorial media is because of their content, not their advertisements.
An additional question on commercial avoidance behavior is included in the
questionnaire to compare the skipping of advertisements in the test magazine with the
other media.
erationalization of Endogenous Variables (Advertising Effects)

I. Attitudes toward Advertising in a Vehicle (Aav)

The attitude toward advertising in a vehicle is defined as the evaluation of
advertising in the context of a media vehicle. The attitude object is the advertisements
as a whole. This attitude toward the context of a media vehicle has not been studied
by researchers on advertising. Abemethy and Rotfeld’s (1991) ATRA scale has made
an attempt to explore the attitude toward advertising in the media class of radio. It is
still not a media vehicle with specific editorial content. The seven dimensions being
identified in their scale have mingled execution quality with interest in the
advertisements so that the ultimate attitude object is not the medium, but the creative

aspect of the ad. It is not a context-specific measure of attitude. Mittal’s (1993) study

108

on viewers’ attitude toward TV advertising suffers the same problem as Abemethy and
Rotfeld (1991). Goodstein’s (1993) ad schema represents attitudes under the context
of television, but it is product-specific.

This study operationalized attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle by
borrowing the appropriate items from James and Kover’s (1992) attitude scale such as
"too much editorial space is devoted to advertisements in this issue," and developing
some specific items on the advertising in the vehicle such as "I don’t like the ads in
this issue. " A supplementary measure of this attitude is a behavioral indicator of how
many advertisements in the tested issue the subject noticed. The Aav scale in this
study consisted of six items. The five attitudinal items were on a seven-point Likert-
scale and the behavioral measure of reading the ads was on a five-point interval scale.
The five-point scale was converted to a seven-point scale in subsequent analysis.

H. Advertising Message Involvement (AMI)

Advertising message involvement (AMI) has been defined as the motivational
state inducing advertising message processing (Laczniak and Muehling 1993). The
construct has been operationalized as the degree of attention to an advertising message
on a summative index of a 25-item AMI scale. Among the 25 items, only five items
measure the concept of message involvement; the rest of the items measure message
attention, brand evaluation strategy, and cognitive response. In this study, four of the
best-performed involvement items in terms of their reported validity and reliability in
their scale were chosen, such as "when I saw the ad, I concentrated on its content."

However, the scale used by Laczniak and Muehling has not been employed by

109

other researchers studying advertising message involvement (James and Kover 1992;
Pratkanis and Greenwald 1993). Instead, they only recorded the time the respondents
spent on seeing the ad. This is an objective and non-intrusive measure, but it is only a
single measure. It is not reliable in self-reported situations such as this study, and“
therefore was not used in this study.

III. Attitudes toward the advertisement (Aad)

Attitudes toward the advertisement is defined as the evaluation of a specific
advertisement by an individual. In this study, the ad refers to the advertisement of
either the focal brand, or the best-remembered brand if the respondent fails to
remember the focal brand.

The scales of Aad that have been developed in the past can be classified into
three types according to the dimensions they represent: 1) the affective response only,
2) the cognitive response only, and 3) both cognitive and affective responses. Such
disagreement on the dimensions shows that the Aad concept is still vague despite the
large amount of research on it (Madden, Dillon and Twible 1986).

Messmer’s (1979) and Edell and Burke’s (1986) Aad scales are representatives
of affective response only Aad scale. Messmer’s scale only contained two items on a
seven-point Likert scales of "favorable-unfavorable" and "like-dislike". Edell and
Burke’s scale was a one item five-point interval scale from very favorable to very
unfavorable. Mitchell and Olson’s (1981) Aad scale; Gardner, Mitchell and Russo’s
(1985) five-item scale, and the three-item nine-point semantic differentials of Cox and

Locander (1987) such as "good/bad," "like/dislike," are also affective response only

110
scales. Allen and Madden (1983) used six items representing three positive and three

negative responses. Gelb and Pickett (1983) reduced Aad to a single item 5-point
Likert scale to a statement of "I like this ad." MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch (1986)
offered a similar two-item index on a seven-point scale to measure Aad as "favorable"
and "interesting." Generally, these scales contain too few items to examine their
validity. Madden, Dillon and Twible’s (1986) study on Aad using a multitrait-
multimetlrod represents a sophisticated effort to test the validity of the Aad construct.
Ten item pairs were examined. It was found that Aad cannot be distinguished from
the concept of attitudes toward the brand with their low discriminant validity scores.

Other researchers on Aad adopted a cognitive approach to measure the
construct. For example, MacKenzie and Lutz (1982) conceptualized Aad as
believability and convincingness. Only the cognitive aspect of attitude is addressed.
Believability is rated on a six-point scale and convincingness is rated on a three-point
scale.

A more comprehensive approach to study Aad is to include both cognitive and
affective response on a general basis such as Shimp and Yokum (1981)’s measurement
of reactions to advertisements along eight dimensions such as "worth-remembering,"
"attractive," and "believable." Moore and Hutchinson (1983) operationalized Aad as
both confidence in seeing the ad and emotional reactions. Aad was measured by two
items on a five-point scale. Machleit and Wilson (l988)’s eight-item seven-point
semantic differential scale was a global evaluation on various aspects of an ad

including execution, feelings, and evaluation. Biehal, Stephens and Curlo’s (1992)

111

Aad scale was a five-item index of affective rating on a five-point semantic
differentials. Olney, Holbrook and Batra’s (1991) tricomponent model of Aad scale
consisted of 16 items on a seven-point semantic differential scale. Aad was conceived
as comprising three components: hedonism, utilitarianism, and interestingness. Such
conceptualization includes uses and gratifications of reading an advertisement.

A shortened version of Olney, Holbrook and Batra’s (1991)’s scale was used in
this study because it contains the three dimensions of hedonism, utilitarianism, and
interestingness that constitute Aad. These three dimensions explain 90% of the
variance of global affect toward the Ad using principal component analysis. The scale
used in this study maintained the original seven-point semantic differential format and
consisted of five items including one global evaluation statement "I like/dishke this
ad. "

IV. Memory

Memory of the advertisement is defined as any indication of remembered
exposure to the focal ad or best-remembered ad in recognition and aided recall tasks.
Both aided recall and recognition measures were used to show the memory of the
message because they could avoid the confounding factor of individual differences in
memory capacity (Krugman 1986). Moreover, in many purchase situations, consumers
only need to recognize the brand name or package that they have seen. Unaided recall
is applicable only to certain products whose product packages are not displayed at the
point of purchase (Alba, Hutchinson and Lynch 1991). Such a measure is too

demanding as subjects who have been exposed to the stimuli one time only. The

112

memory score is computed as the sum of respondents’ scores in both aided recall and
recognition tasks. As recommended by Postman (1975) and Kent (1990), recognition
tasks were preceded by recall tasks as both measures were employed in this study to
avoid the cuing effect of recognition task experience for recall tasks. -

In the aided recall tasks of this study, respondents were provided with cues
such as the product category of the focal ad and a description of the visual of the focal
ad. Visual was chosen as the cue because the importance of visuals in memory
probing of print advertisements is well recognized by researchers (Edell and Staelin
1973; Paivio 1975). Subjects were asked to write down the brand name. Recall was
coded as incorrect if the focal brand was not written, or the written brand was a non-A
focal brand and a non-competitive brand. In recognition tasks, respondents were given
a list of brand names and ad claims and they had to identify the right one. Noted ad
readership (Starch 1966) was probed by the direct question of whether the respondent
has seen the ad. The first recognition task consisted of choices not appearing in the
issue. The second recognition task consisted of choices of ad claims that were in the
issue. If a respondent gave a wrong answer, then he/she would be counted as unable
to recognize the ad. Both failures to recall or recognize were to be counted as 0 in
memory score. Reasons accounting for no memory were probed by a separate
question.

V. Resistance to Competitive Ads
Resistance to competitive ads is defined as the degree to which an individual is

uninfluenced by competitive ads to the ad that he/she has been exposed to. The

113

indicator of this resistance is the individual’s evaluation of the claims and quality of
the competitive ads when compared to the focal-ad. Such evaluation was measured on
a three-item index. The first two items measure the ratings of the credibility of the
competitor’s claim and quality of the competitive ad on a seven-point Likert scale:
The last item is a behavioral measure of the brand choice among the focal ad and the
competitive ads.
VI. Brand equity

Brand equity is defined as the added value with which a given brand name
and image endow a product (Farquhar 1991; Aaker 1991). Only customer-based
brand equity was examined in this study. It is a summarized judgment on a brand and
consists of four dimensions: 1) positive association, 2) loyalty, 3) perceived quality,
and 4) top-of-mind awareness (Aaker 1991).

Most of the published brand equity measures are indirect measures of the
perceptual map of the positioning or image of the product through open-ended
responses, which are only part of the total brand equity construct. Martin and Brown
(1991) have attempted to offer a five-dimensional brand impression scale of
commitment, value, perceived quality, trustworthiness, and image. They have measured
the brand impression facet of brand equity using this scale, but the items have shown
low convergent validity. Moreover, the items for the five dimensions performed
poorly in confirmatory factor analysis. It seems necessary to develop a new scale to
measure the brand equity construct. The twelve-item average index on a seven-point

Likert scale used in this study measures the four dimensions of the construct as

114

discussed by brand equity researchers. It borrows items from prior studies on brand
choice, brand loyalty, and brand attitude. Three items are used to indicate each
dimension: 1) positive association (e.g., "The image of this brand represents what I
would like to be"), 2) loyalty (e.g., "I won’t mind paying a higher price for this ~
brand"), 3) perceived quality (e.g., "The quality of this brand is superior to the other
brands"), 4) top-of-mind awareness (e.g., "This brand is the most popular brand in the
category"). The use of multiple items could measure the reliability of the items and the
scale’s convergent and discriminant validity in confirmatory factor analysis.
mestionnaire and Scale Development

Since all the key variables of this study are either attitudes or perceptions,
multiple-item scales either in the form of semantic differentials or Likert scales are
used to assess the reliability and validity of the measures (Shaw and Wright 1978;
Dawes and Smith 1985; Oppenheim 1992; DeVillis 1991; Bearden, Netrneyer and
Mobley 1993). The scales were developed based on the theoretical conceptualization
of the construct which can guide the choice and interpretation of the statistical analysis
(Peter and Darcin 1991). Both aided recall and recognition measures were used to
probe the memory of the focal ad (Krugman 1986). All factual data were measured in
continuous or equal interval scales whenever possible.

Following the total design method on self-administered questionnaires
suggested by Dillman (1978), demographic variables such as sex, age, family income,
year in college, and the major of the subjects were collected at the end of the first

questionnaire before the experiment to ensure that respondents would not be

115

intimidated by such personal information from the start. The second questionnaire
began with questions on respondents’ magazine reading habits and evaluation of the
content to arouse respondents’ interest in answering the questionnaire. Questions
which required a great deal of memory effort such as exposure to other media were
put at the end of the questionnaire.

Pre-test results

To test the appropriateness of the scales and research instruments, a pretest
was conducted in mid-February, 1994. In the preliminary screening of the statistical
assumptions of the data on the observed variables, the program PRELIS was used
because it is a precursor program for LISREL (J oreskog 1990). All the exogenous and
endogenous variables were normally distributed with low level of skewness. The
slightly high skewness in product category involvement was expected because of the
product category of the focal brand was clothing -- a high involvement product.

To test for the linearity of the relationships among the variables, the
standardized residuals of both the exogenous and endogenous variables were
examined. The means of error are equal for all the variables. All except one
bivariate (Aad and recall of ad) show a slightly higher level than the acceptable
standard of 3.1 (Tabachnick and Fidell 1983). All these indicate that the linearity
assumption has not been violated. .

To examine the reliability and validity of the scales deve10ped in this study, the
scales were subject to confirmatory factor analysis (DeVillis 1991). The "exposure to

other media" scale has not been subjected to that analysis because exposure to media

116

is a composite score which combines different items to make a meaningful score. The
internal consistency test is also not applicable to the memory scores because each item
measures different types of memory -- recognition and recall. Apart from face
validity, there are three major statistical criteria to determine the validity of a scale
(Hunter 1986): 1) internal consistency, 2) uniformity of item quality, and 3)
parallelism (discriminant validity). All the scales in the pre-test show satisfactory
results on these criteria. The scales for brand equity, ad execution quality, advertising
message involvement, and Aad were the highest in internal consistency with
Cronbach’s alpha over 0.95. Originally, the Aav scale consisted of six items, but only
four items show a high level of consistency with alpha=0.78. Adding the other two
("Without advertisements, the price of College Voice will be higher", "How much of
the advertising in this issue of College Voice have you read?" ) reduces the alpha to
0.59. These two items were dropped from the scale of Aav. However, the items were
kept in the questionnaire for reference purpose because they provided additional
information on how subjects responded to the advertisements.

Among the 10 scales subject to confirmatory factor analysis, six of the scales
had items with unequal quality. Unequal quality only indicates that different items in
a scale have different strengths in representing the construct. As long as the gradient
structure is consistent throughout the analysis, the scale will be acceptable. The
percentage of variance in the items explained by a scale can indicate the degree to
which the scale fully represents the construct. In this case, the advertising message

involvement scale scores best in representing the construct with 95.6% of the variance

117

being explained by the same factor. The scale on familiarity with the brand scores
lowest in percentage of variance explained (37.4%). An item of prior exposure to the
same focal ad was added to the scale to improve the representation of the familiarity
with the brand construct. . r

The third measure of validity is discriminant validity which means that the
construct is distinct from other unrelated constructs. It can be measured by a
comparison of the correlation between individual items and other scales. If a construct
is valid, its items in a scale should not have a high factor loading on other scales and
should have the same direction in the correlation matrix. Since the present sample
size of the pre-test was too small to run a complete analysis of factors, the results on
discriminant validity of the scales were reported in the results of the data in the actual
experiment.
Modification of Research Desigr_r

A major threat to the internal validity of a within-subjects design study is the
sensitization of the subjects to the same stimulus or research instruments (Campbell
and Stanley 1966). To test for possible interaction between the order of research
instruments and the endogenous variables, an analysis of variance was performed.
Significant interaction effects of the sequence of the questionnaire and the recall and
recognition scores were found. Since the memory of the ad is the basis of this study,
it is clear that within-subjects designs are not feasible in this type of study which
involves product knowledge and memory. The change of the brand from a specific

one to a best-remembered brand was not a good alternative because the study will not

118

be able to manipulate the presence of competitive brands. Although much lower in
statistical power and less desirable, the design for this study was changed to an
independent group design. Subjects were randomly assigned to a low clutter level as
the control group, and to a high clutter level in the experimental group representing
each dimension of clutter. Only one issue of the dummy magazine was used.
Subjects needed to answer two questionnaires instead of three.

Manipulation check questions were included in the questionnaire. For the
quantity manipulation, the question was "There are too many advertisements in this
issue." For the competitiveness manipulation, the question was "The products
advertised in this issue are very similar." For the intrusiveness manipulation, the
question was "Advertisements interrupt my reading of this issue. " A recognition task
on the overall noted readership of advertisements was put at the end of the
questionnaire to check whether respondents actually read the magazine or its
advertisements. In that task, a list of 10 brands mixed with five correct brands and
five bogus brands were given to subjects. Subjects were asked to identify the five
correct ones (The revised questionnaires are listed in Appendix A). The dummy
magazines were color coded by the treatment for easy identification in the assignment
of treatment. The actual experiment was conducted in April and May after obtaining
the approval of Michigan State University’s Committee on Research Involving Human
Subjects (The list of ads and revised content of the dummy magazine are listed in

Appendix D and B respectively).

119

Statistical Techniques

T-tests were then performed to compare the difference between the high clutter
and low clutter groups on each endogenous variable as they are appropriate statistical
analyses for experimental designs (Hunter and Schmidt 1990). The validity and -
reliability of the scales were tested by confirmatory factor analysis. The structural
equations models used in LISREL VII were employed to analyze the relationship of
the latent variables and estimate the measurement errors of the indicators. The
superiority of using structural equations models in multivariate experimental design
over other traditional statistical procedures has been explained by Bagozzi and Yi
(1990). Structural equations models can provide a holistic view of the relationship
among the exogenous and endogenous variables. Their power lies in delineating the
direct and indirect effect of one variable on the other variables and specifying the
magnitude of such effects. Measurement errors have been taken into consideration in
the models and can be assessed. It is particularly appropriate for research with
constructs that are not directly observable (latent variables) such as attitudes and brand
equity (Joreskog and Sorbom 1989). Finally, a stepwise multiple regression was run

to examine the power of each variable in explaining the variance in brand equity.

CHAPTER 5
RESULTS
Profile of Sample

A total of 133 subjects participated in this study, 15 of them did not participate
in the second phase of the experiment. The sample included students majoring in
different subjects enrolled in general education classes in the Spring and Summer
semesters at two upper midwestem state universities. The demographic profile of the
subjects is shown in Table l.

The sample represents students at different levels majoring in a wide variety of
subjects. There are more female (63.4%) than male (36.6%) subjects. Slightly less
than half (47.3%) of the subjects were majoring in science subjects such as Pre-
Medicine and Engineering. Many of the subjects were freshmen (28.6%) and
sophomores (37.6%) with a median age of 20. Their annual family incomes were
mostly in the $25,000-50,000 bracket (33.7%) and $50,000-75,000 range (38.6%).
This is higher than the 1992 national average of $30,000. T-tests were conducted to
compare subjects in experiments conducted at different sessions. There was no
significant difference in the demographic profile and attitudes toward advertising in
general among them.

To facilitate the analysis of the data, a profile of the magazine reading behavior

of subjects is presented in Table 2. Since this experiment is a delayed recall task,

120

121

Table 1
Demographic Profile of Sample
Gender 1%;
Male 36.6
Female 63.4
Missing=2
Major
Science 47.3
Humanities and Social Science 26.7
Business 22.1
No Preference 3.8
Missing=2
Year in College
Freshman 29.0
Sophomore 38.2
Junior 16.0
Senior 16.8
Missing=2
Family Annual Income
Under $25,000 9.8
$25,000 to 50,000 33.7
$50,001 to 75,000 23.8
$75,001 to 90,000 14.8
$90.000+ 18.0
Missing=11
Age
Median: 20
Mean : 22
Standard Deviation : 12.02
Missing=3

N=133

122

Table 2
Magazine Reading Style
Recency in reading College Voice %
Very recent (1-2 days) 5.1
Moderately recent (3-4 days) 41.5
Not recent (5 days or more) 51.7
Did not read 1.7
Missing-=15
Reading Period
Weekdays 49.2
Weekends 50.8
Missing=15

Time spent on reading College Voice

Mean: 40 minutes

Standard Deviation: 32 minutes
Maximum: 205 minutes

Minimum: 0 minutes

Missing=l6
Number of articles read

Mean: 2.7
Standard Deviation: 2.2
Maximum: 10
Minimum: 0
Missing=20

123
Table 2 (cont’d)

Quality Rating

Mean Quality Rating: 4.02

Mean free subscription preference: 4.7
Maximum Cost willing to pay: $5

Mean cost willing to pay: $0.71

(including those not willing to pay)
Percent willing to pay: 48.2%
Missing=9

Frequency in reading magazine in general
At least 3 in a week
Two in a week
One in a week
One every two weeks
Very occasional
Never

Type of Magazines Read

General Interest

Titles used in the dummy magazine
(Self Mademoiselle, Details)
Special Interest

Do not read magazine

Missing=2
Reading Behavior in College Voice

Browse the pages at random

From first to last page, skipping pages
not liked

Other

%
9.9
13.7
23.7
19.1
29.0
4.6

%

71.8
13.7

9.9
4.6

%

50.9
46.6

2.5

124
it was expected that subjects had read the dummy magazine several days before they

answered the second questionnaire. Indeed, it was found that almost all of the
subjects (93.2%) had read the magazine more than 3 days before they answered the
questionnaire. On average, they spent 40 minutes reading the magazine, and read ‘
about 2.7 articles.

The Stimulus

The dummy magazine received a fairly good rating from the subjects. The
mean rating was 4 on a seven point-scale. About 48.2% of the subjects said that they
were willing to pay for the magazine. This suggested that the stimulus material was
appropriate for college students.

Magazine reading was found to be a common leisure activity for the subjects.
Over 47% of the subjects indicated that they were frequent magazine readers reading
at least one magazine a week. Most of them (71.8%) read general interest consumer
magazines such as People and about 13.7% were readers of those magazines whose
articles were used in the stimulus materials. Nevertheless, only three subjects reported
having previously read more than 3 articles in the dummy magazines. These subjects
were eliminated in the subsequent analysis.

As stated in the chapter on the research model, the assumption made about the
reading style of magazine readers was that they tended to browse the pages at random
to form an attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle. Table 2 indicates the
assumption that readers browsed pages at random was valid for 50.9% of the subjects.

The other major type of reading style was reading from the first to the last page,

125
skipping pages that the subject does not like. This type of reading style does not

conflict with the assumption of the model because the readers read both editorial
content and ads during the course of reading, rather than reading ads or articles
exclusively. A t-test comparison of the effect of reading style on the endogenous '
variables, such as Aav, Aad, memory, resistance to competitive ads and brand equity,
show that there were only significant differences in the level of recall (t=-2.3, df=102,
p=0.1) and the number of noted ads (t=-l.9l, df=109, p=.03) between reading styles,
but there were no differences in the recognition of ads and other endogenous variables.
Subjects who had read from the first to last page had a sequential order in reading.
This may facilitate their noticing and retrieval of ads.

Subjects were probed for their advertising skipping behavior in College Voice
and other editorial media. Table 3 shows that the mean percentage of ads being
skipped in other editorial media is higher than the percentage of ads not being seen in
College Voice. In other editorial media, the reported mean percentage of ads being
skipped was 55%. In College Voice, only 30.2% of the subjects read less than 59% of
the ads. The mean overall liking of the ads was 3.7 on a seven-point scale.

Missing Data

A common problem encountered in research is missing data. This study was
no exception. The main reason for missing data in this study was that some subjects
skipped some questions despite the instructions and others did not write down the

brand name in the memory probing questions. There were also subjects who did not

126
Table 3
Ad Reading Style
Ads skipped in other media

Mean : 55%
Standard Deviation: 31.03% ‘

Percentage of ads noticed in College Voice %
None 6.9
Very few (1-19%) 7.8
A few (20-39%) 15.5
Some (40-59%) 28.4
A lot (69-79%) 31.0
Almost all (80-100%) 10.3
Missing=17

Overall liking of the ads in College Voice
(seven-point scale)
Mean: 3.7
Standard Deviation: 1.5

Missing=l7

answer questions on family income as shown in Table 1. Tabanick and Fidell (1983)
and Dodge (1992) suggest several steps to deal with this problem. First, one may
assume the randomness in missing data. If the missing data are caused by random
reasons, then the results of the studies will not be biased by the missing data. T-tests
were conducted to compare the demographic characteristics and attitudes toward
advertising in general of cases with missing and non-missing data. There is no
significant difference in these basic characteristics between cases with missing and

non-missing data. It is safe, therefore, to assume the randomness of the missing data.

127
Table 4

T-tests Comparing Cases with Missing Data and Non-missing Data

t-value if p
Year in College .03 129 .98 '
Sex -.51 129 .61
Family Income .05 129 .96
Major“ .35 129 .74
Aag .92 129 .36

* Major is collapsed to science and non-science subjects for ease of
companson

Once the randomness assumption was established, the second step was to
choose among alternatives to handle the cases with missing data. One option was to
drop all the cases that contained missing values. This option was not feasible for this
study because the moderate sample size and the high cost of recruiting subjects would
have led to a substantial loss of data

The second option was to use pairwise deletion to calculate correlations, but
this also would have greatly reduced the sample size and may have produced negative
eigenvalues. Using multiple regression of the complete cases to estimate missing
value was a third alternative. The tradeoff is that multiple regression would overfit
the data and is only be feasible when all the good predictors of the variables with
missing data are available.

The fourth and most common way to deal with missing cases is to estimate the
missing value with a calculated value such as the grand mean of that variable.

Although the correlation size tends to be reduced by using the mean value as the

128

missing value, this method could allow a researcher to maximize the use of all
available data on the variable in every case without great distortion. This mean
substitution method is employed to handle the missing data in this study. All the
missing values are substituted by the mean of the variable. '
Data Examination and Scale Validation

To utilize the regression statistics legitimately, the data of this study must meet
the three basic assumptions of regression: 1) normality, 2) linearity, and 3) non-
multicollinearity.

Normality concerns with the normal distribution of the variables. The program
PRELIS (J oreskog 1990) generated the distribution information on the data. As shown
in Table 5, most of the variables in this study do not violate the normality assumption.
They only have a low to moderate level of skewness (between 0.01 to 0.88) with
reasonable standard deviations. Exposure to other media and brand equity are the two
variables with highly skewed distributions. Attempts such as taking the square roots
and the logarithm of the value of the variables, were made to transform the data
(Tabachnick and Fidell 1983). However, no improvement was gained. To avoid
distortion by non-beneficial transformation, the values of these two variables remained
intact in the analysis. Caution is therefore needed in interpreting the estimates because
the means of these two variables are not reliable indicators of the central tendency of
the variable.

Linearity of the relationships among the variables was examined by the size of

the standardized residuals. Acceptable largest standardized residuals are +/- 3.1

129

Table 5
Normality of Distribution
Mean SD. Skewness
Exogenous Variables
1. Attitude toward advertising 3.80 .79 -.42
in general

2. Ad-editorial compatibility 4.08 .95 -.51
3. Product category involvement 4.00 1.13 .02
4. Ad execution quality 2.07 2.23 .45
5. Familiarity with the brand 2.63 1.71 .01
6. Exposure to other media“ 117.65 89.30 1.92
Endogenous Variables
1. Aav 3.56 1.29 —.32
2. AMI 1.39 1.61 .88
3. Aad 1.83 1.95 .47
4. Resistance toward 1.55 1.64 .48

competitive ads
5. Memory of the ad** 4.02 2.52 .57
6. Brand equity 3.41 1.19 -1.67

* Scores in rrrinutes.
All other variables are on a seven-point scale.

** Scores include both recognition and recall and on a dichotomous
scale

130
(Tabanick and Fidell 1983; Norusis 1988). As shown in Table 6, the largest residuals

of all bivariate pairs of the variables, except five pairs, did not exceed this standard.
Among these five pairs (ad execution quality-AMI, Aad and resistance to competitive
ads, ad execution quality-Aad, memory and brand equity, and AMI-Aad), each pair
has only one case with such large residuals. The influence of outliers on the results
was tested with Cook’s Distance statistics. All the large residual cases in these
bivariates did not have a significant Cook’s D value to affect the results as listed in
Table 6. These cases are kept in the subsequent analysis.

Multicollinearity refers to the situation in which an independent variable in a
model is in fact an almost linear combination of other independent variables (Norusis
1988). A variable exhibiting multicollinearity is redundant in a model and will not
add any more explanation to the dependent variable. The multicollinearity of the
variables can be checked by its tolerance level (1 - squared multiple correlation for
that variable). As shown in Table 7, there is no sign of collinearity as all the variables

have a much higher tolerance level than the minimum level of 0.01.

131

Table 6
Linearity of Bivariate Pairs
Largest
Standardized Cook’s D*
3%
1. Aav-AMI 2.47 -
2. Ad-editorial 2.46 -
Compatibility-Aav
3. Aag-Aav 2.14 -
4. Product category 2.67 -
involvement-AMI
5. Memory of the Ad 2.37 -
-Resistance to
competitive ads
6. Ad execution 2.00 -
quality-AMI
7. Aad-Memory of the ad 2.98 -
8. Aad-Resistance to 3.77 .104
competitive ads
8. Exposure to other 2.86 -
media-memory of the ad
9. Resistance to competitive -3.13 .055
ads-brand equity
10. Memory of the ad -3.40 .066
-brand equity
ll. AMI-Aad 3.84 .330
12. Familiarity with the brand 2.97 -
-memory of the ad
13. Exec-Aad 5.59 .281
14. Clutter level-Aav 1.75 -
15. Clutter level-AMI 2.45 -
l6. Aad-brand equity 1.70 -
17. Aag-AMI 2.52 -

* Only Cook’s D values of cases with largest residuals greater
than 3.1 are reported.

N.B.: The mean value of the residuals of all the pairs is zero.

132

Table 7
Test of Multicollinearity
Exogenous Variables Tolerance Level
1. Attitude toward advertising .84
in general

2. Ad-editorial compatibility .74
3. Product category involvement .87
4. Ad execution quality .69
5. Familiarity with the brand .90
6. Exposure to other media .14
Endogenous Variables
1. Aav .12
2. AMI .16
3. Aad .09
4. Resistance to .42

competitive ads
5. Memory of the ad .55

Reliability and Validity

Reliability is the consistency of the scale item measured across subjects and
session. Figure 3 is a list of all the item statements in the scales used in this study.
Table 8 provides the reliability of the scales used in the study. Cronbach’s alphas for
both the exogenous and endogenous variables are satisfactory, ranging from 0.75 to
0.99. Due to its low item-scale correlation with the attitude toward advertising in
general scale, the item "Advertising adds to the costs that must be passed along to
consumers in the form of higher prices" was dr0pped from the analysis. Cronbach’s

alpha for the Aag scale improved to 0.8. Composite scales such as memory of

133

Exogenous Variables
Attitudes toward advertising in general

A1. Advertising is honest.

A2. Advertising is annoying.*

A3. Advertising is good.

A4. Advertising is worthless.*

A5. Advertising saves my time searching for product information. ‘

A6. The claims in advertising are always exaggerated.*

A7. Advertising helps raise our standard of living.

A8. Advertising makes people try to get products they should not
buy.*

A9. Advertising adds to the costs that must be passed along to the
consumers in the form of higher prices.*

A10. Advertising appeals to people’s emotions rather than to their

intelligence.*
Al 1. Advertising is essential.
A12. Advertising is a reliable source of information about products.

Ad-editorial compatibility

Bl. I think the advertisements in this issue of College Voice fit well
with the content.

B2. It is easy to distinguish between the advertisements and the articles in College
Voice.*

B3. What proportion of the ads in this issue went with the content?

Product Category Involvement
Cl. If I chose the wrong brand of clothes, I’ll
have a lot to lose -- have little to lose
C2. My decision to buy clothes
requires a lot of thought -- requires little thought
C3. For me, buying clothes will be
a very important decision -- very unimportant decision

Ad Execution Quality

D1. The picture in the ad was attractive -- unattractive.

D2. The design (layout) of the ad was outstanding -- poor.

D3. The headline in the ad was provoking -- boring.

D4. The copy of the ad was well-written -- poorly-written.

D5. The typefaces used in the ad were appealing -- unappealing.
D6. Overall, the ad was well-crafted -- poorly done.

Figure 3

Scale Items Used in the Study

134
Figure 3 (Cont’d)

Familiarity with the Brand

E1. How often had you heard about or seen the brand?

E2. How often have you used this brand?

E3. How often did you see the advertising of this brand?

E4. Have you seen a Spiegel ad the same as the one in this issue before?

Endogenous Variables
Attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle

V1. Too much space is devoted to advertisements in this issue of College
Voice“.

V2. Advertisements interrupt my reading of this issue of College Voice.*

V3. There are too many advertisements in this issue of College Voice.*

V4. I like the advertisements in this issue of College Voice.

Advertising Message Involvement

W1. I paid attention to the content of the ad.

W2. I carefully read the content of this ad.

W3. When I saw the ad, I concentrated on its contents.
W4. I expended effort looking at the contents of this ad.

Attitude toward the ad

X1. This ad was pleasant -- unpleasant

X2. This ad was useful -- not useful

X3. This ad was entertaining --- not entertaining
X4. This ad was interesting -- uninteresting
X5. I liked this ad --- disliked this ad

Resistance to competitive ads

Y1. The claims in the ads of these other brands are more credible than
Spiegel?

Y2. The ads of these other brands are better in quality than Spiegel?

Y3. If I were to choose one of the clothing brands (or your best-
remembered brand’s product category) advertised in this issue for
purchase, I will choose

Brand Equity

a) Positive Association

21. The image of Spiegel is the same as the other clothing brands.*
Z2. The image of Spiegel represents what I would like to be.

23. I feel bad using this brand.*

135

Figure 3 (Cont’d)
b) Brand Loyalty
Z4. I would rank this brand as my _ choice if I purchase clothes.*
ZS. I won’t mind paying a higher price for this brand.
Z6. If the catalog of this brand is not sent to me free, I am willing to pay
to get one. -

c) Perceived Quality

Z7. I agree with the claim that Spiegel products are simple, stylish, and
of good value

ZS. The quality of this brand is superior to other brands.

Z9. Spiegel is most suitable to my needs.

(1) Top-of-mind awareness

ZlO. Spiegel is the most popular brand in the category.

21 1. When I need to buy clothes, I will think of Spiegel immediately.

212. When asked about brands in clothing Spiegel will come to my mind
immediately.

* reverse scored items

Note: Since exposure to other media and memory of the ad are composite
scales not subject to reliability tests, they are not listed here.

the ad and exposure to other media are not subject to the reliability tests because the
items in a composite scale do not necessary have any correlations among one another
(Cohen et a1. 1990; Hayduk 1987).

There are three major statistical criteria normally used to determine the validity
of a scale, after an examination of face validity of the item by its substantive content
(Hunter 1986): 1) internal consistency, 2) uniformity of item quality, and 3) parallelism
(discriminant validity). Table 9 reports the uniformity of item quality and percentage of

variance explained in the confirmatory factor analysis procedures. The factor loadings

136

Table 8
Reliability of the Scales
Exogenous Variables Cronbach’s or No. of Items
1. Attitude toward advertising .80 11
in general*
2. Ad-editorial compatibility .86 3
3. Product category involvement .77 (.77) 3
4. Ad execution quality .99 6
5. Familiarity with the brand .80 4
6. Exposure to other media n.a. 4
Endogenous Variables
1. Aav .95 3
2. AMI .97(.95) 4
3. Aad .98 5
4. Resistance toward .91 3
competitive ads
5. Memory of the ad n.a. 5
6. Brand equity .93 12
a) positive association .77 3
b) brand loyalty .72 3
c) perceived quality .89 3
d) top-of-mind awareness .90 3

* One item of the 12-item scale of Aag was dropped because
of the low item-scale correlation.

N .B.: The numbers in parentheses next to the results are the
reported reliabilities of the scales used in past
studies.

137

of items in ad-editorial compatibility, product category involvement, ad execution
quality, Aav, AMI, Aad, the positive association dimension, perceived quality
dimension, and top-of-mind awareness dimension of brand equity all show equal
quality. Aag, familiarity with the brand, resistance to competitive ads, and the brand
loyalty dimension of brand equity show a gradient (unequal) quality. Unequal quality
means that each item in the scale has a different strength in representing the construct.

It is most desirable to have equal item quality because each item equally
represents the construct. When items are unequal in quality, they have to show a
consistent correlation pattern with other variables to be a valid measure of the
construct. The data of this study show that the unequal scale items have a consistent
correlation pattern with other variables. The convergent validity of the scales can also
be shown by the percentage of variance being explained by the factor. The best
performed scale is ad execution quality which explains 97.5% of the variance among
the items. Only Aag exhibits a relatively low explanatory power of the
variance for the items.

The discriminant validity of a scale concerns whether or not a scale item
measures one and only one construct in the study. It can be established if the items of
a scale do not have a significant loading on other unrelated factors and their factor
loading should be higher in its own factor than other related factors in the item-factor
correlation matrix (The matrix is listed in APPENDIX F). An examination of the
pattern of each item’s loading in the matrix shows that most of the items meet the

discriminant validity criteria. Although there is a moderate significant correlation

138

Table 9
Validity of the Scales
Exogenous Variables Uniformig % of Variance
of Item# Explained
1. Attitude toward advertising unequal 35.8(57%)
in general"
2. Ad-editorial compatibility equal 78.4
3. Product category involvement equal 68.8
4. Ad execution quality equal 97.5
5. Familiarity with the brand equal 66.1
6. Exposure to other media n.a. n.a.
Endogenous Variables
1. Aav equal 86.2
2. AMI equal 92.4
3. Aad equal 94.2(90%)
4. Resistance to unequal 86.7 '
competitive ads

5. Memory of the ad n.a. n.a.
6. Brand equity unequal 58.6

a) positive association equal 69.4

b) brand loyalty unequal 64.5

c) perceived quality equal 82.7

d) top-of-mind awareness equal 83.6

Parallelism

Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
n.a.

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

n.a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

* Item quality is considered as equal if the difference between items

in item-scale correlation is less than 0.1

# The internal consistency of the scale is reported in Table 8.

N. B.: The numbers in parentheses are the reported explanatory power of

scales in previous studies

139

between an Aav item and ad execution quality, the item-factor correlation within the
Aav factor is much higher than its correlations with ad execution quality. Therefore,
the two scales can still be considered as attaining discriminant validity. Table 10
shows the scaled items used in the final measurement model. '
Manipulation Check

To examine whether or not the manipulation of the level of the three
dimensions of clutter was successful, several t-tests were conducted to compare the
manipulated level and the subjects’ self-reported perception of the clutter level of that
dimension. Table 11 shows that only the quantity manipulation was successful in
eliciting a perception of too many advertisements (t=2.28, df=72, p=0.03). The
competitiveness and the intrusiveness manipulation seemingly failed to create a
corresponding perception of high competitiveness or high intrusiveness. These results
suggest that there may be individual differences in the tolerance of clutter level in
terms of competitiveness and intrusiveness. In subsequent testing of the hypotheses on
the effects of clutter, the individual’s perception of the clutter level of the dimensions
of quantity, competitiveness, and intrusiveness will be used instead of the manipulated
level.

The study also checked whether or not the subjects actually read the stimulus
materials by asking them to write down the name or topic of the article in College
Voice that they liked most. Around 80% of the subjects correctly named the article or
topic in College Voice or clearly stated that they did not like any of the article. Only

one of the subjects gave a topic that was not in the magazine. The rest did not write

140
Table 10

Scale Items Used in the Final Measurement Model

Exogenous Variables*
1. Aag 0t=.80

2. Ad-editorial 0t=.86
compatibility

3. Product 0t=.77

Category
Involvement

4. Execution or--.99
Quality

5. Familiarity or=.80
of the Brand

Endogenous Variables“

1. Aav 0t=.95
2. AMI a=.97
3. Aad 0t=.98

4. Resistance 0t=.91
to Competitive
Ads

5. Brand Equity a=.93

Scale item labels (with item-factor loadings)

A1(0.50), A2(0.58), A3(0.58), A4(0.6l), A5(0.47), ~
A6(0.35), A7(0.27), A8(0.31), A10(0.32), A11(0.55),
A12(0.63).

Bl(0.74), B2(0.68), B3(O.80)

C1(0.54), C2(0.58), C3(0.69)

D1(0.98), D2(0.99), D3(0.97), D4(0.98),
D5(0.99), D6(0.98).

E1(0.77), E2(0.49), E3(0.74), E4(0.64).

Vl(0.92), V2(0.89), V3(0.93), V4(.74)
W1(0.92), W2(0.93), W3(0.95), W4(0.91).
X1(0.96), X2(0.95), X3(0.94), X4(0.95). X5(0.96).

Yl(0.93), Y2(0.94), Y3(0.73)

Zl(0.56), Z2(0.80), Z3(0.58), Z4(0.59), ZS(O.71),

Z6(0.56), Z7(0.77), 28(0.81), Z9(0.84), ZlO(0.83),

Zl 1(0.74), 212 (0.68).

* Exposure to other media and memory of the ad are composite scales not subject to
item-factor loading analysis because their items do not necessary have any

interrelations.

141
Table 11

Manipulation Check

T-tests Comparing Manipulated Clutter Level and
Perceived Clutter Level (one-tailed tests)

Manipulated Mean t-value gr p_
Level Perceived

Clutter Level
Lo Quantity 3.0 2.28 72 0.01
Hi Quantity 4.25
Lo Competitive- 5.06 .14 68 0.45
ness
Hi Competitive- 5.13
ness
Lo Intrusive- 4.68 -.11 65 0.46
ness
I-Ii Intrusive- 4.62
ness

down the topic or name of the article. Based on the high percentage of the correct
identification of the article, the data obtained in the study should reflect the response
of the subjects after the reading of the stimulus material.
Direct Effects of Clutter

Clutter had been hypothesized to negatively affect attitudes toward advertising
in a media vehicle (Aav) of the subjects. The t-test comparison of the mean scores of
Aav between low and high clutter levels in Table 12 shows that this hypothesis was
supported for both the quantity and intrusiveness dimension of clutter, but not for

competitiveness. Subjects perceiving a low quantity of clutter exhibited Aav scores

142
significantly higher than subjects perceiving a high quantity of clutter (t=-11.38,

df=121, p<.001). In other words, subjects perceiving a high quantity of clutter seem
to hold a more negative attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle than those
perceiving a low quantity of clutter. -

The intrusiveness dimension of clutter level exhibited the same pattern as the
quantity dimension. Subjects perceiving a low level of intrusiveness of clutter
displayed a significantly higher Aav score than subjects perceiving a high level of
intrusiveness (t=-8.66, df=128, p<.001). There was no significant difference in Aav
scores between the subjects perceiving high competitiveness of clutter and subjects
perceiving low competitiveness of clutter (t=-1.01, df=128, p=.l6).

Table 12

T-test Comparing Direct Efl’ects of Clutter on Aav (one-tailed tests)

Mean Aav t-value _c_l_l_’ p_
Score
Quantity Dimension
Low 5.78 -11.38 121 <.001
High 2.48
Competitiveness Dimension
Low 4.11 -1.01 128 .16
High 3.52
Intrusiveness Dimension
Low 5.06 -8.66 128 <.001
High 2.33

* one-tailed tests are used because the hypotheses have a predicted
direction.

143
The hypothesis that clutter level adversely affects AMI was not supported by

the data. Research results showed no significant difference between subjects
perceiving a high clutter level and a low clutter level in all three dimensions. Table
13 shows that subjects perceiving a low quantity clutter level do not have a higher
AMI score than subjects perceiving a high quantity clutter level (t=.32, df=100,
p=.38). Similarly, subjects perceiving a low intrusiveness clutter level do not have a
higher AMI score than subjects perceiving a high intrusiveness clutter level (t=1.24,

df=109, p=.l6).

Table 13

T-tests Comparing Direct Effects of Clutter on AMI (one-tailed tests)

Mean AMI t-value d_f p
Score
Quantity Dimension
Low 1.5 .32 100 .38
High 1.38
Competitiveness Dimension
Low .84 -l.36 109 .08
High 1.49
Intrusiveness Dimension
Low 1.57 1.24 109 .16
High 1.15

* one-tailed tests are used because the hypotheses have a predicted
direction. '

Since testing of the indirect effects of clutter was largely based on the memory

of a specific ad in the stimulus material, it was necessary to examine the general

144

performance of the noted ad readership and memory scores of the subjects. Table 14
lists the scores of the subjects on the various memory tasks. It shows that many
subjects reported that they did not remember any ad in the dummy magazine

(_ 54.6%). Very few subjects could accurately recall or recognize the focal ad. This
low performance in memory is usually expected in delayed recall tasks such as this
study because subjects are not instructed to pay attention to the ads, and they read the
magazine in a normal setting. Nonetheless, subjects’ recognition scores are
substantially better than aided recall scores. The Spiegel ad, the focal ad of this study,
scored quite well with 9.6% of the subjects who cited it as their best-remembered
brand. Spiegel was also the most frequently mentioned brand of all the brands in the
best-remembered category. Since only four subjects have named a non-existing brand
in the issue as the best-remembered brand, the self-reported recall appeared to reflect
the true recall of the brand.

In the aided recall task with a product category cue, subjects demonstrated
some confusion among product categories. It is more difficult to relate a given
product category to a brand than a given brand to a category (Farquhar and Herr
1993). Even though 29.9% reported that they saw a catalog apparel brand, quite a
number of them could not or did not write the brand name. Some identified a clothing

brand in the issue that was not a catalog apparel brand.

Table 14

Memory Performance

Best Remembered Brand

Spiegel

Not remembered any ad
Other brands in the issue
Wrong brand

Have not read any ad
Missing=18

Aided recall with product category cues

Correct
Wrong

Not applicable
Missing=20

Aided recall with visual cues

Correct
Wrong

Not applicable
Missing=25

Brand name recognition

Correct

Wrong

Have not seen any ad
Missing=18

Saw the ad?

Yes

No

Not noticed any ad
Missing=l6

%

9.6
54.8
24.3

4.3

7.0

% (reported remembered the
brand)
14.2 (29.9%)
6.2
79.6

% (reported remembered the
brand)

8.3 (17.9%)
1.9
89.8

%

37.4

55.6
7.0

35.9
57.3
6.8

146
Table 14 (cont’d)

Brand claim recognition

%
Correct 12.8
Wrong 29. 1 ~
Not applicable 58.1

Missing=16

Subjects responded poorly to the visual cues also. Only 8.3% of all the
subjects could recall the brand name correctly when given the visual cues. Compared
to the recall task with product category cues, the recall task with visual cues achieved
a better accuracy rate among those who claimed to have seen the ad with the listed
visual cues.

The specificity of the visual cues may account for such results. The scores on
brand name recognition and reported noted readership of the Spiegel ad are much
better than the aided recall tasks. The closeness among the scores of noted ad
readership and brand name recognition (37.4% vs. 35.9%) seem to indicate that the
recognition of a brand reflects the noted readership of its ad. Indeed, the correlation
between recognition of a brand name and noted readership was very strong (p.79,
p<0.01). The scores in brand claim recognition are substantially lower than the scores
in noted ad readership and brand name recognition. Only 12.8% of the subjects
identified the brand claim correctly. Those who reported not seeing the Spiegel ad
substituted the best-remembered brand for Spiegel. Hence, around 46% of the subjects

could provide complete data for every variable in the model. Those who did not

One way to examine the noted ad readership of subjects is to test the overall

S_tatu_s

right
bogus
bogus
right
right
bogus
right
right
bogus
bogus

147

advertising message involvement.

ads that subjects could identify most.

Mean correct identification of bogus ads
Mean correct identification of right ads

Missing=40

remember seeing any ad received a 0 score for Aad, resistance to competitive ads, and

recognition of ads that appear in both high and low clutter level manipulations. Table
15 reports the overall recognition of the ads. Subjects did better in identifying the
bogus ads than the correct ads. Among the 10 ads, the average correct identification
of the bogus ad is 75% while the average correct identification of the correct ads is

only 66%. Vibrance Shampoo and Redkin Conditioning Color were the two correct

Table 15
Noted Ad Scores
Brand % Correct Identification
Marlboro Cigarettes 66.7
Allstate Insurance 86.4
Honda Accord 76.5
Jacques Moret 55.6
Redkin Conditioning Color 69.1
United Airlines 72.8
Finlandia Vodka 59.3
Vibrance Shampoo 79.0
AT & T 64.2
Motorola Cellular Phone 72.8

148
Indirect Effects of Clutter

The indirect effects of clutter were examined through the parameter estimates
of the causal paths in the structural equation model. Table 16 reports all the
parameter estimates of this study in the original research model generated by the ~
program LISREL VH using the maximum likelihood method. This method
progressively improves the parameter estimates so that the discrepancy between the
estimates and the true values will only be caused by a sampling fluctuation (Hayduk
1987). Moreover, this method does not require the assumption of normality (Joreskog
and Sorbom 1989). It has been suggested that ordinal data such as those
used in this study should employ polychoral correlations instead of product moment
correlations because the skewness may be corrected by polychoral correlations
(Joreskog and Sorbom 1989). There is also an Opposing view that product moment
correlations should be used even if the data are ordinal because there is no
mathematical proof that polychoral correlations can be justifiably entered into the fit
function for maximum likelihood estimation. Moreover, unless the skewness is caused
by a narrow range in the scale, the usage of polychoral correlations cannot rectify the
problem (Hayduk 1987). Peter and Darcin (1991) also contend that the reasoning of
the scale and its meeting of the assumption of normality and linearity should
detemrine the choice of the statistics used, not the type of scale. This study employed
the Pearson product moment correlation matrix in estimating the structural equation
solutions.

The hypothesis that the more positive the Aav, the higher the AMI was rejected

149
(1321:.03, t=.54). Hypothesis 3b predicted that the higher the AMI, the more positive

the Aad. The data supported this hypothesis (832:.22, t=3.37). It was also
hypothesized that both positive Aad and better memory of the ad will induce a
stronger resistance to competitive ads. Only the hypothesis that Aad leads to stronger
resistance to competitive ads was supported by the data (853:.67, t=8.51). Memory did
not appear to have a significant effect on resistance to competitive ads (1354:.11,
t=1.36). The three antecedents of brand equity: Aad, resistance to competitive ads,
and memory of the ad all positively correlated with brand equity; but only memory of
the ad has a significant effect on brand equity (1364:.22, t=l.99). Aad and resistance to
competitive ads have no significant effects on brand equity (363:.07, t=0.47; 865:.10,
t=.77).
Effects of Countervailing Factors

Ad-editorial compatibility was predicted to countervail the effect of clutter by
creating a more positive Aav. The data supported such a prediction (713:0.18, t=2.54).
Aag was also predicted to affect Aav by attitude transfer. This hypothesis was
supported by a significant relationship between Aag and Aav (712:.24, t=3.34).
Product category involvement did not have any significant effect on AMI (725.05,
t=l.4). Contrary to the findings of James and Kover (1992), Aag did not have any
effect on AMI in this study (722:.00, t=-.003).

Hypothesis 7a and 7b predicted that better ad execution quality leads to higher
AMI and more positive Aad. Both hypotheses were strongly supported by the data

(725=°919 t=23-4; 735=o73, t=10.9).

150

Hypothesis 8a predicted the moderating role of familiarity with the brand on

Table 16

the relationship between Aad and brand equity. This hypothesis was tested by

partialling out "familiarity with the brand" in the correlation between Aad and brand

Standardized Parameter Estimates of the Original Model (t-value)

B,,=.03(.09) y”=-.48(-6.67) §,=.61
332:.22(3.37) 7.3:.18(2.54) §2=. 17
B43=.S6(7.21) 725:.91(23.4) C3=.09
B,,=.67(8.51) 735:.73(10.9) €5.59
Ba=.22( 1.99) y“=.10(2.01) C,=.46
B“=.10(0.77) y,,=.03(0.71) €5.89
863:.07(0.47) yu=.05(1.4)
1354:.1 1(1.36) 736:.04( l .27)
y47=-.03(-.38)
722:.000(-.0003)
7.2:.24(3.34)
x2 = 85.26 df=38 p<.001
Goodness of fit index (GFI) = .92
Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) = .80
Total Coefficient of Determination = .95

equity. The zero-order correlation coefficient between Aad and brand equity dropped
from .28 to a partial r of .15. The hypothesis was supported, but it must be noted that
controlling brand familiarity did not reduce the partial r between Aad and brand equity
to 0. The relationship between Aad and brand equity was therefore not spurious.
Hypothesis 8b predicted that familiarity with the brand facilitates the memory of the
ad. This hypothesis was also supported (746:.10 , t=2.01).

The last hypothesis predicted that greater exposure to other media will reduce

151

the memory of the ad. This hypothesis was rejected due to the insignificant parameter
estimate (mp-0.03, t=-.38). Figure 4 summarizes the hypotheses-testing results.
Validig of the Model

The research model shows a moderate fit (36:85.26, df=38, p<.001, GFI=.92,
AGFI=.80). The null hypothesis that the model fits the data could be rejected because
the model is statistically significantly different from the data with a significance at a
0.05 level. The modification indices show that the model can be improved by relaxing
some of parameters and adding new parameters. In light of the insignificant causal
paths between exposure to other media and memory, product category involvement
and AMI, Aav and AMI, the research model is modified by dropping these paths, and
adding product category involvement as a direct determinant of brand equity and the
direct effect of execution quality on memory of the ad. The final model is presented
in Figure 5 and shows a good fit (x2=54.86, df=36, p=.02, GFI=.94, AGFI=.87).
Although the chi-square value is still large, it should be noted that chi-square is not a
very good measurement of fit because its size is affected by the normality assumption
and sample size. The adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) is a better indicator of
the fit of the model with the adjustment of standard errors (Joreskog and Sorbom
1989). In this case, the AGFI of the final model is quite satisfactory with .87. The
total coefficient of determination of the structural equations is .95, which means that
95% of the variance in the endogenous variables can be explained by the exogenous
variables. The modification indices also show that there would be no significant gain

by adding or dropping any parameters.

H1.

H2.

H3a.
H3b.
H3c.
H3d.

H3c.

152

Higher clutter level, more negative Aav

Higher clutter level, lower AMI

More positive Aav, higher AMI

Higher AMI, more positive Aad

More positive Aad, better memory of the ad

More positive Aad, stronger resistance to
competitive ads

Better memory of the ad, stronger resistance
to competitive ads

H3f. More positive Aad, higher brand equity

H3g.

H3h.

Stronger resistance to competitive Ads,
higher brand equity
Better memory of the ad, higher brand equity

H4. More compatible the clutter with

H5a.
H5b.

the editorial content, more positive the Aav
More positive Aag, more positive Aav
More positive Aag, lower AMI

H6. Higher product category involvement, higher AMI

H7a.
H7b.
H8a.

H8b.

Better ad execution quality, higher AMI

Better ad execution quality, more positive Aad

Higher familiarity with the brand, lower
correlation between Aad and brand equity

Higher familiarity with the brand, better memory
of the ad

H9. Greater exposure to other media, poorer memory

ofthead

Figure 4

Summary of Hypotheses-testing Results

Results

partially
supported
rejected
rejected
supported
supported

supported

rejected
rejected

rejected
supported

supported
supported
rejected

rejected

supported
supported
supported
supported

rejected

153

o .25 Cl=f70 t 5:48
. C 6 =.7$-

-e37 111 .20 ..

 

 

.1 9
is
Attitudes toward
5.1 gm" LM' 11 advertising
fig ttltudea toward “W9 1 in a media vehicle (ll-item)
ln general(11-ltem) n2 Advertisi Meesa
i3 Ad-editorial compatibility (3-ltem) |mm2gt (44:31.13)
£4 Product Category Involvement (3-lteni) 113 Attitudes toward the ad
£5 Ad execution quality (64mm) (S-itern)
is Familiarity with the brand (ll-item) 114 “"900! 0’ "19 'd
11 Reactance toward
5 competitive ads (3-ltein)
“5 Brand equity (1 Z-ltem)
Chl-equare- 54.86 df-36 p-0.02
6"- 0.94
AGFI- 0.87
Total Coefficient of detenntnatlon- 0.95
Figure 5

Final Model

154
The model yielded similar results in both the intrusiveness and the quantity

dimensions as shown in Table 17. The usage of recall only, recognition only, or both
as the measure of memory does not make any major difference in the fit of the model
as shown in Table 18. Table 19 lists the direct, indirect, and total effects of the ~

variables on brand equity.

Table 17
Comparison of Goodness of Fit by Clutter Dimension
Combined Dimensions Qpantig Intrusiveness
x2 54.86 59.83 68.51
p .02 .01 .01
GFI .94 .93 .93
AGFI .87 .85 .84
Total Coefficient .95 .95 .97
of Determination
Table 18

Comparison of Goodness of Fit by Memory Measures

Recall and Recogpition Recogpition Recall

x2 54.86 50.63 55.33
p .02 .05 .02
GFI .94 .94 .94
AGFI .87 .87 .87
Total Coefficient .95 .96 .95

of Determination

155
Table 19

Effects of the Variables on Brand Equity

Total Effects Direct Effects Indirect Effects ~
Clutter level -.05 0 —.05
Ad-editorial .04 0 * .04
compatibility
Aag .04 0 .04
Ad execution .11 0 .11
quality
Product .24 .24 0
category
involvement
Familiarity .21 .17 .04
with the
brand
Aav .15 .15 0
AMI .02 0 .02
Aad .11 0 .11
Memory .20 .20 0

Multiple Regr_'ession Analysis of the Variables

To examine the explanatory power of the variables in predicting brand equity, a
multiple regression of the variables on brand equity was conducted. The results of the

regression is shown in Table 20. Ad-editorial compatibility, product category

156

involvement, ad execution quality, familiarity with the brand, and Aav seem to be

good predictors of brand equity. The variables explain only 30% of the variance in

brand equity with an adjusted R2=.30.

Table 20
Multiple Regression of the Variables on Brand Equity

Standardized*
Was.

1. Clutter level .03
2. Ad-editorial compatibility -.22
3. Product Category Involvement .28
4. Ad Execution Quality -.44
5. Familiarity with the Brand .24
6. Aag .13
7. Exposure to other media -.03
8. Aav -. 15
9. AMI .04
10. Aad .32
11. Resistance toward competitive .11
ads
12. Memory of the ad .04

F: 5.69 p < .001

Adjusted R2: .30
Standardized Residuals=l.91

Note: One—tailed tests are used because all the independent
variables have a predicted direction on the dependent

variables.

t-value

.39
-2.59
3.56
-3.13
2.86
1.61
-.44
1.70
.24
1.40
.99

.39

.35
.005
.001
.08
.003

.33
.05
.41
.08
.16

.35

CHAPTER 6
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Advertising Clutter and Brand Eguig

Advertising clutter has been viewed as an advertiser’s enemy and a public
nuisance. Researchers and industry practitioners debate on whether clutter affects
advertising effects. Armed with the selective attention argument, clutter as a problem
of concern has been rejected by critics. The captive audience assumption and the
cognitive approach of past research seem unable to answer such a challenge. Despite
researchers’ efforts, very limited insight into the nature of clutter and how clutter
affects advertising effects has been offered.

This study attempts to shed light on this controversy by differentiating the
direct and indirect effects of clutter. Factors that may Countervail the effects of clutter
during the advertising process are also examined. The overload and interference
explanation of the effect of clutter are redefined here to incorporate both cognitive and
affective responses of consumers toward clutter. Perceived threat of overload and
interference, instead of the actual experience of overload and clutter, are postulated to
cause the negative effect of clutter on an individual’s attitude toward advertising in a
media vehicle, and also on his/her advertising message involvement. In addition to the
overload and interference explanation, the theory of psychological reactance is

introduced to explain consumers’ negative responses toward clutter.

157

15 8
Direct and Indirect Effects of Clutter

Results of this study show that there is a significant effect of clutter level on
attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle, but not on advertising message
involvement. The hypothesis that clutter has a negative effect on the attitudes of ‘
consumers was supported, but the evidence was not supportive of the hypothesis that
AMI is mediated by Aav. It may be suspected that the variations in time spent on
reading the magazine could explain the difference in AMI, but the data showed no
correlation between time spent on reading and AMI, nor between time spent on
reading and noted ad readership. When more time was spent on the magazine, readers
read more articles, not more ads.

The findings show that Aav and AMI are two separate processes determined
by different factors. Aav seems to be determined by Aag, clutter level and ad-editorial
compatibility; AMI is largely shaped by the execution quality of the ad as perceived
by the individual. The data also show that clutter has a weak direct effect on memory.
This seemed to conform to the interference and overload explanation that clutter
reduces the information processing capacity of consumers. It should be noted that the
t-test comparison does not show a difference between clutter level and memory of the
ad. The weak relationship only appears when a complete set of variables are linked to
one other.

The indirect effects of clutter on brand equity appears dependent upon whether
or not Aav has any effects on brand equity. Attitudes toward the ad, memory of the

ad, and resistance toward the ad were hypothesized as the three advertising factors that

159
affect brand equity directly. Results of this study show that only memory of the ad

has a significant direct effect on brand equity. Attitudes toward the ad affect brand
equity indirectly by facilitating the memory of the ad. They also facilitate the
resistance to competitive ads. Since the data shows that AMI has quite a strong effect
on Aad; and Aav facilitates brand equity, it can be deduced that clutter indirectly
affects brand equity.

Surprisingly, resistance to competitive ads appear to bear no relationship to
brand equity. This may imply that brand equity and resistance to competitive ads are
two separate domains. Brand equity is formed by a consumer’s cumulative direct and
indirect experience of a brand, while resistance is a process of persuasion and counter
persuasion that is affected by the positive image and comparative advantages of the
products shown in the ads.

The inference to be drawn from such independence between resistance to
competitive ads and brand equity is that consumers may not have a definite choice for
some products. Multiple brands can co-exist in the evoked set of the consumers.
Situational factors such as product availability may determine the final choice. Even
if a consumer does not resist competitive ads, he/she may still give a high rating to an
advertised brand. This is because there may be several brands with similar high equity
in consumers’ minds. The competition between brands in consumers’ minds may not
be a zero-sum game as marketers contend. Unless the equity of a brand is much
higher than a competitive brand, the purchase decision may be more likely to be based

on a multiple brand set with similar equity.

160
The Role of Countervailing Factors

Five factors have been identified in this study as possible factors that may
countervail the negative effect of clutter on brand equity: advertising—editorial
compatibility, attitudes toward advertising in general, product category involvement, ad
execution quality, and familiarity with the brand. These factors have been shown to
countervail the effect of clutter by enhancing either the Aav, the AMI, memory of the
ad, and brand equity during the advertising communication process.

Advertising-editorial compatibility is a factor that appears to contribute to the
development of a positive attitude toward advertising in a media vehicle. Attitudes
toward advertising in general seem to affect Aav only, and not advertising message
involvement. The inference is that Aag is accessible to consumers when they form
their Aav during the process of media consumption.

Product category involvement does not appear to have any impact on
advertising message involvement. Its role in the advertising process is seemingly not
a motivating force for message processing, but a basis for the judgement of a brand’s
equity. There is a significant direct effect of product category involvement on brand
equity. The higher the product category involvement of the consumer, the more likely
the consumer is to rate a brand in that product category with a higher equity. This
may indicate that the a brand’s equity is dependent upon the product’s perceived
importance to the consumer. In the case of products with which consumers are highly
involved, such as automobiles, brand equity may be a more important factor in the

purchase decision than less involved products.

161
Ad execution quality apparently plays a very significant role in enhancing the

advertising message involvement of the consumer, the evaluation of the ad, and
memory of the ad. This factor almost entirely explains why a consumer pays great
attention to an ad with high AMI and why he/she remembers an ad. It may well be
that the aesthetic value of an ad is the motivating force for a deeper processing of
advertisements because it can lead consumers to expect the pleasant consequence of
reading the ad. It is a major factor that can explain why an ad can still be
remembered in a competitive message environment.

Familiarity with the brand was found to moderate the effect of Aad on brand
equity. Such results are consistent with other studies on the moderating effect of
familiarity. It plays a significant role in the processing of an ad by enhancing its
retrieval in memory recall tasks, and enhancing brand equity directly by providing
alternative cues other than the ad to determine a brand’s equity. This seems to favor
established brands in advertising, a view in accordance with the emphasis of brand
familiarity as a prerequisite of brand equity (Moran 1990; Biel 1992; Macrae 1991).

Exposure to other media is a variable introduced to tap the effect of distraction
from additional input of other media on the memory of the ad. This factor does not
show any significant effect on the memory of the ad nor other measures of advertising
effects. It may be suspected that skipping of the ads may have moderated the
relationship between memory of the ad and exposure to other media, but controlling
the percentage of ads skipped does not improve the correlation between memory and

exposure to the other media. Hence, exposure to other media does not affect memory

162
of the ad in this study.

That the intensity of exposure to other media does not have any effect on
memory is a finding that is contrary to the assumption of overload and interference. It
may be possible that the intensity of exposure is not a good measure of the extraneous
media consumption factor. The quantity of media consumption may not affect an
individual unless the individual pay full attention to these media. Perhaps a subject’s
involvement with the stimulus material and other media is a better measure of the
interference of media consumption intensity with memory in a natural media
consumption environment.

How far these factors can countervail the negative direct and indirect effects of
clutter seems to rest upon the coexistence and strength of these factors. For example,
if an ad is placed in a highly compatible editorial environment, but its execution
quality is mediocre, it may not be able to capture the attention of the consumer in a
highly-cluttered condition. If all the countervailing factors are present, then it is likely
that the effect of clutter can be offset by these factors and become invisible in the
measurement of brand equity or memory of the ad. In reality, very rarely can an ad
possess all the countervailing factors because some of these factors are not
controllable, such as the product category involvement of the consumer. Advertisers
can only manipulate those factors that are within their options such as media
placement and execution quality.

The fact that only 30% of the variance in brand equity can be explained by the

variables in the regression model is no surprise since advertising is only one of the

163

many sources used to build a brand’s equity. The difference in the results between the
solutions of the structural equations model and the multiple regression model can be
explained by difference in the mechanisms of the two analyses. Structural equations
models can decompose the direct and indirect effects among the variables. Since“
multiple regression cannot account for indirect effects and the inter-relationships
among the endogenous variables, the results should be viewed as merely an indicator
of the explanatory power of the variables as mutually independent predictors of brand
equity.

In short, brand equity in this study has been shown to be caused by familiarity
with the brand, memory of the brand’s ad, and the product category involvement.
Clutter only affects brand equity indirectly by affecting the Aav and memory of the
ad.

Three Dimensions of Clutter as Evaluative Measures of Media Vehicles

Media vehicles are chosen for their delivery of target audience and their
advertising environment. Clutter was conceptualized in this study as the three-
dimensional density of advertising in a media vehicle, comprising of quantity,
competitiveness, and intrusiveness. Results of this study demonstrate the negative
effect of clutter on the consumer’s evaluation of the advertising environment in both
the quantity and the intrusiveness dimension. The individual differences in the
tolerance level of each dimension of clutter are very pronounced in the intrusiveness
dimension, but not significant in the quantity dimension of clutter. For the quantity

dimension of clutter, the evidence suggests that advertisers can still evaluate different

164

media vehicles’ clutter level with the indices employed in this study. For the
intrusiveness dimension, an advertiser may possibly use the indices employed in this
study as an estimate of readers’ clutter tolerance level in similar type of magazine
titles. ‘

The effects of the competitiveness dimension of clutter cannot be measured in
this study because of the failure of the competitiveness manipulation. A plausible
explanation of why the competitiveness dimension manipulation failed to induce a
perception of high competitiveness in this study is that the subjects might not have
read most of the ads. They could not perceive the competitiveness of the ads and so
were not affected by the competitiveness dimension. The highly unequal number of
cases between perceived high competitiveness and low competitiveness may also
account for the insignificant effect of competitiveness. With such a restrictive
assumption that readers have to attend to all the competitive ads, the utility of the
competitiveness dimension of clutter may be somewhat limited. Even if it can be
shown that competitiveness also negatively affects the Aav, AMI, and memory of the
ad; competitiveness of the ads in a media vehicle would be meaningful only if an
advertiser is certain that most of the ads of the vehicle would be read. Otherwise, it is
doubtful whether or not consumers can recognize the competitiveness of the advertised
products in a media vehicle.
Attitude Transfer from General to Sflific

Studies on attitudes toward advertising generally imply that there will be an

attitude transfer from a general media class to a specific media vehicle and to a

165
specific ad. This notion is only partially supported in this study. The accessibility of

attitudes toward a general object in the formation of evaluation on a specific object is
low. When a consumer reads a magazine, for example, its specific editorial content
and advertising mix are the basis for the formation of the attitude toward the ‘
advertising in that magazine. His/her general attitude toward advertising is accessible
and exerts influence on his/her Aav formation. This seems to support the attitude
transfer hypothesis. However, attitudes toward a specific ad are largely caused by how
well the ad is executed. There is no attitude transfer from Aav to Aad, nor from Aag
to Aad. This is consistent with findings about the antecedents of Aad (Biehal et a1.
1992).

Attitude researchers contend that a positive attitude toward advertising in
general can enhance advertising effects. Results of this study indicates that Aag plays
a role in the processing of advertisements of specific brands by affecting Aav. It is
also noteworthy that there is a strong positive relationship between Aad and resistance
toward competitive ads. Once an ad is accepted by the consumer, then the consumer
is more likely to resist competitive ads. Aad can be a good indicator of whether an ad
has successfully persuaded the consumer to withstand the lure of competitive ads.
Reliabilig and Validig of the Scales

Ten scales were developed in this study to measure the latent variables. These
scales in general displayed satisfactory reliability and validity by measures of
consistency, equality of items, item-scale correlations, percentage of variance

explained, and discriminant validity in a confirmatory factor analysis. Of particular

166

interest are the ad execution quality scale and brand equity scale which can be
reexamined with future marketing and advertising research. The number of items is
not too large for inclusion in a study and the scale adequately measures the two
constructs. The ad execution quality scale can explain 97.5% of all the variances with
six items only. The brand equity scale can explain 59% of the variances. The
subscales for each of the four dimensions of customer-based brand equity -- positive
association, brand loyalty, perceived quality, and top-of-mind awareness -- perform
even better. Over 83% of the variance of the top of mind awareness dimension, and
82.7% the variance of the perceived quality dimension can be explained by each
subscale representing the dimension.

Most of the scales adapted from other studies show better results than the
original scales, except the Aag scale which explains 36 percent of the variance only.
The original Aag scale is reported to be able to explain 58% of the variance
(Muehling 1987), but its results were based on a homogeneous sample of business
students. Its 31 items also limit the practical utility of the scale as one of the
variables in general surveys. The Aad scale and AMI scale employed in this study are
simplified versions of Olney et al. (1992) and Laczniak and Muehling’s (1993) scales
respectively. Containing fewer items, these scales score as high or higher in reliability
and validity than the longer original scales. This may indicate a refinement of the
scales and may be applied in future studies.

The usage of multiple items in measuring the latent variables allows a

researcher to assess the measurement error of his/her research model. The error of the

167

measurement for the indicators can be shown in the squared multiple correlations. The
higher the squared multiple correlations are, the lower the errors of measurement are.
Among all the scales, the indicators of ad execution quality construct scored best with
an average squared multiple correlation of 0.95. ‘

Although Aag, Aav, and Aad are three attitude scales that look similar to one
another, they are actually three distinct constructs. Data in this study showed that they
are three discriminantly valid constructs of their own right in confirmatory factor
analysis. It is necessary to differentiate them when measuring consumers’ attitudes
toward advertising. The choice of which attitude scale to use should be based on the
research question. If the attitude object of interest is pertinent to the media vehicle,
then items in the Aav scale can be used, instead of Aag. However, if the research
interest is on advertising as a social institution, only items in Aag scale should be
used. In the Aag scale, there is a distinction between the global attitude statement and
the belief statement. The belief statement reflects the respondents’ knowledge of and
experience with advertising. One possible inference is that the stronger the correlation
between attitude statements and belief statements, the more the respondent’s attitude is
based on knowledge and experience.

The familiarity with the brand scale also consists of two types of experiences.
Advertising experience had a high loading of 0.74 on the scale. Product usage
experience produced a relatively low loading of 0.49 on the scale. This suggests that
there is a big difference in direct experience and indirect experience of a brand. A

person may be highly familiar with a brand just by being frequently exposed to a

168

brand’s advertising, but may have never used the brand before. A person that uses a
brand often may not be often exposed to the brand’s advertising if he/she is not an
active media user.
Implications of the Study ~
Theoretical Implications

One major discovery of this study was the individual differences in the
tolerance level of clutter. Past studies such as Brown and Rothschild (1993), Pillai
(1990), Cobb (1985) have assumed that there is a common high clutter level for every
individual and the effect of clutter is across the board. Results of this study show
that this assumption is far from valid, especially in the intrusiveness dimension of
clutter. Some consumers may welcome advertising so much that they do not consider
advertising as interrupting their consumption of the media content. Some consumers
may be so hostile toward advertising that even the arrangement of the ads does not
interrupt their reading, they still consider the ads as intrusive. The intrusive dimension
of clutter demonstrates its effects on Aav only when the individual’s perception of
intrusiveness level is used, but not in a manipulated intrusiveness level situation.

The combined cognitive and affective approach used in this study has provided
a fuller explanation of the effect of clutter on advertising effects. The direct effects of
clutter on attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle was generally confirmed by
the data for two of the three proposed dimensions of clutter: the quantity and
intrusiveness dimensions of clutter. Clutter only has a weak direct negative effect on

memory too. This may indicate that the direct effect of clutter on memory as posited

169
by the interference and overload theory can only be applied to a limited number of

individuals.

Perhaps one of the most significant findings of this study is the importance of
attitudes to the advertising process. There is a direct effect of Aav on brand equity,
suggesting that a perceived favorable advertising environment could facilitate the
acceptance of the advertisements and the advertised products. The high coefficient
between Aad and resistance to competitive ads reinforce the importance of the
studying of Aad in explaining the effects of advertising on consumers. Since
execution quality is an important determinant of Aad as shown in the results of this
study, future researchers on Aad would have to provide a good measure of ad
execution quality, instead of taking execution quality for granted.

This research model offers a preliminary explanation of how Aav and Aad are
formed. Advertising message involvement plays quite a significant role in this attitude
formation process. It allows a consumer to process an ad with more time and
cognitive effort, as suggested by Laczniak and Muehling (1993), so that a more
positive evaluation of the ad can be formed. Ad execution quality also contributes to
this process by facilitating the advertising message involvement and providing sensory
gratification to the consumers with cues other than the advertised product.

In a multiple competitive advertising message environment, an ad can fulfil its
task of building brand equity by its well-crafted artistic value with an appropriate
media placement. The aesthetic value of the ad is very important in creating a high

advertising message involvement and a positive Aad to countervail the negative Aav

170

and lower memory in a highly cluttered environment. Ad execution quality is more
important for new brands than established brands because new brands do not enjoy the
advantage of having -the alternative cues of brand familiarity as established brands. The
understanding of the importance of ad execution quality may mean a dilemma between
emphasizing high frequency at the expense of execution quality, and emphasizing
execution quality at the expense of frequency. The latter seems to give a better payoff
to advertisers if building brand equity is the goal of advertising.

Moreover, the ad should be placed in an compatible editorial environment
which can .facilitate the development of a positive Aav. Such positive Aav guides the
consumers’ processing of the ad as suggested by Yi (1993) and Thorson (1990). A
well-executed ad and a compatible editorial environment can be efficient clutterbusters
that can countervail the negative effect of clutter.

A brand’s equity is built by many factors. In this study, familiarity with the
brand, memory of the ad, and product category involvement all were found to
contribute to the enhancement of a brand’s equity directly. Consistent with the views
of other researchers on brand equity (Aaker 1993; Moran 1990; Baker et al. 1986),
advertising plays an important role in familiarizing consumers with the brand. A
positive memory of the ad will give a brand higher equity.

The ad execution quality scale developed in this study is an answer to the call
for improving measures of execution quality of the ad (Bell 1988). The five elements
of a print ad -- headline, copy, layout, visual, and typefaces, in addition to a global

evaluation of the craftsmanship of the ad, form the basis of evaluation. This approach

17 1
of differentiating the quality of the ad in terms of the provocativeness of the headline,

the writing skill of the copy, the picture’s attractiveness, the layout’s outstandingness,
and the appeal of the typefaces from a consumer’s perspective seems to be highly
reliable and valid in confirmatory factor analysis. It may be tested in future studies to
assess the role of ad execution quality in the advertising process. The scale could be
adapted to other media by the production characteristics of the medium.

Magazines have long been viewed as a high involvement advertising medium
where readers are consciously aware of what they have read and learned. However,
this study indicates that low involvement learning of advertising is also possible in
self-paced media such as magazines. The overall noted readership performance of the
subjects in this study provides evidence of such a low involvement learning process.
Many magazine readers do not admit that they are influenced by the ads.
Unconsciously, the ads have sneaked into their minds. The subjects could correctly
identify brands that were or were not advertised in the issue although they said they
did not remember seeing any ad. The higher scores in recognition rather than the
aided recall scores also indicate that consumers do not realize they already have a
memory structure of the ad. Nevertheless, more cognitive efforts and deeper memory
formation is necessary to achieve a strong Aad to resist competitive ads. Noted
readership is not enough to do a successful sell for a brand. Successful advertising
that can withstand competition may only be possible when a consumer has undergone
a high involvement learning of the ad and develops a positive Aad.

The negative effect of clutter on magazine advertising effects found in this

172

study can be a warning sign for other new media which are rushing for advertising
revenues such as on-lines services and some of the pay cable services. These media
may need to look out for the clutter level that their subscribers can accept and provide .
a balance of ad service and editorial service before a negative Aav develops for their
service.

Methodological Implications

This study attempted to simulate the actual reading environment for magazine
advertising. As expected, the overall advertising recall performance of the subjects
was much lower when compared to other studies on clutter using forced exposure in.
laboratory settings. The relatively low scores in memory of the ad in this study than 4
previous studies may indicate a big difference between tapping audiences’ responses in
an uninstructed delayed recall task and settings that require subjects to concentrate on
the stimulus materials. Such low scores on the memory of individual ads may be a
better reflection of reality.

The presence of both editorial content and advertisements in the stimulus
materials can test the synergy between the editorial content and advertisements in an
editorial medium such as magazines. This factor has been largely ignored in most
studies of magazine ads which isolate magazine ads from the editorial content. Since
advertising media contain both editorial content and ads, the editorial content and. ads
can compete for the attention of the readers. They can also be complimentary to each
other. For example, this study has found a positive effect of editorial content’s

compatibility with advertising on Aav.

173

The procedures of checking the appropriateness of the stimulus materials and
the validity of the manipulation are vital to a correct interpretation of the results. For
example, the failure of the competitiveness dimension manipulation in this study can
distort the results. The checking of the intrusiveness dimension reveals the high ‘
individual difference in clutter perception level.

The sample in this study has an advantage over most experimental studies in
advertising which used either business or advertising students as their subjects. The
recruitment of students in general education classes is much more difficult than in
advertising/marketing classes. The great effort to recruit non-advertising student
subjects can pay off by providing a much broader group of subjects, most of whom
have no training or preference in advertising or related topics. The bias of subjects in
affecting the results can be minimized. With a diverse college student sample, results
of this study have a higher generalizability than other similar experimental research.

The effect of clutter is the same with either recall or recognition as the memory
measure. The two measures yield similar results because both measures have cross-
checking mechanisms and are of considerable difficulty. Over-reporting is not likely
to happen. Subjects have to know the brand’s product category and the visual
characteristics of the ad in order to get scores in the aided recall task. With the
recognition measure, the presence of similar bogus brands and actual excerpts of the
claims of different ads in the same issue confuse subjects who do not remember the ad
well. Results of this study provide further support to the suggestion that both methods

can be as good to measure the memory of the subject in delayed situations (Singh,

174
Rothschild and Churchill 1988).

Overall recognition tasks show that the shampoo and haircare ads were best
recognized among the subjects. The frequent usage of shampoo and haircare products
by subjects may account for the high recognition rates of these two ads. This question
has the highest number of missing data. One possible reason is that it is put at the
end of a lengthy questionnaire. To identify ten ads may seem to require too much
effort of the subject. Another reason may be that subjects really could not identify
the ads at all and just left the answer blank.

The application of the structural equations modeling technique in this study
decomposes the direct and indirect relationships between clutter and advertising
effects. The structural parameter estimates not only show the relationships between
the exogenous variables and endogenous variables, but also reveal the relationships
among the endogenous variables. Missing causal paths can be identified by the
modification indices. For example, the effects of product category involvement on
brand equity could not be known using traditional methods of statistical analysis such
as AN OVA. Researchers on clutter and other advertising effects may use this
technique to broaden the horizons of their conceptualization. Studies on advertising
effects can be freed from the constraints of association between variables and can
avoid falling into the traps of distal fallacy. A meaningful linkage of the variables can

provide a fuller picture of the advertising process.

175
Practical Implications

The-worry of advertisers about the effect of clutter on advertising effectiveness
is partially supported in this study. Clutter lowers the Aav and to a lesser extent, the
memory of the ad by the consumer. By negatively affecting Aav and memory of the
ad, clutter indirectly affects Aad and brand equity, respectively. Results of this study
confirm the suggestions of practitioners that there are countervailing factors that can
offset the negative impact of clutter on Aav and memory of the ad. These factors are
the ad execution quality and advertising-editorial compatibility. The former is the job
of the creative staff and the latter is the job of the media planning staff. Advertisers
should strive to maximize the AMI of the ad by creating a high quality advertisement
that excels in headlines, copy, visual, typeface, and layout. The high AMI then
achieved can facilitate the development of a positive Aad. Ads should be placed in a
compatible editorial environment to maximize the benefit of a positive Aav in
enhancing an advertised brand’s equity.

The three dimensions of clutter identified in this study may serve as an
additional evaluative measure of a media vehicle for an advertiser. As this study
shows, the quantity and the intrusiveness of clutter have a negative impact on Aav and
memory of the ad. If the ad of an advertiser does not possess the countervailing
factors such as a very high execution quality, the advertiser should try to avoid media
vehicles with a high clutter level because his/her ad is highly likely to be missed by
the consumer in a cluttered environment. The large readership of popular magazines

may not be appropriate for some advertisers because their clutter level is usually high

176

and their editorial environment may not be compatible with the product.

Advertising media owners can benefit from this study by reviewing the three
dimensions of clutter in their own media. The large quantity of ads could produce an
unfavorable environment for consumers to process the ads by the resultant negative
Aav. When advertisers become suspicious of the quality of the advertising
environment of the media vehicle, they may withdraw their advertising support. The
short-term gain in advertising pages may not be able to compensate the media for its
eventual loss of advertising effectiveness in the long run.

The belief that a more intrusive arrangement of ads will get better attention is
not supported in this study. In the manipulated intrusiveness conditions, there is no
significant difference in the AMI score between high and low intrusiveness level.
When intrusiveness is determined by subjects’ perception, high intrusiveness levels
create a negative impact on Aav and memory. This result has great implications on
the arrangement of the advertising pod. If intrusiveness does not yield gain in AMI,
the media should not risk the resistance from the readers by interrupting their reading
of the media content. Advertisements do not necessarily need to infiltrate into an
editorial unit to create an impact if their execution quality is high and compatible with
the editorial content.

The effect of advertising editorial compatibility in affecting Aav may indicate a
need for media owners to rethink their strategy in recruiting advertisers and editorial
policy. If they wish to maintain their current editorial profile and be independent from

advertisers’ pressure, they may want to go after advertisers who have products

177

compatible to their editorial content. For example, a general interest magazine such as
Readers ’ Digest may not want to recruit industrial advertisers such as Exxon Oil
Refinery. If the media owners would like to broaden their pool of advertisers, their
editorial policy may have to change to accommodate their needs. If they want to ‘
recruit more car advertisers, they may need to include more articles on automobiles or
life-style features to provide a compatible editorial environment for these advertisers.
The risk of this strategy is that the media vehicle will relegate itself as an vehicle of
advertisers and may antagonize its readers who do not like the shift in editorial
content.

Limitations of the study

This study recruited a fairly representative sample of college students by
recruiting subjects in general education classes. The requirement of answering two
questionnaires at two consecutive classes and take a magazine back home to read
posed a barrier to subject recruitment. The final sample size of 130 is acceptable
(excluding those who read more than three articles previously), but not large enough to
further explore all the possible parameters in the measurement model in the structural
equations.

The failure of the manipulation of the. competitiveness dimension of clutter is
the greatest drawback of the study. For future studies that need to manipulate this
dimension, it is necessary to know how competitiveness is perceived by consumers. It
may be so product-specific that a pre-test on the products’ similarity on the perceptual

map of consumers may be required before the actual experiment is conducted. If the

178

manipulation still fails after a pre-test on the competitiveness of the products has been
conducted, then one can draw the conclusion that competitiveness is a valid concept
only when all the alternative/competitive ads have been read by the consumer.

The usage of a new magazine as a stimulus material may explain why clutter
did not stimulate advertising avoidance behavior in this study. As discussed in Chapter
2, if individuals are not familiar with the format or content of the media vehicle, they
are less likely to skip the ads. If the tested magazine is one that the subjects subscribe
to, the results on advertising message involvement may be different from this study.

This study’s primary interests lay in exploring the proposed three dimensions
of clutter and their impact in the advertising process. No interactions among the three
dimensions have been studied to avoid the complexity of factorial designs in structural
equations models. Nevertheless, results of this study do not show that the three
dimensions create opposite effects. It may be a next step for researchers to explore
the interaction among the proposed dimensions in future studies.

The method of handling missing data by mean substitution in this study is a
compromise between the loss of data and attenuated estimates. The results of this
study should therefore be viewed only as a conservative estimate of the relationship
among the variables. 1

To avoid overcomplexity of the research model, this model has only included
some of the major creative and media factors in advertising. Ad execution quality is
the creative variable chosen that may countervail the effect of clutter. Other creative

variables such as the product’s positioning and usage of celebrity endorsement in

179

arousing AMI has not been studied. Clutter level and advertising-editorial
compatibility are the two media factors included the model. Positioning and frequency
of the ads are also possible countervailing variables which have not been studied in
this study. *
Suggestions for Future Research

The model in this study represents an effort to explain the relationship of
clutter and brand equity in the advertising process. However, the low coefficients for
some of the causal paths may indicate that there are missing mediating variables that
may better explain relationships of the variables. For example, the relationship
between Aav and brand equity may be mediated by the number of ads being read.

The indirect effects of clutter on brand equity by affecting Aav and memory
of the ad have been shown in the results. The large individual differences in the
tolerance of clutter level is a subject that should be pursued in order to provide
solutions to the clutter problem. An area of study that can be developed is to identify
the determinants of clutter tolerance level such as the level of interest in the editorial
content.

Since the competitive manipulation in this study has failed, the question of
whether competitiveness creates any effect on consumers in a multiple advertising
message environment has not been answered. A better manipulation of
competitiveness may shed light on this question and test whether the assumption of
reading all the competitive ads is a prerequisite to testing for competitiveness. If the

competitiveness dimension is so dependent on the thoroughness of exposure of

180
multiple ads, the utility of the concept may be rather limited.

A natural extension of this study is to examine the interaction of the three
dimensions of clutter in a factorial design on the direct effects of clutter found in this
study: Aav and memory of the ad. If no interaction is found, then the dimensions*of
clutter can be viewed as an additive phenomenon. If there is an interaction, one
dimension could be a countervailing factor of the other dimension. In that situation,
the concept of clutter will have to be reexamined.

The economic effects of advertising clutter and advertising rates is another
management issue that can be explored. With the present understanding of how clutter
affects attitudes toward advertising in a media vehicle, whether advertising rates
should be adjusted according to the clutter level of a vehicle can be a matter for the
industry to negotiate. The clutter level of the vehicle may be a basis for media
placement discount if more studies on clutter can confirm the relationship between
clutter and its negative effects on advertising effects.

This study has only examined the impact of clutter on individual ads, but
clutter may also pose a threat to the readership of the editorial content too. The
difficulty in processing the editorial content that may be caused by highly intrusive
clutter can be a subject for further study.

Based on the results of this study, a cross-vehicle and cross-media comparison
of the effects of clutter on brand equity as suggested in the final model should be
conducted to test for the generalizability of the model. A comparison can be made

between vehicles of different frequency such as weeklies and monthlies, between

181

media with different mode of presentation such as TV, radio, newspapers, and between
business and consumer publications.

The composite indices of this study can be used for a survey of the objective
clutter level in the magazine industry and other media. The clutter problem has been
overlooked in the magazine industry. There has been no attempt to assess the severity
of the clutter problem in magazines. A future study pursuing this issue can be a
comparison of the clutter level between business publications and consumer
publications. The former rely more on advertising income than the latter do to cover
the cost of production. This may serve as a good basis on which to discuss the

advertising clutter issue in the magazine industry.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Research Questionnaires Used in Experiment

182

Code Number:
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE 1

As a potential subscriber, you are invited to preview and evaluate College Voice,
an upcoming general interest magazine for college students. Before you read it, please
fill out this questionnaire for our reference purpose. Thank you for your
participation.

Unless stated otherwise, please circle the number of your answer for each question.

Part I.

1. We would like to know your magazine reading habits. Please indicate
how often you read magazines.

1 At least three magazines a week

2 Two magazines a week

3 One magazine a week

4 One magazine every two weeks

5 Very occasionally (Less than one magazine every two weeks)
6 Never read any magazines (please skip to Part II)

2. Please list the titles of the three magazines that you read most
often.

Do you buy or subscribe to this magazine?

 

 

 

 

Yes No
Yes No
Yes No _

 

 

3. When do you usually read magazines?

1 Weekday (Monday-Friday)
2 Weekend (Saturday, Sunday, or holiday)
3 Both weekday and weekend

183

Part II.

Since our magazine will carry advertising, we would like to know your attitude
toward advertising in general. Please circle the degree of your agreement with the
statements below.

1. Advertising is honest.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

2. Advertising is annoying.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

3. Advertising is good.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree «- strongly disagree

4. Advertising is worthless.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree —-- strongly disagree

5. Advertising saves my time searching for product information.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -—- strongly disagree

6. The claims in advertising are always exaggerated.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

7. Advertising helps rake m standard or living.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree - strongly disagree

8. Advertking makes people try to get products they should not buy

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

9. Advertising adds to the costs that must be passed along to the consumers in the form of higher
prices.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

184

10. Advertising appeab to people’s emotions rather than to their
intelligence.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

11. Advertising is essential.
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree
12. Advertising is a reliable source of information about products.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree —- strongly disagree

Part 111.

Information on your life-style will also enable us to prepare content suitable to your needs. Please
circle the degree of your agreement with the following statements.

I.Iliketosocializewithotherpeople.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

2.IfIhavetime,Iwouldratherstayhomethangoout.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -—--- strongly disagree

3. I don’t like to talk to strangers.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree ---- strongly disagree

4.1!giventheopportunity, I’dliketoreachatopmanagement
position within a short time.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -—-- strongly disagree

5.1‘hemostimportantthinginlifeistobesuccessful.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

185
6.1feel greattobeabletoworkonseveral projectsatthesametime.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree ---- strongly disagree

7. I always try a product before my friends do.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

8.Ialwaysbuythelatestmodelofanyproduct.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -——- strongly disagree

9.Ialwaysprovideopinionstomyfriendsonproductstheyplantohuy.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

Part V.
Please provide the following information to aid our analysis of the data.
a. Your Gender:

1 Male
2 Female

b. YourMajor:

 

eYourYearinCollege:

1 Freshman (first year)

2 Sophomore (second year)

3 Junior (third year)

4 Senior (fourth year or longer)

d. Your Family’s Annual Income:

Under $15,000
$15001 - $25,000
$25,001 - $35,000
$35,000 - $50,000
$50,000 - $75,000
$75001 and $90,000
$90,001 and above

\IO‘MhU’Nr—n

e. Your Age:

 

186

 

Color of Magazine: Code Number:
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE 2

 

Please answer the following questions as accurately as you can. Put a circle around the number of
the correct answer. Thank you for your participation.

Part I. About College Voice:
1. On which day did you [3 read this issue of College Voice? ~

1 Thursday

2 Friday

3 Saturday

4 Sunday

5 Monday

6 Tuesday

9 none - please skip to PART IV on page S

2. In total, how much time did you spend on reading this issue?

_ hour(s) minutes

 

3. How many articles in this issue have you read?

articles

 

4.Whicharticledidyoulikemostinthisissue?

 

5. Ifyou were to give a score from 1 to 7 (7 for the best), what would be your rating of the editorial
content quality of this issue?

_ points

 

6. Iwould subscribe tothis magazineatacostof$ per issue. (Ifyou
don’t think you will subscribe to it at any cost, please write 0).

7. I would like to obtain a free subscription to this magazine for a trial period of three months.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Strongly agree --- strongly disagree

8. How did you read College Voice?

1 I browsed the pages at random

2 I read only the articles listed in the cover

3 I read from the first to the last page, skipping pages that I did not
like

4 Other (Please state)

187

Part II. We would like to know your comments on the specific aspects of the issue that you read. Please
circle the number that corresponds to your agreement with the statement.

1. Too much space is devoted to advertisements in this issue of College Voice.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

2. Advertisements interrupt my reading of this issue of College Voice.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree «— strongly disagree

3. Without advertisements, the price of College Voice will be higher.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

4. There are too many advertisements in this issue of College Voice.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

5. I like the advertisements in this issue of College Voice.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree «— strongly disagree

6. I think the advertisements in this issue of College Voice fit well
with the content.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

7. It is easy to distinguish between the advertisements and the articles in College Voice.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

8. What proportion of the ads in this issue went with the content?

1 less than 20%
2 21-40%

3 41-60%

4 61-80%

5 81-10096

8a. The products advertised in this issue were very similar.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree ---- strongly disagree

188

9. How many ads in this issue of College Voice did you notice?

0 none - please skip to PART VI on page 8.

1 very few (l-l9%)

2 a few (20-39%)

3 some (40-59%)

4 a lot (60-79%)

5 almost all (80%-100%) -

10. Which advert‘ued brand in this issue did you remember best? Please write down the name of your
best-remembered brand in the space below.

1 (brand name) - Please answer 0.12.
2 I did not remember any advertisements - Please answer Q.11.

11. Can you tell us why you did not remember any advertisement in the issue?
1 Ididnotreadanyoftheadsatall

2 I just could not remember
3 Any other reason (please state)

 

12. Do you remember seeing any catalog apparel advertisements in thk issue?

1 Yes
2 No -- skip to Q.l4

13. What’s the brand name(s) of that catalog?

 

14. Do you remember seeing an catalog apparel ad with a woman sitting on the ground in the ksue?

1 Yes
2 No - skip to Q.16

15. What’s the name of that product?

16. Which one of the following clothing brands has advertised in this issue?

1 Dockers

2 Spiegel

3 Gitano

4 Ralph Lauren
5 Don’t know

189

17. Have you seen an ad of the Spiegel clothing catalog in this issue of College Voice?

1 Yes
2 No —PleaseskiptoPartIII.

18. Which of the following was the slogan of the Spiegel ad in this issue? Please do not go back to

questions

on the previous page (All of the following choices are from the ads in this issue). ~

Home stretch

I love what you do for me
The bon marche
Simplicity, style, value
Shaping the looks of today
Don’t know

OMAWN—

Part III. What do you think about the Spiegel ad (IF YOUR ANSWER TO Q.17 ABOVE IS NO, PLEASE
RATE THE AD OF YOUR BEST REMEMBERED BRAND IN THIS ISSUE). Please circle your score
on top of the statement unless stated otherwise. If you said you didn’t remember any ad in Q.14 above,

please go to Part IV on
page 5.

Section A.

1. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
This ad was pleasant -- unpleasant

2. 7 6 5 4 3 2 l
Thisadwasusefulu-notuseful

3. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
This ad was entertaining -- not entertaining

4. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
This ad was interesting - uninteresting

5. 7 6 5 4 3 2 l
Ilikedthisad --dislikedthisad

Section B.
1. I paid attention to the content of the ad:

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree strongly disagree

 

2.1carefullyreadthecontentofthisad:

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree strongly disagree

 

190

3. When I saw the ad, I concentrated on its contents.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

4. I expended effort looking at the contents of this ad.
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree -

5. We would also like to know your attitude toward the elements of the Spiegel ad (or your best-
remembered ad if you said you did not see remember the Spiegel ad in Q.l7 above). Please circle

your score on top of each description.
a. The picture in the ad was

7 6 5 4 3 2 l
attractive --- unattractive

b. The design (layout) of the ad was

7 6 5 4 3 2 l
outstanding poor

 

eTheheadlineintheadwas

7 6 5 4 3 2 l
provoking - boring

 

d.Thecopyoftheadwas

7 6 S 4 3 2 l
well-written -- poorly written

e.Thetypefacesusedintheadwere
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
appealing-«— unappealing

f.Overall,theadwas

7 6 S 4 3 2 l
well-crafted --- poorly done

191
Part IV.

la. Had you heard of or seen the Spiegel brand (Please substitute with your best-remembered brand
that you listed in Part II, Q.14 ifyou said you did not see the Spiegel ad in Q.17) before reading
this issue?

1 yes
2 no --pleaseskiptoQ.2a .

lb. If yes, how often had you heard about or seen the brand?

1 almost everyday

2 at least two times a week
3 at least once every week
4 at least once a month

5 at least once a year

6 less than once a year

2a. Have you used this brand before?

lyes
2 no mpleaseskiptoQJa

2b. How often have you used this brand?

almost everyday

at least two times a week
at least once every week
at least once a month

at least once a year

less than once a year

GUI->038)—

3a. Have you seen advertising for this brand before?

1 yes
2 no - please skip to PART V.

3b. How often did you see the advertising of this brand?

1 almost everyday

2 at least two times a week
3 at least once every week
4 at least once a month

5 at least once a year

6 less than once a year

3c.HaveyouseenaSpiegeladthesameastheoneinthhissuebefore?

lyes
2no

192

Part V. If you said you did not remember any ad in Part II Q.14, please skip to Q5 on page 7. Apart from
the Spiegel ad, we would like to know your opinion on other ads as a whole. If you don’t remember the

Spiegel ad, substitute Spiegel in the following questions by your best-remembered brand and the product
categogy of your best-remembered brand in this issue. Please circle the right answers.

1. Have you seen any ads for apparel products similar to Spiegel in this issue?

1 Yes - please skip to Q2. -
2 No— please skip to Q.1a.

In. Why did you not see any ads of products similar to Spiegel in this issue?

1 I skipped all the other ads in this issue

2 I did not want to see any ads of similar product
3 I was not aware of any ads of similar product

4 Other reasons (please state)

 

2. The claims in the ads ofthese other brands are more credible than Spiegel?

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree -- strongly disagree

3. The ads of these other brands are better in quality than Spiegel?
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Strongly agree —-- strongly disagree

4. If I were to choose one of the clothing brands (or your best-remembered brand’s product category)
advertised in thb issue for purchase, I will choose

1 Spiegel (or your best-remembered brand)

2 Other brands advertised in the issue

3 Brands that were not advertised in this issue
4 Cannot detemrine

5.1'heimageofSpiegelisthesameastheotherclothingbrands.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

6. The image of Spiegel represents what I would like to be.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

7.1feelbadusingthisbrand.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

193

8. I would rank this brand as my __ choice if I purchase clothes (or you best-remembered brand’s
product category).

1 first

2 second

3 third

4 fourth or more

5 never consider this brand -

9. I won’t mind paying a higher price for this brand.

7 6 S 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

10. If the catalog of this brand is not sent to me free, I am willing to pay to get one.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

11. I agree with the claim that Spiegel products are simple, stylish, and of good value (substitute the
claim of your best-remembered brand here if you don’t remember the Spiegel ad).

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

12. The quality of thk brand k superior to other brands.

7 6 S 4 3 2 1
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

l3. Spiegel k most suitable to my needs.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

l4. Spiegel is the most popular brand in the category.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree --- strongly disagree

15. When I need to buy clothes (or product category of your best-remembered brand), I will think
of Spiegel (or your best-remembered brand) immediately.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
strongly agree .... strongly disagree

16. When asked about brands in clothing (or product category of your best-remembered brand),
Spiegel (your best-remembered brand) will come to my mind immediately.

7 6 S 4 3 2 I
strongly agree -- strongly disagree

194
Part VI.
1. I plan to buy clothes within (e.g. 10 days, 5 months, etc.)

_ year _ months _ days
__ Never buy clothes

2. If I chose the wrong brand of clothes, I’ll -

7 6 5 4 3 2 l
have a lot to lose ----—- have little to lose

3. My decision to buy clothes

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
requires a lot of thought ---- requires little thought

4. For me, buying clothes will be

7 6 5 4 3 2 l
a very important decision --- very-unimportant decision

If you said you did not remember any ad in Part II Q.14, please answer the following questions. IF YOU
REMEMBER THE SPIEGEL AD OR IF YOU SAID YOU DIDN’T READ ANY OF THE ISSUE OR
ANY AD. PLEASE SKIP TO PART VIII.

Part VII.
1. I plan to buy the product category of my best-remembered brand in this issue within
(e.g. 10 days, 5 months, etc. )

__ year _ months _ days
_ Never buy this category

2. If I chose the wrong brand of the product category of my best-remembered brand in this issue, I’ll

7 6 5 4 3 2 l
have a lot to lose have little to lose

 

3. My decision to buy the product category of my best-remembered brand in this issue

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
requires a lot of thought -- requires little thought

4. For me, buying the product category of my best-remembered brand in this issue will be

1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
a very important decision —- very unimportant decision

195

Part VIII. Lastly, we would like to know how you used other media during the period that you had College
Voice with you.

lmDidyoureadmyothermagazinesinthisperiod?

1 Yes
2 No -- Please skip to Q.2a

lb. If yes, how much time did you spend reading other magazines?

Hours Minutes

1c. Please lkt the titles of the major magazines you’ve read during this period.

 

 

 

2a. Did you read any newspapers during this period (e.g. dailies, weeklies, Sunday papers)?

1 Yes
2 No -- please skip to Q.3a

2b. If yes, how much time did you spend reading newspapers during this period?
Hours _ Minutes

3a. Did you watch any television during this period?

1 Yes
2 No -- please skip to Q.4a

3b. If yes, how much time did you spend watching television during this period?

Hours _ Minutes

 

4a. Did you listen to any radio station during this period?

lYes
2 No—-pleaseskiptoQ.5

4b. If yes, how much time did you spend listening to radio during this period?

Hours __ Minutes

 

196

5. When using these other media this week, could you give a rough estimate of how many of the
advertkements in them did you skip?

% (0 for none, 100 for all)
6. If you have read the articles in this issue, how many of them had you read before?
(0 for none).

7. Please circle the §w__e brands that have advertised in this issue of College Voice (only five brands

are comet).

l Marlboro Cigarettes 6 United Airlines

2 Allstate Insurance 7 Finlandia Vodka

3 Honda Accord 8 Vibrance Shampoo
4 Jacques Moret Bodywear 9 AT & T

5 Redkin Conditioning Color 10 Motorola Cellular Phone

APPENDIX B

Content of Dummy Magazines Used in the Pre-test

197

Content of Dummy Magazines Used in the Pre-test

Issue 1 (low quantity clutter)
(low competitive clutter)
(low intrusive clutter)

1. Spiegel

Revolution of 1994... 1-7

2. Redken Conditioning Color Gloss
3. Jacques Moret

4. Windmere styling iron

5. Ford Escort

Will I ever be Happy?...12-15
6. Vibrance Shampoo

The cat to lose diet... 17

7. Carefree Pantiliners

8. Camelot music

Nutrition Flash...20
Dissatisfaction guaranteed...21
A skeptic’s guide to catching
a natural buzz...22

9. Wellbody Skincare

Makeup with a point...24-27
10. Incognito

Beauty Strategy...29-30

How to Do Everything Better...3l-38
11. Salon Selectives

12. NFL Football jackets

15 Reasons to be Hopeful About the Future...4l
Firrnative Action...42-44

13. Champs Rollerblade

The Art of Being You...46-49
l4. Slim-Fast

15. Rosacea Society
Nostagia...52

16. Sebastian Makeup

Alice Unchained...54~57

17. Tagheuer watch

Medical Flash...59

18. Power Bar

Mumbo Gumbo...6l-63

A Force of One...64-69

l9. L’Uomo Vogue Magazine
20. Finlandia

21. Marlboro

198

Issue 2 (high quantity clutter)
l. Spiegel
Trend Watch 94...1-5
5 hot ways to stay fit...6-7
2. Redken Conditioning Color
Gloss
3. Jacques Moret
4. Windmere styling iron
5. Ford Escort
6 Pantene ProV
7. Nivea Shower Gel
8. HP Deskjet
Ecology Flash..JS
Style Flash.«l6-l7
9. Incognito
10. Vibrance Shampoo
11. Guess Jeans
12. Henessy Cognac
13. Carefree Pantliners
14. Camelot Music
15. Champs Sports Rollerblade
Fashion...25-35
Home Goals...36-41
Sandra Bullock...42
l6. Beefeater Gin
17. Union Bay
18. Sebastian Makeup
19. Looking Grreat
20. Slim-Fast
HIV + me...48-52
21. Salon Selectives
22. NFL Football jackets
Beauty Flash...55
The Determinator...56
23. Nestle Sweet Success Diet Mocha
24. Fabio Fitness Video
25. Wellbody Skincare
26. Acne Statin Kit
27. L’Uomo Vogue Magazine
Hey, DJ...62-63
Record Reviews...“
28. Jergens Lotion
29. Tagheuer watch
30. L’Oreal Invisi-Gel
31. Oil of Clay Bath Bar
32. Lancome Lash Brush
33. Jose Cuervo
34. Finlandia
35. Marlboro

199

Issue 2 (high competitiveness clutter)
l. Spiegel
Trend Watch 94...1-5
5 hot ways to stay fit...6
2. Jacques Moret
3. Redken Conditioning Color
Gloss
I’ll Cry if I want to...10-l3
4. Wellbody Skincare
Body Mind flash...”
5. Jergens Lotion
6. Henessy Cognac
7. Guess Jeans
8. Union Bay
9. Beefeater Gin
Ecology Flash...21
10. Pantene ProV
11. Vibrance Shampoo
Fashionm24-35
Home Goals...36-41
Sandra Bullock...42
12. Slim-fast
l3. Nestle Sweet Success Diet Mocha
Style Flash...45-46
14. Saturn
15 Toyota Tercel
16 Ford Escort
HIV + me...50-54
Beauty W5
17 . Jose Cuervo
18. Smimoff
The Determinator...58
Sex, Plagues of the 90s...59-63
Hey, DJ 64-65
Record Reviews...“
MusicbooksartsdanceTVvideomovies...67-69
l9. Stoli
20. Finlandia
21. Marlboro

 

200

Issue 2 (high intrusiveness clutter)
1. Spiegel
Trend Watch 94...l-5
5 hot ways to stay fit...6,9
2. Jacques Moret...7
3. Windmere Styling Iron...8
4. Redken Conditoning Color...10
5. Carefree Pantiliners...11
I’ll Cry if I want to...12-l4,l7
6. Sebastian Makeup...15
7. Fabio Fitness Video...16
8. Nestle Sweet Success Coffee...18
Ecology Flash..J9
9. L’uomo Vogue Magazine
Style Flash...21
Fashion...22-28,30-33
10. Vibrance Shampoo...29
Home Goals...34-36,39-4l
11. Wellbody Skincare...37
12. Acne-Statin Kit...38
Sandra Bullock...42,45
Body Mind lt‘lash...43
13. Saturn
HIV + me...46-47,50-52
l4. Salon selectives
15. NFL Football Jacket
Sex, Plagues of the 90s...53-54,56
16. Tagheusser watch...55
Beauty Flash...57
l7. Clarins Lotion
Boyz II Snowman...59
Hey, DJ...60-61
Record Reviews...62
The Determinator...63
18. Nivea Shower Gel
MusicbooksartsdanceTVvideomovies...65-66,68
l9. Incognito...67
20. Finlandia
21. Marlboro

APPENDIX C

Research Questionnaires Used in the Screening Session

201
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE (For selection of ad)

Your participation in this experiment will earn you five extra points for the course. By completing
this questionnaire, you indicate your agreement to participate in this study. Thanks for your participation.

1. Please list the three magazines that you like to read most. 0 for none.

 

 

 

II. Please rate the 19 ads according to the listed criteria. The numbers in brackets are the scores you will
give to each aspect of the ad. You can give any score between 1 to 7 for each item.

1. Pantene Pro-V
Score

Thepictureintheadisattractive(7)--unattractive(l) _
Thedaisnflayont)oftheedisoumndins(7)—-poor(l) __
Theheadlineintheadisprovoking(7)--boring(l) _
'I‘hecopyoftheadiswell-written(7)-—-poorlywritten(l) _
Thetypmusedinthudanplminunmunpmsa) _
Overall,thead iswell-crafted(7) --- poorly done(l) ' _
2.Vibrance

Thepictrrreintheadisattractive(7)—~unattnctive(l) _
Thedaisn (layouththeadisoum-ndinsm-m poor-(1) _
Theheadlineintheadisprovokillg(7)--boring(l) __
Thecopyoftheadiswell-written (7)-«poorly written (1) _
Thetypefnwusedintheadmplwinuflmunplminsfl) _

Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) - poorly done(l) _

202

' 3. Joese Cuervo

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) --- unattractive (1)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) --- poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) «~- boring (r)

The copy of the ad is well-written (7) «- poorly written (1)
WWMinthudmple-sinsmmunplwinun
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly done(1)

4. Smirnoff

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) --- unattractive (1)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) -- poor(1)
Theheadlineintheadkprovokins(7)m-boring(l)

The copy of the ad is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
Thetyperaeesusedlntheadarepleasing(7)--unpleasiog(r)
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly done(1)

5. Finlandia

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) «- unattractive (r)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) «.- poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) --- boring (I)

The copy of the ad is well-written (7) ~- poorly written (1)
The typefaces used in the ad are pleasing (7) -- unpleasing (1)

Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly done(l)

203

6. Stoli

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) - unattractive (1)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) -- poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) --- boring (I)

The copy of the ad is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
Thetypefacunsedinthcndmplwinsm-munplwinsfl)
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) «— pooriy doue(l)

7. Beefeater

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) -- unattractive (l)

The design (layout) of the ad is onmdins (7) -- poor(1)
Theheadlineintheadlsprovolting(7)--horing(r)
Thecopyortheadiswell-written(7)-poorly writteua)
Thetypefwmedihthe-dmplwins(7)-unpimins(l)
Overall, the ad a well-crafted (7) ~— poorly done(l)

8. Hennessy
Thepictureintheadkattractive(7)--unattractive(l)

TIN-”46‘8“ (layout) of the“ is outstanding (7) - 9001(1)
TheheadlineintheadlsprovokinuD-n-horlngu)

The copyofthead is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
WWMiflihehdeiwinsmmthlwinsfl)

Overall, the ad is well-crafted (‘7) ..... poorly done(l)

204

9. Guess
The picture in the ad is attractive (7) .... unattractive (1)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) .... poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) --- boring (1)

The copy of the ad is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
Thetypefmusedintheedmplwinsmmunflwingfl)
Overan, the ad is well-crafted (7) «~- poorly doue(l)

10. Union Bay
The picture in the ad is attractive (7) -- uuattractive (l)

Thedesisnaayouthftheedisonmndins (7)-«poor(1)
TheheadliueintheadkproWkills(7)-~boriug(l)
Theeopyottheadiswell-written(7)-poorlywritten(1)
Thetypefeeewsedintheedereplwins(7)-nnplwins(l)
Overall,theadiswell-cratted(7)-—~poodydone(i)

ll. Moret
The picture in the ad is attractive (7) -- uuattractive (1)

The design (layout) otthe ad is outstanding (1) ~- poor(1)
The headline in thead is provoking (7) «~- boring (1)
Theeopyottheadiswell-written(7)-~poorlywrittenu)
WWMhmeldelwinsmwunflwincfl)
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) «~- poorly doue(l)

12. Spiegel
Thepictureintheadisattractive(7)-—-uuattractive(l)

The design (layout) of the and Is out-tending (7) - poor(1)
Theheadlineintheadisprovokinufl-n-boringu)
Thecopyofthead is well-writteu(7) .... poorly written (1)
Thetypef-ee-ueedinflleedmpleulnuflmunple-sinul)
Overall, the ad h well-crafted (7) «- poorly done(1)

205

13. NFL Jacket

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) -- unattractive (1)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) ~- poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) --- boring (1)
Thecopyottheadhwell-writteu(7)-~poorlywrittcu(l)
Thetypefeeeeusediniheederepleeeing(7)-onplwins(l)
Overall, the ad is wen-crafted (7) «~- poorly done(l)

14. Nivea

The picture in the ad is attractive (7) -- unattractive (l)

The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) --- poor(1)
Theheadliueiutheadisprovokiug(7)--—boriug(l)
Thecopyottheadis well-written (nu-woody written (1)
Thetypefeee-medintheedereplminUflmonplwinul)
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly doue(l)

15. Jergens

The picture in the ad k attractive (7) - unattractive (1)

The design (layout) ofthe ad is outstanding (7) -- poor(1)
Theheadlineintheadisprovokinun-u-boringu)

The copy of the ad is well-written (7) «- poorly written (1)
Thetypefeoeeusedintheedmple-eins(7)-unpleosins(l)

Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly doue(l)

 

206
16. Wellbody
The picture in the ad k attractive (7) -- unattractive (l)
The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) --- poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) «~- horing (l)
The copy of the ad is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
The typetaces used in the ads are pleasing (7) .... unpleasing (1)
Overall, the ad is well-cratted (7) --- poorly done(l)
17. Toyota Tercel
The picture in the ad is attractive (7) .... unattractive (l)
The design (layout) at the ad is outstanding (7) ...- poor(1)
Theheadiineintheadisprovoking(7)-—horing(1)
The copy at the ad is well-written (7) ...- poorly written (1)
Thetypefacesusediutheadsarepleasing(7)-uupleasing(l)
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly done(1)
18. Saturn
The picture in the ad is attractive (7) - unattractive (1)
The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) «- poor(1)
The headline in the ad is provoking (7) «- horing (1)
The copy of the ad is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
ThetypefacesusedintheadsareplflflngalmuupleasingU)
Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) ---- poorly doue(l)
19. Ford Escort
The picture in the ad b attractive (7) -- uuattractive (l)
The design (layout) of the ad is outstanding (7) .... poor(1)
The headline in the ad k provOIdIIx (7) --- boring (I)
The copy of the ad is well-written (7) -- poorly written (1)
The typefaces used in the ads are pleasing (7) -- unpleasing (1)

Overall, the ad is well-crafted (7) --- poorly doue(l)

207
Eh. I plan to buy haircare products (e.g. shampoo) within
_ months or _ days
_ Never buy this product (skip to IV)

IIIb. I’ll have a lot to lose if I chose the wrong brand for haircare products (7)
--- little to lose ifI chose the wrong brand (1)

[He My decision to buy haircare products
requires a lot of thought (7)-— requires little thought (1)

HM. For me, to buy haircare products will be
a very important decision (7)—— very unimportant decision (1)

Na. I plan to buy liquor (e.g. vodka, gin) within
_ months or _., days
_ Never buy this product (skip to V)

IVb. I’ll have a lot to lose if I chose the wrong brand for liquor (7)
an little to lose ifI chose the wrong brand (1)

IV c. My decision to buy liquor
requires a lot of thought (7) --- requires little thought (1)
IVd. For me, to buy liquor will be

a very important decision (7)-— very unimportant decision (1)

Va. I plan to buy clothes within

_ months or days

_ Never buy this product (skip to IV)

Vb. I’ll have a lot to lose if I chose the wrong brand for clothes (7)
---littletoloseifIchosethewrongbrand(l)

208

Vc. My decision to buy clothes
requires a lot of thought (7)-— requires little thought (1)

Vd. For me, to buy clothes will be
a very important decision (7)«-— very unimportant decision (1)

VIa. I plan to buy skincare products (e.g. lotion) within

_ months or days

_ Never buy this product (skip to VII)

VIb. I’ll have a lot to lose if I chose the wrong brand for skincare products (7)
--- little to lose ifI chose the wrong brand (1)

VIc. My decision to buy skincare products
requires a lot of thought (7)-- requires little thought (1)

VId. For me, to buy skincare products will be
a very important decision (7) - very unimportant decision (1)
VIIa. Iplantobuyacarwithin

_ months or days

_ Never buy this product (skip to VII)

VIIb. I’ll have a lot to lose ifI chose the wrong brand for cars (7)
mo little to lose ifI chose the wrong brand (I)

VIIc. My decision to buy a car
requires a lot Of thought (7) -—- requires little thought (1)

VIId.Forme,tobuyacarwillbe
a very important decision (7) --- very unimportant decision (1)

VIIIa. Have you heard or seen about any of these advertised brands in this experiment before?

_. yes
_ no - Please skip to Q.IX

209
VIIIb. If yes, please list the brands that you know.

 

 

 

 

VIIIc. Among these brands, please list the three most familiar brands. Please start with the most
familiar one.

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

IX. The following are 10 possible titles for a general interest weekly magazine for college students.
Please rank them from 1 to 10 (1 for the most preferred title, 10 for the least preferred title).

Cool

4.0

College Voice

GPA

In

OK

Ours

The New Generation
Me

_ Young Adults

X. Please indicate your sex: _ Male _ Female

XI. Have you taken any creative courses in advertising such as ADV317?

_ Yes (please list the courses you’ve taken)

 

NO

APPENDIX D

List of Ads Used in the Study

.“a‘

 

210
List of Advertisements Used in the Study

Haircare

l. Pantene Pro-V

2. Vibrance Shampoo

3. Salon Selectives

4 Redken Conditioning Color Gloss
5. L’Oreal Invisible Gel

Cosmetic/skincare

6. Clarins Lotion

7. Oil Of Clay Bath Bar
8. Lancome Lashbrush

9. Nivea Shower and Bath
10. Jergens Lotion

11. Sebastian

12. Wellbody (DR)

13 Looking Grreat (DR)
14. Acne-stat Kit (DR)

Perfume/Frames

15. Incognito Fragrance

Liquor
16. Hennessy Cognac

17. Beefeater Gin
18. Jose Cuervo

l9. Smirnoff Vodka
20. Stoli Vodka

21. Finlandia Vodka

Food
22. Power-Bar

Diet Food and Beverages
23. Slim-Fast

24. Nestle Sweet Success

211

Cigarettes
25. Marlboro

Automobile

26. Ford Escort
27. Saturn

28. Toyota Corolla

F ashion/Apparel
29. Unionbay jean

30. Guess Jeans

31. National Football Jacket
32. Spiegel(DR)

33. Jacques Monet

Entertainment
34. Camelot Music

35. L’uome Vogue Magazine
36. Fabio Fitness Video

Jewel /watch
37. Tagheuer watch

Smrts Goods
38. Champs Rollerblade

Personal
39. Carefree Pantiliners

Office/Stationeg
40. HP Deskjet printer

Chang/Public Service
41. Rosaccea Society (DR)

(DR) Direct Response Advertising

APPENDIX E

Content of Dummmy Magazines

.. -.v M. A

212

Content Of Dummy Magazines
low quantity clutter

low competitiveness clutter
low intrusiveness clutter

* l. Spiegel

Revolution of 1994... 1-7

2. Redken Conditioning Color Gloss
3. Jacques Moret

4. Windmere styling iron

5. Ford Escort

Will I ever be Happy?...12-15
6. Vibrance Shampoo

The eat to lose diet... 17

7. Carefree Pantiliners

8. Camelot music

Nutrition Flash...20
Dissatisfaction guaranteed...21
A skeptic’s guide to catching
a natural buzz...22

9. Wellbody Skincare

Makeup with a point...24-27
10. Incognito

Beauty Strategy...29-30

How to Do Everything Better...31-38
11. Salon Selectives

12. NFL Football jackets

15 Reasons to be Hopeful About the Future...“
Firmative Action...42-44

l3. Champs Rollerblade

The Art of Being You...46-49
14. Slim-Fast

15. Rosacea Society
Nostagia...52

16. Sebastian Makeup

Alice Unchained...54-57

l7. Tagheuer watch

Medical Flash...59

18. Power Bar

Mumbo Gumbo...61-63

A Force of 0ne...64-69

l9. L’Uomo Vogue Magazine
20. Finlandia

21. Marlboro

* The position of Spiegel was rotated in different copies

 

2 13
high quantity clutter

l. Spiegel

Revolution of 1994... L7

2. Redken Conditioning Color Gloss
3. Jacques Moret

4. Windmere styling iron

5. Ford Escort

6 Pantene ProV

7. Incognito

Will I ever be Happy?...l4-17
8. Vibrance Shampoo

The eat to lose diet... 19

9. Camelot Music

Nutrition flash...21

10. Carefree Pantiliners

ll. Nivea Shower Gel

12. HP Deskjet
Dissatbfaction guaranteed...25
13. Champs Sports Rollerblade
14. Guess Jeans

15. Henessy Cognac

How to Do Everything Better...29-37
l6. Beefeater Gin

17. Union Bay

18. Sebastian Makeup

19. Looking Grreat

Beauty Strategym43-44

20. Fabio Fitness Video

The Art of Being You...46-49
Alice Unchained...50-53

21. Slim-Fast

Medical Flash..55

22. Power Bar

23. Salon Selectives

24. NFL Football jackets

25. Wellbody Skincare

26. Acne Statin Kit

Mumbo Gumbo...61-63

27. L’Uomo Vogue Magazine
28. Jergens Lotion

29. Tagheuer watch

31. Oil of Clay Bath Bar

30. L’Oreal Invisi-Gel

32. Lancome Lash Brush

33. Jose Cuervo

34. Finlandia

35. Marlboro

* The position of Spiegel was rotated in different copies

 

214

high competitiveness clutter
*1. Spiegel
Revolution of 1994... 1-7
2. Jacques Moret
3. Redken Conditioning Color Gloss
Will I ever be Happy?...10-l3
4. Wellbody Skincare
The eat to lose diet... 15
Makeup with a point...l6-l9
5. Jergens Lotion
Beauty Strategy...21-22
6. Henessy Cognac
7. Guess Jeans
8. Union Bay
9. Beefeater Gin
Dissatisfaction guaranteed...27
A skeptic’s guide to catching
a natural buzz...28
10. Pantene ProV
11. Vibrance Shampoo
How to Do Everything Better...31-38
12. Slim-fast
13. Nestle Sweet Success Diet Mocha
14. Saturn
15 Ford Escort
15 Reasons to be Hopeful About the Future...“
Firmative Action...44-46
Medical Flash...”
16. Toyota Corolla
Nutrition Flash...”
Alice Unchained...50-S3
l7. Smirnoff
18. Jose Cuervo
The Art of Being You...56-59
Nostagia...60
Mumbo Gumbo...61-63
A Force of One...64-69
l9. Stoli
20. Finlandia
21. Marlboro

* The position of Spiegel was rotated in different copies

 

215

high intrusiveness clutter

*1. Spiegel

Revolution of 1994... 14,8-9

2. Jacques Moret...5

3. Windmere Styling Iron...6

4. Redken Conditoning Color...10
5. Carefree Pantiliners...11

Will I ever be Happy?...12-l4,l7-18,20
6. Sebastian Makeup...15

7. Fabio Fitness Video...16

8. Nestle Sweet Success Coffee...19
The eat to lose diet... 21

9. L’uomo Vogue Magazine
Dissatisfaction guaranteed...23

A skeptic’s guide to catching

a natural buzz...24

Nutrition Flash...25

Makeup with a point...26-28,31
10. Wellbody Skincare...29

ll. Acne-Statin Kit...30

12. Vibrance Shampoo...32

Beauty Strategy...33-34

How to Do Everything Better...35-36,39-43
l3. Salon selectives...37

14. NFL Football Jacket...38
Medical Flash...“

15 Reasons to be Hopeful About the Future...45
Firmative Action...46,49-50

15. Nivea Shower Gel...47

16. HP Laser Jet...48

l7. Tagheuer watch...51

The Art of Being You...52-55
Alice Unchained...56-59
Nostagia...60

Mumbo Gumbo...61-63

A Force of 0ne...64-66,68,70

18. Clarins Lotion 67

19. Incognito...69

20. Finlandia

21. Marlboro

* The position of Spiegel will be rotated in different copies

 

APPENDIX F

Item-factor Correlation Matrix

 

216

 

- - Correlation Coefficients - -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.01 ..52 5.03 :00. AAGS ..ca
AADL 100003 .029039 .29939¢ .368339 .367399 .25630.
AAGd “129.399 1.0000 .433239 .617339 .3369‘. 0315388

l—TIc3—__‘__—__7Z99U33__——7I3UzV5——_T7UUUU_——__—7I95U3it___T:U‘7"——__7252933__—_-
A.¢, .3,53.. ..tzzco .495000 1.0000 .355200 .350200
AAfi) .36733‘ .5869“ .4J67" 035529. 1.0000 00896
63000 0:35:33 0313’“; 0ZJZQ33 0555253 0013',“ I .0000 w
8A6: .5661 .496» .250693 .1053 .223493 .0166
#800 0396133 049099. 019933 0259933 ‘00021 03335“
100.0 .Zflld" 011933 03553 00733“ 0C§UU 061193'
1‘6th 051‘.d“ 0 3368.‘ 0331:.’ 030966“ 03917“ 0 1106
A5512 0515539 0001693 .5671°° .3066‘3 .52559‘ 01272
“JLU-‘H'l 090V) 0(5’1“ 01",“ 0021‘, 0JJIU 0153‘?
AUCqug -.l¢33 00533 '03363“ ‘00739 '01276 “00766
Agfiufla .3963 01331 013139 .1192 .3960 .3522
:Xcul “00365 00.01“ 0363’ 043‘? ’05:}: 06:17,
51:54 '05‘85 0J596 00°21 05276 -0003? 00772
£ACbJ -.G~79 ..a.t .3735 .J397 -.0035 .5600
:Ae.» -.-f21 .0348. .503. .3063 -.3132 .avifiFi
:Acb) ‘03009 0J°30 0031* 00236 “00143 06966 1
aAa.; —.0.35 .4002 .3105 .0513 .3038 .0536 -
ZKVZ’ 00351 00335 ovaat: 03131 03136 '00QUU
I‘V; .359) 06475 -.0223 '00022 .0292 -00660
:XUQ .lifii .1259 .2-39.‘ .1322 01403 '01396
rtic '0J77: .JV37 0U51’447 ‘03881 ‘011537 “00361
F639 -00059 .3932 0J7!“ ’03‘11 '00196 -00859
FAMO ’0U573 06383 05287 ’00156 -00677 00293
PAM] .0155 .3426 .3325 .0261 :05453 .5623
3:54 -.1571 .3225 .3159 -.3409 -.026J -00461
<c$9 ’0l355 00079 00360 -06312 .3161 ‘00666
«:5 -.0719 ..572 .039. -.0500 -.0397 -.0365’
AAUL .4336 .1967“ .1317 01999 .3733 00966
AAV‘ 0JJ95 0261399 0125; 022139 00009 0171’.
m0 ...az .2018" .1.“ “3?“ .3400 .1075
£0!) 021503 .3065" .33379. 036399“ .1708 0(615‘.
Aad. 0.0697 .J969 .1019 .3666 “.0057 00916
filia‘ 'fiq r- 08.037 0003‘; OVUUU " .‘D‘J 3 Gavin}
660; ‘00961 06979 03356 ‘03238 '000‘2 0000,
A60? -006“. 01:35 01092 03230 00132 0356.
1‘93 '0U‘UO 0391’ 0157: 03722 ‘00002 01305
AH11 ‘00069 00603 01270 00266 ‘00766 00979
A41: -.0027 .0371 .1365 -.G319 -.O111 .1062
3313 00013 OJIDS 06769 ‘00266 -0029“ 01322
0‘10 .323? .dec .C969 '05339 03391 00561
£01 .399) .1232 .1335 .6729 .5365 .2172:
502 0127i 0&65239 .1663a 016010 01525 0)57!
:.—J ‘.UJI§ .LJz: 0U757 .J‘sz .uiwv -.uc?-0
c005 -.0596 .0059 ‘.0169 .0107 -.0766 -.0080
E0) 00031 0277939 .1069 .1921a .3375 .0292
:00 011377 00):! 01J)? 00330 0.351 '07131
5.7 .1793° .1936 .1425 01175 03393 .3596
£05 .17709 .1475 .1223 .1160 .1355 .0626
:.9 .1980 017763 .1313 00191 717569 '0055‘
:66. 0:989 0.197? 03990 06697 039!“ -06231
Cdll 010%? 01559 01506 036?? 01552 00111
:.00 .1.;‘.)‘; .1371 .3030 .3015 .-T309 “341‘.
Ann 03753°3 0097633 .009390 .090993 0595633 06605..
AJCUH? ‘0Ci1" 01335 007‘.» 0.3918 033‘? 03566
:A:. ‘09357 06732 0337; 0a3éS—_ :TUCT7 0:337
13V .1337 .0017 01091 05561 .C715 -00958
F." -0015, 06297 00583 '0J336 -00766 ‘0;°9‘
47:) ‘01‘51 0631? 0v3ZV '035‘7 ’;01!5 ‘03)19
AAV 01£23 0575733 .Zillc .306399 .1163 02190.
And ‘0)053 .6697 .119“ 03320 -.CD9Z .0782
All “00055 0335’ 01133 ’03163 '03215 037‘!
EdUlTY 01335 019319 01060 01266 .0989 .3360
3 - )l;nlf0 L; .3) Y5 - .t,nir. a: .Jl (Z-taileai

 

217

 

 

- COFfC‘JE100 uOdf’1ziflfltS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1067 0068 A0016 00611 00612 ADCOPPI
AM“ .3661 .Z‘PJH.u .2923" .316883 .515503 .6195
0064 .698. .29099¢ .1755. .383303 .001680 .331100
‘Wnflfif .43053V’ .1v1av .0003 .301zvv .abwlvv .17170
00.0 .1058 .259°" .1933. .090600 .308000 .1219
006: .228080 -.JO£1 .0680 .391700 .525600 .0310
‘1168’* ..100 .3335" .zrlvvv .IIUG .1272* .133u
0067 '.0000 .3651 .L907° .357100 .22250 .3410
A‘oo 0U061 103030 02217a 00739 02569.: 03395
00615 017079 .(2170 1.6000 .260035 .269208 .9362
00611 .357100 .3739 .2603"- 1.0000 .0555" .1220
01611 .4225¢ .060°¢. .2692“ .0555“ 1.0000 .1135
Auuuarl .U?ZJ .3316 .6362 .Izzu .1135 1.0003
AJCUHP‘ 0CJBJ '01173 ‘00503 '0123‘ -09725 ~03016
00603: .0026 .0252 .6:51 .1763‘ .2025‘I .3321¢¢
:KELI .0004 ”711:0 .1003 .11): .307! .1058
éAECi .0335 .1662 .0997 .1082 .3631 .1331
EAELJ 06’01 0J96‘ 003‘8 05973 005“ 01221
:At~§ 0.5}( 01513 0.19).] 007V’ 0.145, 0131‘
510.5 ...0. ..oao .1095 .0910 .0309 .1522 I
EAELO 03301 01233 01137 01363 00301 01356 ‘
10v: .000: -.lel .00?) ..(00 .3000 .3710
INVJ .1117 -.1036 .0618 .0000 -.0053 .0863
IMVb .1331 -.J73O -.0100 .2063“ .2130. .0730
mar «03?? .0511 .1073 .100T .1231: am!"—
FAHO .Joko .J397 .2156¢ .6609 .1202 .0870
PM. .0015 «02... .1109 .0005 .0080 .2151.
‘7TII’ .043: .JliV" .100! .0332’ .001) 0JUIUV
KESJ 0J375 ‘03136 ‘00‘90 00‘20 ’0021‘ 00191
RES. 0115’ ‘00239 ‘00952 00297 '001‘9 01509
«c: ..030 .001: .0017 .040: .0000 .0044?
00v1 .0960 .6259 .1350 .3185 .3086 .3005"
AAV¢ .055) .J7JS .1509 .3591 .0593 .0035"
1fv‘0— 0 1610 01233 0 1737' WVC‘I 011707 0 53113"
10V: .6375 .1906“ .2322’ .3932" .3561" .5290“
0001 03511 01157 00993 01159. 0°16. 0202’.
m— 0313:! 0117: 03311 01:10 «(000* 01‘107'
A003 .JLOS .1073 .3204 .1157 .0556 .1336
0000 .6.29 .1016 .0165 .1660 .0655 .17620
1005' .0.za .1205 .1001 .1000: ..1d§a .2056‘
An]; .3050 .0923 .0601 .1500 .0806 .1653
AH“ 05L,“ 00853 00391 01313 00778 0030!
A11: .J297 .3311 .1033 .1132 .0519 .J97!
an!» .3.5. .457. .13?! .1232 .0335 .0090
5.1 .3751 .6500 .1032 .0619 .0269 .3760
:.2 .ZJ15° .1551 03506 ol79¢¢ .1123 00591
$73 .31‘7 .4135 .3505 -.0126 “00257 .307‘
50U0 .1322 .6532 -.1003 .0292 -.1518 .0191
£35 0l565 01177 .0711 .459508 .1071 .1330
:i6 .JvS? 059:6 -.DJ§Z .1810' .0232 01179
é.7 -..034 .6800 .1522 .18908 .1162 01182
é.3 .1431 .1332 .6092 .1010 .3363 .0677
:.9 .1207 .1637’ .0001 .1511 .1153 03136
6.10 .0327 .0001 .3367 .6636 -.6255 --0201
£311 01773° 01170 .6657 01589 0125? 03001
:013 .0731 0113" .33‘3 00999 .Jllw ‘00353
lab 0335139 0911339 05592¢¢ 096003. .595133 01517
5J‘Jfl? 0611. ‘04357 03133 0.909 01333 09766“.
‘E'X'Et— .Jr.37 ..101 .1320 .103? .3375 .1408
[WV .3353 -.0603 .6360 .1698 .0950 01036
FAN .6380 .3612 .1075 .3956 .1095 .2691‘9
3:) .1131 04132 -.u£GZ 00351 “00303 01553
6" 01135 01293 022673 01690 011°? 06333“
AAU .0481 .1253 .0765 .1650 .3773 .1910.
ARI .0017 .J053 .0154 .135“ .3782 .1060
640177 .1050 01236 .0607 0156‘ .0658 .3597

 

 

218

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -orravatxUfl_CUUTfTETths - -
ACCOHPZ ADCSHJ EXECL EXECZ EXEC3 EXECQ
A451 -.1aaa .0935 -.0365 0.0285 -.0679 -.0121
AAGd -.o:os .1331 .0516 .5593 .0361 .0808
AAUJ -.Z34333 .19153 .3635 .5517 .0736 .3558
AAGB -.0700 .1192 .0349 .0276 .0397 .0663
0‘65 '01275 00960 ‘00033 -0003? '00035 ‘00132
A.c. -.u7bo .3522 .o7v3 .0772 .0600 :3936
3‘07 OJJBJ OJGZQ 03502 00335 0390‘ 0J532
AAGG “01173 OJZSZ 01126 00°“2 00969 01‘18
Aubzu -.u.03 .0251 .lafia .0997 .3818 .Jvifi
AAGLL -.123~ .17538 .1252 .1032 .0973 .0965
A3512 -.0725 .20259 .0%57 .0631 .0566 .0263
Aqiun?x -.ua7a .33223- .1933 .1331 01221 clutc
AJCQAPZ 1.0JCJ .J029 -.1112 -.1076 -.0613 -.1216
neCJHS .3021 10J030 .2309‘3 02116‘ 02405“. .ZBOZ°‘
Each; -.1.i: c.5696- 1.0JU; .1015'“ of613*' 0'970vv
£1652 -.1376 .2116; .961393 1.0000 .952930 .9702¢$
ékE$3 -.Jo13 .263533 .9515“ .352999 1.0000 .?6#7¢‘
CACLY -...13 ..JGZVV .istava .VIOZV' .7367“: 1.0000
EAELS -.1862 .229239 .3761¢¢ .316788 .955793 .976060
Excib -.1JSJ .237533 .370199 .573299 .3666¢3 .375303
[JVZ ~o1257 -.Tzak .laa. .1h77 471357 .1520
1NV$ -.Oéd# -.3355 .1233 .1652 .1279 .1660
IRUQ -.1507 .0356 .132: .1456 .1161 .1623
rifl‘ ”00:29 OUT): OCUVJua 09351.. .35733! 03727"
FQQQ -.0732 .4932 .253633 .276999 .266503 .2386“
FAHo -.0506 .5137 .3‘9233 .356193 .323339 ,3291cc
__"hl 0UZU7 '0J133 ITZWIVV OJJI£VV .JUZIVV .JJ’J"
R653 -.0112 .4975 .6565‘0 0J737" .66519’ .7021“
RC5? ’00‘15 01‘35 061‘9.. 06899.. 0670... .7172.‘
Kc: ‘oUJJl ..‘JJ .ovvzvv $333U"_—__T3T*'UU-—_73923*'-——'
05" 03450 01610. .3552 05517 00951 011‘)
AdV‘ .0155 .2290“. .21659 .2129a .1669 .261599
’xnvw .uavJ .1202’ .3300’ .0353 .0173 .4735
Adv, ‘00301 025979. .1900‘ 01859” 01621 0201‘.
A501 -.1593 ‘o26478‘ .939933 .936799 .9057‘3 .9250"
EIU‘ i.01r7*’ .2130? .vunavv .IO2UV'-‘—_73320V*—‘——738UU**—_—‘
AAO; -.0979 .239603 .3769‘. .6679“ .3721" .656699
AAOQ ~o1~§1 .2513cc .9023" .3981“ .3808'¢ .695693
‘0 0‘ o o . .
Alll -.0261 .207‘3 .89bd°¢ .3960“ .877036 .6666"
AHI2 -.0923 .1213 .823299 .360699 .3116‘. .4206“
Int} 6.0!)» .203)? .073VVV OJV(¥“ .3577" .u
33‘“ ‘0!J@3 017553 03501“ 085583‘ 03‘23" 00509..
:.‘ ‘01:}, '0J5)l 0.14.);ca .£535$$ 923273. 02350..
:.2 -.J73; -.1322 .1.3.¢8 .322¢¢¢ .279200 .264299
;.a ‘01031 'o13.5 0233;33 o£°35$$ .279338 03051cc
:20?” '” ‘;3537”' 3.3973’ ‘31366 .1568“ ‘31365 ' .165?”
643 ‘.J503 .6033 .1332 .1359 .1361 01503
:.6 -.0:9: .011) .3971 .3741 .3696 .5623
::T -.ISS? -..Izr ‘ ...zzvv 'BJIUIV' .IIIUV’ £ZTUV"—__'
1.3 -0193? ‘0J3d3 01557 01346 012,3 01310
;.9 -.1.£a -.3i:9 .231533 .428503 .269196 .235839
'e.LJ“‘ ....59 -.1615 .3773 :3567 ‘.)550 .cssa
c.11 -.159a '91333 .395. .1923 .0619 .3625
2-12 -.0367 -.1533 .3207 .J156 .3331 -.0013”
RRJ- — :01594 ...?521 01355 0.3:? 0:952 0114‘
AaQQnr .sub139 .7Zd643 .131. 0.336 .1360 .1505
25:.- ‘o;~?'& 0:37:33 .:£55°9 olroca 9773339 07‘3913’
IR “- -.1333 -.355$ .152? ..7703 .1539 013559'm-_-
;.m -...s; ...»; ....ava ..27sau .sazscc o1°9°“
{:5 -.J;7. .12i? .7;az¢¢ .716’¢$ .saebca .1390°°
‘t:?—“”‘“" .3525"' '32373*" .1555 ‘ .1959 .125?" .298?*———"'
in” -.;,;; .;333cu .:,3g¢c . 377$: .agoouc .4266‘¢
as; -...as .1136“ .9353cc ..tzsvc .3366°9 -3903°°
ST3ITY—-"“"*.1287’““‘bof213““ .2t$:**—— .3232¢- “.:ozav~ ~213t*“——'
3 - is,asr. L- .3) fia - :x,n:‘. LE .;1 (Z-tatleop

 

219

 

.orriiztron Lo.rrrCIEfits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ilfics 565:6 1NV2 1NV3 1NV6 FAHZ

6661 -.JaC6 .0633 .1331 .0590 .1162 -.3771
6652 .JOSJ .0862 01336 ’00675 01259 .0607
6603i .6016 .3733 .0386 0.0228 .2239°° .0619
6656 .0266 .0513 .0161 -.0022 .1322 -.0801
A665 -0016) 00038 .0136 00292 .1603 -.1103
6.150 .6163 .3536 '05-'00; '05605 0139'. -.-T531
Anal .6656 .6501 .3363 .1117 .1231 -.0099
6600 01093 .1233 -.0279 -.1085 .0730‘ .0571
6556“ 0 13‘?) 0 6 637 00.00", .70“ 0UIU‘— 0 [‘73
66511 .J910 01063 .1288 .0660 .2063‘ .1067
66612 .6209 .5331 .0666 -.0053 .21309 .1295
AJUUHPI .XDZZ 01335 05973 03863 03733 0:7‘q"
6600392 '01062 .1350 -.1557 -.0036 .1507 -03626
‘JLJHJ .1‘9253 02376.: ‘0l£$~ -00355 00330 03752
EAELL .376130 .370130 .1600 .1238 .1325 ..07655"'
éAéCZ .316783 .97329‘ .1677 .1652 .1656 06051..
EAéL3 .9557¢9 .066633 .1357 .1279 .1161 .367903
$6651 .110043 .375333 .1323 .1660 .1623 .372799
56:1.) 10.5.05.) 09.5.3739 01383 .1570 01511 06052..
56506 .9007cc .3030 .1323 .1301 .1605 .30590.
INV‘ .130) .1323 1.0003 .619133 .561799 .226155
1%V3 .1570 .1351 .619199 1.0000 .6190" -.0077
1NV6 .1317 .16J5 .561793 .619093 .0003 .1710”
Fahc .065233 .335”3° .226199 “.0077 .171.)9 1.3500
F686 .iJZiOO .266399 .1617 “.0669 .1022° .5293“
FuHo .355093 .523039 .1166 .0652 .18219 .3963“
F6"? ...Savu .11330' .100) ”71205 :1360 .3301"
KCSJ 0607299 060309. 01382 01135 .0923 .3367‘.
2:56 .707399 .71359. .3865 .1100 .0761 .2902"
ac) .a...v= ..0ssvv .zzisvv .5105 :c§t9“““711171""
6691 .1623 .1156 .0959 .6517 .1061 .3233
6692 .259099 026279° .3123 .0036 .0773 01632

”41696' .0154 .0310 .3503 .0333 .0551 -.0001
6695 .1939a .1935“ .2311; .1600 .258393 .2069.
6601 .917199 .962139 .1203 .0666 .1602 .6160.‘
Inb‘ .IUUJVV 0.39113" 01135 0.0617 0111‘ 0'97“...—
AuJJ .362799 .671999 .1091 .1011 .1769° .38689’
6609 0592.103- 010359‘ 0233?‘ 03737 01510 06069..

#40213: .vnnwi .‘ucuwr .131? .W .131! .6169"—
6811 .39259‘ .66273’ .1575 .0876 .1369 .636203
6M12 .663999 .6033°' .2613‘9 .3675 .1700 03735..
int) 0u'UJV‘ ..0737: .2361¢“ 01717' .1739: 0)332;;
aux. ..a15°= .42)... .273.°¢ .1263 .1679 .363503
E06 .237599 .255599 .Z7°3¢° 019668 01060 020969
0.3 0393393 0136.233 .27Q}¢¢ 06663 02331.. 02800..
“3 .1720“: .3135”: .2393“ .3060 .2226“ .36653“
0.06 01636 01521 00173 01337 .1061 .2076.
5.5 01319 .1616 .226199 .0671 ,21116 03065“
:.O 03350 ..3§0 0.077., 03357 0102’ 013,7'
:.7 .21113 .22173 .331593 .19350 .2786.“ .3338.‘
:63 .1551 .1545 .250699 .1506 .1666 019169
Edi 023.3237 02331;: .3156“3 02(33" 0153 I“ 01232"
écid .0095 .6659 .2113° .1792“ .1207 .1606
£466 .339} .J737 0336,“g 03322.. 02510.“ .6395.
2.12 .0324 06600 .3337“: 0251699 01555 01035
660 .3930 ..261 .1523 -.3109 .1566 .0359
66Cqu .120} ..322 -.131? -00225 03216 01565
gig; .751:35 .935033 .103547 01933 01631 .3971°.
1"“ .1300‘3 0102.5 07959.. 0523603 03566.0 01560
F6H .621139 .0023?9 .2033° .J668 .2167‘ 0651099
KC) 0741.9.)at 0731533 01311 01125 03933 73560"
600' 019763 0£°J93 06.569 06037 0153‘. 06271
AA” .‘QQLSOO .Q39390 0:565 0:301 01537 09259..

'71va OOUJQVV' 026135“ 01175 016,1 0611063“

CQUXTY .222199 .226399 .319300 .230603 .236506 .3231"
~ *9“- ~~¢ —’ '7-Y11irwv

 

 

220

 

- 0 Zarr.lac:on Coafficxencs - -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

€686 FAFS F657 9553 3559 qE5
6601 -.3157 -.0570 .3150 -01571 ‘.1353 ‘.J71°
4602 .3502 .0033 -.0§25 .3225 .3079 .3578
6‘63 .3719 .0207 .3323 .0159 .3353 .037‘
666. -.0011 “.31). .0251 °.0609 -.0312 '.0800
6693 -.0196 -.0677 -.0653 °.3240 .0151 -.J387 7
Elna ‘.VJDV .J‘VJ .VTCJ '{U‘Ul -.VSVG -.JJUV
Aha: .UOQO .J515 .0253 .0675 .116‘ .1336
Ahoo .0097 ‘.JZ~§ .019; -00136 -.026“ .0613
63510 .2159‘87 .1143 .1J57 “.vQQU -.0552 .631?
660.1 .4609 .JBOS .0552 .3420 00297 00262
660.2 .1292 .Jfiié .0615 -.0214 -.0169 .0369
349U5V1 .7373 .5151: .CJ’Jv .0151 .15UV .JU‘CV
AJCUJHZ -.0131 .0530 .32c5 “.0112 ‘o0315 ’00331
131.4; .avoz .41}? ~o6133 .;?16 .1603 .123!
;£c5‘ .233CVV .39323‘ .3271“: .0563" .37533' .5955VV
c1:02 .275... 0359133 .337268 .373799 .58999‘ .0356“
£125; .236)“: .32333‘ .3J2133 .365193 .6703“. 057653‘
CACLV ..aav33 .3277}: .335333 .-VZIVV' .017233 .3523VV
iAé.) .232138 ..55~39 .3233?“ .0672”? .7373“ .36093‘
56:56 .230333 .3235; .323339 .03339‘ .7135°‘ 0363399
ij4 .1§Il .11‘0 .1335 .LJOJ .3305 .(‘53VV
{XV} “.UQH9 .3452 .1203 .1135 .110: 0090!
15V. 01.5223 018213 .1660 .3923 .0751 00969
F.n‘ .;¢9.¢5’ .aioJa6* .533r55* .336753"“72v3235 .353???
Fnflv 1.330. .333333 .3:7¢¢‘ .2250¢¢ .22°39. .2360“
PAH: .333999 10J003 .756799 0.97999 .2965“ 020880
Fun .297“: ”'53?“ 1.0303 4.230? .2551” .1366‘
its: .2253¢3 .297QOG .2023“ 1.0000 .9553" .7005.‘
RES» 0229339 0&965“ .255193 .9553.“ 1.0000f_: .72700t
\cé .23“)¢¥ .2043“ .1369“ 4'7703593 .7270“. 1.0000
Aav; -.J.JZ .J833 .3372 .0361 .1392 .1350
6AV‘ .0095 .£601°° .1361 .155‘ .2165. .232133
“v. -.a.:5. ...:3 W103 .5347 .1219 J29.
1413 .1730 .19590 .131: .0095 . 712 019559
6601 .4055‘3 .5536“: .3262.8 .0955“ .713““ .6570"
AZU‘ .3o1?VV .JDJSVV .JUVUVV .3657?“ .3311“ 03517"
A2J; .256o68 .327136 .23139‘ .023199 0636599 0020699
A10. .1517¢° .535000 .235a00 ..J£0°¢ .6355°¢ .069500
KIDS .Z?§?33 ”737763“ .JJVTV‘ .37n73V' .33623' .3665"
6H1; 03071:. .3576°a .3365“ .0239‘. .6350" 05906..
3612 .275933 .321303 .2603“9 .612193 .6116“ .5579‘0
:nl: ..32733 ..1::== .131333 .256??? .797280 .?1305‘
141. .294233 .315536 .237736 .5261?“ .529593 0'5290‘8
£31 .155) .32):$¢ .3337¢¢ .£31C°# .03’20‘ .1753c
C.‘ 03.53$9 0.75§° 017679 020899 021269 .32359‘
Edi .ZZZY’V .313233 .3‘937‘u .¢IIYVV .39333' .‘Q55V"
:.U“ .0133 .1711a .1100 .1705. .qufifi .139‘
i.‘ 02.5599 0225638 .2015‘ 01336 .1346 .25790‘
LgO .15373 .66‘543 .17693 .0375 .JVFX .1555
5. .236399 .32~~33 .2910“9 .27579‘ .2799" 0256999
-.a .1via? .1077 .1201 .1595 .1757¢ .256193
c.; .1217 .353? .0753 022203 .227730 02‘083‘
:41J OJVOQ .0031 .0579 .0535 .0056 01235
Ch11 .1050 .1352 .591“ .3952 .3121 .152°
3.1‘ ..959 .3099 -.019; “.4356 ‘.3553 .0555
in“ .Jt13 .6323 .3315 'oJ136 -.3019 .3372
we...” 05995. ____~_5' {3 ___-. :1_'5§£_.,. _--_ 2:313. __._ 01373- -;1§0".- _
:66. .ZI'JJ"a .390303 .339533 .0339“. .7051" .3399“
1J1 .1067 01330 .1523a 01901 .1103 01679
FuH .0322¢° ..31549 .3311cc .34063‘ .3342‘3 .3166.“
‘: .2333¥¢ ..27735’ .303233 .335193 .9bCS¢¢ .37TEOO
Aav .3039 .19193 .1285 .1111 01746 02161a
‘30 .07q5‘9 .36:Z°¢ .3153¢° .0592°a .bg‘agc .05‘5‘.
231 .2367“: .355633 .233‘3547 .6071“: .5I31uu .30013'
5.0177 02323“'3 0.713" 0223630 021673 .2331°¢ .276309

 

 

5'. -

. r

-h 1.7 \'\

 

221

 

Zorri1acnon Coaff:cu.nts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11v: 11v: nAV6 AAVS 1101 1102

6661 .0530 .J393 .0302 0215‘. -.0697 “.1072
1662 .19499 .261393 .261699 .506839 .0989 .0669
K153 .1v17 {1250 71515 .3337“9 .1319 .06157
A656 .16é9 .22139 .235199 .383999 .0606 .0000
AABJ .0733 .0609 .0603 .1708 ‘.0057 -.0553 ‘
EKG 09,63 017:5: .1'070 0261533 0031‘ 00m
A567 .0966 .0559 .1319 .0975 .0511 .0138
AABO .3259 .u703 01203 .1966‘ 01157 .1175
13310 .1359 .1503 .17‘)° .23220 .0963 .0319
A6511 .0155 .J691 .0929 .393266 .1755? .1518
14612 .0983 .0693 .0769 .356199 .0766 .0635
luLJHVL .300333 .vvafiv‘ .3305”; .52953‘ .ZCZSV .1935“
AQCOHPZ .005: .0155 .0600 -.0361 -.15°3 -.0719
A004") .13709 .229099 .1252 .2607c3 .2687“, .ZlSOfi
EXEL 0 mt 0(193“ .UJ“G o AWU‘ .VJ‘I‘I" . 9016“
c1502 .0377 .2129: .0353 .1856“ .936780 .502099
éAECS .0w51 .1631 .0175 .1627 .90579‘ .3620‘9
- . O ‘ .5 O .L 0 -¢. CW
515.: .1025 .259686 .0762 .19399 .937139 .3053¢¢ .
EAECO .115: .2b2799 .0593 .1935‘ .9621cc «391199 '
inc’ .u.31 .412. .0363 ..vav .12LJ .1136::
1VV3 .0517 .0836 .0569 .1608 .0666 .0879
1‘VQ .1091 .0773 .0662 0250393 .1602 .1211
’PAHZ’ 0&2}: .161. 'OUJUL .2007“ 051QUV‘ 0Q,DV"
Finn -.JéO; .0895 -.0265 .1700 .255590 ..101'099
Fad: .046: .26613‘ .0553 .19990 .3566.‘ .3500.‘

‘—?1ht oust. *TT68T== OJIUU .1310 .JiUZVF"__T3U#V""
its: .0d61 .1556 .0367 .0096 .6955" .6857“
R809 .1392 021053 .1210 .0112 07139.. 06811..
K35 .1J:J 025213“ .1695 .1955" .DSVUV' .OJIVUV
thVL 1.0600 .7171°9 .3576.‘ .30319‘ .0891 .0132
A‘V‘ .717199 1.0000 .7086.9 .376399 .22759. .1403
unvw .9: I 5W .703“? 1 .JJUq .JW
AAV: .5031‘9 .37V5" .36779‘ 1.0000 .2596“ .2165‘
6501 .0691 .22769‘ .0718 .259668 1.0000 .91669'
I311‘ . 11 3.: O 1555 " .UJ‘ia 0‘193V . '1‘““‘ 1 00111“:
1.0: .1092 .1572 .0559 .256899 .8695’. .91679.
6505 .1102 .10003 .0900 .275299 .9251°° .9106.9
AADS .0702 .2366.9 .0515 .2903°° .968599 .921999
1311 .0465 .1699 .0563 .2208. .8916" .8036‘9
0312 .0969 .1507 .05‘1 020963 .3033.. 00201..
ARI: .143: .1759; .0731, .21269 .317399 .527099
AH1~ .116: .1625 .0663 .1690 .7930‘3' .7815“
3.1 .1013 .2379“: .1297 .22869 .255903 .2378“
:02 .J993 .16JC .1219 .301639 .2763‘9 .5016'9
3:3 0050- 01131 -00133 00352 .531399 .2VUV"
5.06 -.0095 -.0075 .0438 .0356 .1531 .18570
EH5 .31959 .1155 .211?° .360299 .17718 .263693
2.0 .(vJSV 010117 .JIU3V .4135“ .UOV5 .1375
:u7 .233599 .1235 .15739 .28999‘ .307799 .285999
End 0£J70° .0935 020383g .2‘72“ .1515 .1311‘
E6? .1527: .0315 .IVZJ .1712c {292399 .261093
5.10 .1222 .0260 .1157 .1639 .0763 01511
5.11 .1~86 .J652 .1502 019299 .0613 .1085
E... .3323 -.3151 3:331" .0856 -.3253 .3416
Aav .173»9 .2133“ .2391"9K 0599099 .1390 .0666
Aubufif .297J¢¢ .335933 .273399 .379293 .1539 .1826‘
:AEL ..oZ? .2232?” .0539 .11166 "-77?3§59' .VUYTuv
1hv .1005 .0015 .0 21 0597733 .lSCJ 01315
PAH .0.12 021963 .0133 033619 0629299 0630799
is) .1293 .‘1733 .1203 .399? .733439 .723353
iAV .sa6=9¥ .JOJZ39 .909993 .316230 .20339 .1156
And .0015 .19923 .0566 .266983 .976693 .962739
A51 .1055 .1765“ .0065 .2123° .370799 .569299
5.0177 .17309 .1228 .13230 .259193 .239299 .2736“
3 - 3|-n|r. L- .:w - a: fiu‘. 1 ., '7-?j71°u$

222

 

‘ -OFYEIGCIOH Loafficsents

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.103 1.0!. 11.35 1:111 M112 M113
A651 -.Gi63 “0095* -.0206 -.C‘Q‘ ‘.0027 .3110
A~J¢ .3679 .1225 .0925 .3603 .3371 .3256
A693 .U’SO .1022 .1570 .1270 .1365 .0709
3555 '.0236 .0250 .0722 .3200 ‘.0319 ‘.0266
AAGS -.0062 .0132 -.0002 -.J766 -.0171 -.026‘
“‘00 .JJC5 .0599 .1305 .0970 .1062 .1022
AAu7 .0103 .J127 .0923 .3656 .3154 .3297
3550 .1.73 .1920 .1235 .3923 .3068 .3311
‘hbtv .029” .5795 .10‘7 .3981 .3391 01‘33
66511 .1107 .1569 .19359 .1500 .1313 .1132
15512 .055. .0555 .1093 .0366 .0773 .0519
iuLJI‘VI .1300 01:65:: .5330; .1933 .3001 .3177!
AuCaflPZ 00579 '01661 ‘01661 “.3261 ‘00623 -.0956
AJCQN. .239433 .251339 .252199 .2076¢ .1213 .20639
cKE:1 ..79733 .7023}: .7339“: .3755“3 .323233 .gVSQUU
55292 0.07999 .393199 .72259‘ .596099 .3605°° .0926‘3
EAECJ ...721’3c ...oact .304399 .07709‘ .311699 .5579“
:ACL» .Jaoa¥3 .)95633 .3092”: .505433 .329699 .468793
61:05 .c;273$ .19259‘: .729939 .4925cc .363999 .398099
EAEQO .d71239 .305‘99 .722333 .362799 .306699 .3675“9
mu ...;1 .zono .151. .1575 .2515“ .4551”
1MV’ .1511 .0107 .0660 .3376 .3675 .1715.
XXV. .17600 .1510 .1577__ .1369‘_ .1700 .1799.
FAM‘ .Joaa$¢ 0-5¢93° 05169.9 093423‘ 0373533 0155299
Fan. .286099 .201733 .216933 .307199 .2759‘0 .26219‘
FAHD .327133 .33333‘ .3779¢‘ .351033 .329q.‘ .3152"
war . 2:13“ 0.3565“ . 339713; . 33.553 "7.6033? .2616“—
ACSJ ”H.3199 ..32099 .676799 .6239“ .61219t .55659‘
RESQ .65639’ .33539. .6662“ ..350‘3 .61169. .5672"
5:5 . a. a.“ .awsvv .0635!” . 2.6.28er
6". .1092 .1132 .0702 .0309 .0969 .1036
AAV‘ .1272 016009 .236699 .1699 .1587 .1769.
I‘V§ .3551 .JVUU .0513 .J)“J .0391 .3151
Aav: .2566“ .275299 .2903‘9 .22089 .20999 .2126.
AA01- .3a9593 .325199 .960593 .591‘93 .3033‘9 .3373"
A . A " . . . . .
LAD} 1.0303 .135033 .4903“ .655939 .163336 ..537“
1.06 .3353“? 1.3050 .920099 .362539 .79‘703 ..666‘9
5.1 .20659 .267399 .29399° .21829 .231999 .23369‘
5.2 .321135 .277730 .356193 .3663c3 .321786 .3202"
5:3 4.5.” .gaaeao .aurr .2108“ .zesaco .230?”
£40. .139J .1510 .1951 .1938. .1719‘ .1590
:.5 .237133 .2289“. .23339 .1973° .13619 017319
to. 01.50 .1906 .1121 .1152 .5570 .0992
607 .293733 .103133 .303799 .275199 .21039 0235799
fig. .246~¥ .;393¢ .13550 .21139 .1608 o178“
:.? .231J95—-_T:12133____T::5533—__—725383‘. .20695 .2676‘3
2.14 .lJfi7¢ .1551 .1071 .1062 .1015 01065
5.11 .1967 .1393 .0772 .1225 .1329 .1650
:.12 .0271 .0611 ”.0631 .05394’ .0596 .v3JU
1.6 .0027 .12.} .150. .0395 .3350 .0861
Aubufl? .1211 .155“ .17513 .1752“ .0564 ~1161
clcb .033333' ..63c33 ‘773‘333‘—_"73939‘3_"'"773735 _ '"33
1NV .17793 .1721° .1h95 .1534 .1721a .296393
FA“ .3J7J¢° ..06139 .693599 ...5299 .3315‘9 .368399
ac. . 37?. ~'==== . airwc .7797“ .BBQWE—‘fiS‘mfi-fmm—
A“. .1009 .2035“ .232,3 .107‘ .102; 01709
AAU ..aaou: .463933 .311... .903... .365300 .:123°°
§H1 .37953‘ .4635“; .331333 .3 o . 0
600177 .2623“. .277653 .253399 .2686‘3 .237299 .2607“9

 

 

223

 

 

- -orralatTfifi“tBiYTTtTlfits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4‘14 531 $22 303 £304 535
LAGL .5232 .09?0 .1571 -.J313 -.0596 .0631
Alb; .3089 .1232 .295238 .1323 -.0089 .27790.
IKE: .Jv.» .1333 .1665v .UVB’ -.U16v .16..
1A6. '00303 .0720 .13313 .6512 .0107 .1921.
A163 .6391 .JZQS .1325 .0549 -.0766 .0875
iibo .u261 ..lr.v .Gari” -.J£I§ -.UUUJ oaavz
AA»? .G.5° .3751 .2215° .3167 .1322 .1565
Ahéu .JJ7Q .JSVQ .1551 .5135 00382 01197
1x919 ..svz ..~J(' .uzuu .470: -.IVUU .4111
AA611 .1232 .J619 .17Q93 -.0126 .0292 .259508
1A51z .0635 .0239 .1123 -.7257 “.1518 .1071
IULUHPI .JaV: .Jrzc” ousvx oval. .UIVI .1136
AJCuMPI -.1JZa -.Aba? -.0732 -.1637 .0337 -.0303
AJCUJQ.’ .1753° “.U531 “.1322 '.13“9 -.0975 .3033
:AELI .620133 .564033 .338633 .2950‘3 .1k66 .1652
EAEC2 .33.:08 .253600 .232h3‘ .29360’ .1568 .1359
61653 .d.23¢¢ .;3273° .2752°¢ .2793¢¢ .1366 .1361
515;. ...cse‘c‘ .3530” .2:’.2°° .5351” 3.61 v.50:
646.: .i51303 .2375fi3 .293)“‘ .212803 .163. .1519
cAéLb .529430 .JSSE¢¢ .254233 .315503 .1521 .1616
Ile .273.¢¢ .273039 .276355 .457533 .0173 .216133
1‘V3 .1403 .19553 .1663 .130“ .1337 .J571
[ivy .L~74 .1333 .233193 .2220. .1061 021173
W752 .333)33 .6076; .ZECJW .33-‘53; .53155 .3
FAN. .2.d£3° .14.5 .3153‘3 .223793 .0736 .2655.‘
FAHO osxsa¢° .525290 .175?¢ .593200 .1?11° .225660
R", .237733 033373: .1757‘ .3‘37“ 0118:] .2015‘
iéSé .5261°° .2313’9 .2089‘ .6117°° .1703. .1336
ans. .549900 .237239 .2126“ .3988¢¢ .1986¢ .1366
7;. .229.“ .aaro an??? «4.501 fin. .5195?—
AA'1 .1163 .1013 .0795 .0532 -.0095 .2195‘
Aav; .1323 .537730 .1500 .1231 -.3075 .1158
413V” .306) .1257 .1219 -.0138 .0983 .2115‘
6") .1690 .dZS“ .3016“ .3862 .0355 .36023‘
AADL .793gcc .2659°¢ .2763‘3 .331800 .1531 .17913
1.34 .:.12== .43???“ .IJISUU ..iuvnv .1657“ .263633-“
1403 .azaac. .40.SO .321:¢8 .285933 .1560 .2671"
AAD. .332533 .267390 .2779GG .2966‘9 .1516 .2239‘0

. a . . .5 . .
AA11 .331J¢3 .2132“ .36630‘ .2703“ .1938‘ .1973‘
AHIZ .36333¢ .23193. .3219°¢ .265833 .1719. .1861.

O O 0‘ O O O 0

A31. 1.030J .2161° .2711¢3 o2606¢‘ .1667 .1256
5.1 .3151“ ....O...) .vOOi" .355533 .36“5.‘ .3541)“
¢.2 .271133 ...)333 1.3000 .166339 .S?61¢¢ .6615”
73.3 .£.CQ°¢ .255563 ...6330 1.J300 .29913‘ .35103‘
auu. .1J61 .366600 .5?61¢¢ .2991.8 1.0000 .5066“
5.5 .1259 ossao:a .boIS°¢ .351033 .SOfiOOO 1.3000
c... .11.: .3620“ .suafi .aozzc «533:. .3477”
£47 .1751“ .50593‘ .539703 .5998¢¢ .36673¢ .5098.c
5.5 .121: ..10333 .7.27¢° .1120°° .SO$2¢¢ .5961¢°
5.9 756736 "7.3.7“ 313225 manic—c 326857 .oooeu
5.10 .3655 .viafiac .0982?“ .262?“c .65519’ .6036“
5.11 .IJC£¢ .)baé=$ .663h0t .266683 .650530 .561209
6.14 .1003 .2635a3 .031bsa .123“ .46383¢ ..693‘3
AA» .113J .1616 .2652‘8 .J619 -.0527 _.2521"
54‘9“? IU312 ‘.Jligu ‘.C)2§ ‘0L2é1 ‘.3289 .552‘
éAEb .é)o9°° .2563?c .3353¢¢ .5013¢¢ .1556 .1532
[AV .2225° .435733 .57113¢ .271193 .1331 01°22‘
FAN .3)ag¢3 .522733 .42-55$“ .“150°‘ .180°# .1299,“
.«n‘ .5954!» "7233;” 4.95.3" .3775: .1320: .1391.
..v .1361 .;;71: .1971” .6?26 .0025 .56693‘
Ana ...7;¢$ .ZavLGV .3u5533 .3139°° .1626 .229293
AHI .).b:¢¢ .4351c5‘"“71337$3'”‘7233§I% .IEZZ‘ 4717515___
56017! 02172‘3 o:056*° .35090. .553103 .708!‘3 .7511ca

 

 

 

3 - )1901'. h; .C)

*3 - :s’ntf. 12 .J1

0-‘00'.n.q-.o

- \aano

(z-tatled}

.3 ran-”.61

 

 

 

 

224

 

.Jrrelatxon -oeffiEients

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:03 527 5:5 F39 3210 :211
Aug; oiiéi 007:5; 017733 00466 03939 01599
Anus 00333 01953 015:5 00775¢ 0)??? 0063¢
"§:G:_ -_ 0:333—- I—77$?5_—- ‘0 -3"'”"323I§“ -,"73‘qu_m 0T$U5-_m
A~g~ .ijSJ 01115 011‘; 00101 066°? 03656
4355 0Q§51 0J3’5 01355 007333 0098“ 01552
-.Wa -.‘:.-n “wen—~- ‘2m—-~-7nfia-—~--'smzwt———3rrz—-
haul 0.157 -.uCSZ 0163; 01537 03337 037733
00000... 0.05:? 0.33.”: 00.392 0145’ 0:661 0:170
-:x=::‘“- -.c:=4‘ olctt"‘ .c:wz—' 03631" 07867"' .365Q—‘"
0050; 01414“ 0055:: 0131J 00511 00555 01539
Aublz 0-45‘ 0013! 03453 00:53 ‘03255 01259
17:33rT-”“' '01777" "71:3?'—‘ ’33:7T-" ”03r3¢”‘ '072?T_' 0333T———
A.C.nr¢ -.;.=z ~0162‘ -.152; -.1225 -.J£53 -0LS?6
Aacufié 000;! ‘0d717 ‘05:25 -.0da9 ‘0165: ’0;°5°
-: 0 -_""0377Tm 002T¢3V '}.JCI "“723T593'-"'73TTT-' ‘04 “'
:AC.‘ 0b:‘i 0&‘073 0:5”: 0£Z§Sa° 03557 03?33
éA:LJ 0055* 01713: 01273 02‘3793 03550 036‘?
-ETE::"“N '03523‘ ::I:"3m' 0:?TU" "3333533”"" 03:17. ‘73537_——
:Atbi oésié 0Jlll3 0155; 0233233 03093 04593
:43»; 0:39, 0520?: 00535 :5313“ 03559 07757
:372__"'_ 0377?. “733:3¢5"' 7233533 0323533" ".2t!3¥ 'A-3335335_
in?) 00357 01935’ 0150: 02235°“ 017?Z‘ 033220”
i0¥Q 00.57 .;73633 00050 .{5373 012C? 0(510"
'?:HZ“' ‘0r057¢ :35,3u0 01;10$- '0ZZ3Z¢¢ ' 01333 ‘013958"
FAAV 005J1° 0¢SSEU¢ 00’sflc 0021a 03??? 01658
Fade 0&35533 0320333 0i-77 0u333 03531 01352
Furl? 011493 — 0401333 _0 10'3”. -—T§738 “.1375" .-. 73.31?—
0:30 0J3?) 0&7570‘ .1576 022259 00536 00062
w». .0033 .530?” .174" .2277” .3056. .c121
«a: p.53: “ “53900 ‘72'30106 '“‘.‘2I-9£u ‘71‘73'2-1' .1029 —
Ail. 0C0J09 0&3330. 02375. 00‘270 01222 01556
5&V‘ 00¢00$ 00235 0336’ 0J3i5 03:60 03552
.1:7;_.___m. :2f353 -_—775733‘ _--;Z$33*‘ 01623 " 0fr37 _ -71502'—-
AAJfi 034503 0sJ939. 0297233 017123 01639 01929.
AhUL 03995 0337799 0:573 0&42300 0v758 00613
‘.IIUZ_--” '“M'07377—' 0253333"' 023:2”. -025233'""' 0151T_—"' 0133""—
Aid) 00'56 0-5:703 02569‘ 038159‘ 015873 0&567
A50“ 01Vuv 0Jéélac 00413. 0292160 01‘51 01390
'13?" ---0T:21”- --UOS‘IW' ....1355.‘--._. 326553¢ ' .nc7r. ”313772.—
031‘ 01154 0175108 02113a 0&5589.‘ 01062 0122‘
hlll .JoVJ oilJJG 01333 02069. 010‘s 01329
inla 0.7?! ‘~‘ 0453773——__7T755°‘_"_-73375§¢'_"_TIU63" .0153U-_—
AH‘Q 01A=J 03751“ 01£15 05357°¢ 00653 0l302¢
300 0595.3; O);J?‘u 0516’”: 0§73C33 0326633 036’39fi
50‘ 03£LQV¥ .,3,1¢¢ 07~2733 07342" 0593233 03‘3““
’5. 0:523: “0377330 031Z3$6 0050333~ 02529“‘ -0248‘.‘_-
:00? 0*JJ£$° 0J697¢0 05:9233 05233cc 0605733 06505‘3
503 0597733 03G!33° 0536739 03066on 0509533 056029.
'"373—“._"-."100033'-"_'003J35‘ ' ‘03:!Z‘°_- .7:5733¢-“"053233¢"-"75331¢’_—
-.7 0-}§J¢u LOJOJ; 0519933 0571‘.ca 05%1039 03129..
5. 0345J¢° 0¢6633¢ 10039; 076950‘ 031‘303 ”caioq‘q1_
:;a 0037233 '23:;zao .7;:.aa z.gcsc' ‘2§ézo¢° .702300
:00v 0533433 0050003 0304333 0332333 203033 073313“
501‘ 0503033 0313433 0530;33 .3023¢° .730133 1.3339 __
5“. 0‘42093 “0090333 073133“ 0>3J3°* .753239 0’=33‘°
Aav oL~7) 007333 0L353° 0L775$ 03720 03035‘
Auhufif 0iju “04¢3’ “01037 ‘0l355 ’01Q67 -0393
EAcb' ’ 00030 .0415}? 01353 0&6-133 03533 0J73‘
in] 000;; 0J~9£3$ 0:22333 0535533 035?i° 03619°‘
Fn‘ .;;,°U$ 0364333 0LJ55° 0:50? 001‘, 0075‘“
§£?_fl 0.03} 053833° 032'3¢ 00513¢° .3 ’3 03657.”-
Aid 05*:33* 04C4£Jc .202033 00635 01:3, 01‘)?
‘39 00:73 OJQ31¢¢ 0155§° 0272133 01343 013?!
'-§?T_———N‘H-“”71393"--_::35§@¢w-":175:¢ "7243l°¢ 0J§96 01576_“-.
Eqdlti 060C73’ 0061639 0363733 09560‘3 0303233 0:8‘3‘3
" ‘7'- - 513.11}. L; .n‘.) “58.1-Jib,n| f: ..E 031 (2".31 I ea)

 

 

225

 

larrolatnon Coeffic10ncs -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:‘412 106 .zoconp EXEC INV PAM
5661 015633 05753” '00116 ‘00387 01227 -0038?
AAG2 01271 0097600 01565 00732 00317 00267
515? .0035 .0393“ 00760 00679 .1691 fish-3
A65“ 05616 0°96¢.. 00916 00385 00561 ‘00336
A065 0060? 059663. 00067 -00067 00715 -0J766
1500 0Jv1§ 066355; 05560 03831 ’03956 “0009‘
A167 06731 039623° 00712 00637 0°?‘3 03336
1060 01160 007103° -03259 01161 -00868 05612
A1510 0J16J 0659239 00106 01026 00366 01676
AAG11 03909 0060099 03909 01059 01690 03956
A0012 00110 00951’9 01333 00375 00950 01095
ICCUEPI -00353 01517 0676533 01668 01336 0269155
AJCGHPZ ~00061 -016iO 0556990 -01091 '01580 -00336
‘JCUHJ “01563 01152. 07:86°. 0&369‘. -0055“ 03653
cKECL 0J201 01U63 01516 09555" 01023 0626233
EAéL2 00183 01038 01306 0390039 017709 0627699
EAELJ .0J31 03952 01660 097333. 01539 0392599
excua "00011 01100 01305 ’77!‘TF3_—_'7T3$5°“—'_:Frflflnr_—
EAELS .JJ25 00930 01503 03911°9 018069 0021199
E6650 ‘00)“0 01231 01322 093803¢ 01623 060200‘
INVZ .3337" ..336 «131'; .103U—-_.TWO—mm_
thJ 0201633 -00133 ~00226 01633 03285.. 00668
IHV6 01555 01556 -00216 01601 0356693 021679
run .103: .0309 .120: .5071“ .1500 .3310“—
F‘"Q 05‘69 0391’ 03565 01130.. 01067 06322"
FARO 00360 03323 00402 0366900 01335 0391503
—-Ft'7 ‘0J1VZ 0361“ 01 0 0 0
R853 '06363 “00136 00633 00669“ 01601 03606..
R:$6 -0G§56 -00039 01373 070519. 01103 0336200
K63 00063 0031: 01517 003799' 0157? 03156‘'
‘6'1 009Z5 0173‘. 02,73.‘ 00629 01003 05512
AAV2 -00157 021363 033590. 0226299 00699 021660
[51“ 01111 0‘511” 0CIJJ“ 00359 03711 00135
AAVS 00006 0693003 0379236 019169 0267799 02361‘
AA01 -0025) 01333 0153? 0966906 01300 0629299
“‘1!U¢ .0016 iGESEf” 01:20? 0vurrvvg’ 0151: 0~5Urvv*
AID; 00371 06627 01511 0J835“ 01779. 03373’.
AAO6 06511 01263 01556 03083¢° 01721c 0606100
A603 ’00J52 0163‘ 01151. 093605? 01653 06635;;
AH11 00536 00895 017529 0696930 01536 066523.
“1‘ 00566 03660 00666 06375.. 01921. 03515“
”’1i13 03530 0U861 01161 0393055 02663;; 03663“
1316 01002 01130 00312 0656999 .zzzsc 0350893
501 0409509 01610 -00793 0256363 0235793 0322739
502 0031099 0265299 ”00326 0285839 027119° 02358“
2;: 01286 .0017 -.1§$1 .JU1EVV’ .2711v' .6130""‘
EiU6 0003039 -00527 -00286 01556 01031 018099
505 0099333 0252133 00526 01532 013229 0299500
E16 0~9U1VV 019i} 0U6DJ 0J806 010(0 0(365"
£07 0000633 017303 -0Ooé7 021339 0366299 0192399
533 0731000 013539 -0110? 01653 0222990 013650
:0? 0033‘]“9 017153 ‘01366 0266133 029359“ 0136‘3
5.14 07632¢° 06720 -01667 00632 020919 01157
5311 0733503 020336 -01605 03786 0301939 017563
301‘ 10U035 019?? '016U) 00070 0339639 05390
AAG 0109? 103033 00980 01071 03929 03670
10Cu3r -01600 01930 1030C: 01686 -00602 01239
‘—?XEC’ 00u13 01011 01666 173000" '01723’“ "7:T7V“"__'
INV 0309039 00929 -00°02 017259 100003 01829“
FAN 00590 00670 01239 0017989 013293 100000
RES -0131V 0JC73 01363 0753533 013QZ 0333633
And 00:00 0353239 0359333 01772 01539 01533
‘50 06‘}? 0117: 01700 0965393 01562 06361:.
1H1 03755 03931 01215 0710633 0211‘a OQOYY‘a
600111 0703699 013660 '01039 0226503 0313139 0323603

 

73‘- .!

.3170 -3 031

(3.7-rs". rra'r "

 

 

 

226

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - .orrumu - -
{ES AAV AAO AN! EOUXTY
AAG1 -.1236 .1223 -.0683 -00065 .1335
016102 003311 037.57.. 03697 003“? 01531.
AA»; 00320 022339 01176 01136 01666
6‘66 -005“, 0.3053“ 00323 '001‘3 01Z6‘
AAGS -.017b .1163 -.0092 -00215 .0989
0101100 '00))1'9 0‘1i53 03732 039,98 003‘0
1657 01151 01135 0JZ87 003617 .1650
AAGJ .0102 .1266 .1263 .0833 .1236
1010010 ‘0UZUZ 022573 037“ 00956 03607
AAG11 .0351 01690 .1650 .1359 .1566
AA612 -.0003 .1701 .0778 00782 00656
6011.00.17]. 01553 0‘533" 017103“ 01363 00597
AuCJMPZ -.0272 .0325 .1306 -.0655 -01286
AJCQJ: .1299 .0375! .252299 .13000 -01213
tl=b1 .quzw 0150: .703ZVV .0 .
51602 .716700 .1539 .937703 .911600 .2202°
5x503 .006063 .1259 .9199.‘ .4866" 020209
0112... .7090" ...:as: .926333——.u70'fl’ .zxaffi
EAEBS 0729699 019963 .961399 051169. 0222999
éAiyo .751533 .40368 .739336 .680668 .2263°'
INVI 0101, 0110‘. 01565 00160511 031°3.‘
13V3 .1126 .1067 .0607 .1176 .230669
law. .0935 .1560 .1537 01652 .236500
p.112 .3000.» .127: .zzsfi'o was?“ .3231€t—’
FAH6 02°53°° 0Jb59 02999“ 0&867‘3 002326”
F0u0 .237790 .19690 .3022“ .365633 .2710“
W .2052!" 012.1: .3 . .
2:53 .906100 01111 .606203 .007199 .2167.
R550 0900390 01766 06969.9 0613799 0230199
«1:: “.1051" 01.01? .MW
66V1 01493 0.6536“ 0030315 0105’ 017333
AAV‘ .2170"l .36020‘ .1992. .17669 01223
O 4. O o O I
60" 003995 03132.. 01",” 01128. .259103
AA01 .7336" .20338 .9766" .370799 .2392“
1:0? .TZSIVV .1150 07W
A003 .077100 01039 .9566“ .379509 .202399
AA06 .507500 .2053“ .9609“ .366509 .277599
‘1'05* .ILVIVV .2 0 . .
1011 .606500 .1676 .9030‘. .950596 .2606“
6‘11 06.336“ 01019 03663.‘ 09609.. 02372..
-501 .230903 .21713 .206199 02361" .6053‘.
602 .239:°¢ .1971° .3055°° .335798 .8509¢0____
:‘03 .3773” .09.!0 .3113?” .2589” .5531"
EhU6 018209 00025 01626 01662 0708839
505 .1:91° .260338 .2292“ .1786‘ .7511°‘
:00 .1059 .269636 .1275 .1095 .660755
£07 03022°° 02628“9 .303100 .235609 .7616“
Edd .2113° .261069 .1033‘ 017689 .868799
Eu? 02512“; 01055 02721" 026313 0
£510 .0073 .113a .1360 .0996 .8632°¢
5.11 .0057 .1509 .1392 01570 .75633‘
041‘ ’OUJ1’Q— 03306 0.0‘30 03156 07‘86‘3—mu
AAG .0373 .053230 .1173 .3961 .18660
AJCUHI' 01363 035I3°° 01700 01216 -0103?
‘"—T7:?:38 ..rrt’ .06Hsvv .9103‘3-"—’72265°'_
1-‘V 0150‘ 01537 .1362 021163 03131.‘
FAA .306o¢‘ .1633 0636108 .007739 .3236“
<0) 1.3.0110 .10..) .1050“! .0011va .zaus'"
AA! .1000 1.0030 .10950 .1750 .2235°
A00 .733603 .13)5° 100003 .302799 .2726“
1314’ .bysuvv .1703 .0azrvv 1.0000 .ZS‘FV'__—_
600177 .2583‘. .22359 0272693 .25660O 1.0000
5 ‘ 51911170 L- 0'3: 3' " 0131170 1.: 031 (2‘1611001

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aaker, David A. (1993), "Are Brand Equity Investments Really Worthwhile?" in Brand
Equity and Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands, David A.
Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 333-
341.

Aaker, David A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity, NY: The Free Press.

Abemethy, Avery M. and Herbert J. Rotfeld (1991), "Assessing Attitude Towards Radio
Advertising," in Proceedings of the 1991 Conference of the American Academy
of Advertising, Rebecca Holman ed., 73-80.

Abemethy, Avery M. (1991), "Physical and Mechanical Avoidance of Television
Commercials: An Exploratory Study of Zipping, Zapping and Leaving," in
Proceedings of the 1991 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising,
Rebecca Holman, ed., American Academy of Advertising, 223-231.

Advertising Research Foundation (1962), The Measurement and Control of the Visual
Efficiency of Advertisements, NY: Advertising Research Foundation.

Advertising Research Foundation (1961), Toward Better Media Comparisons, NY:
Advertising Research Foundation.

Advertising Age (1993), "Who’s Afraid of Ad Clutter?" March 1, 16.

Alba, Joseph W. and Amitava Chattopadhyay (1985), "The Effects of Context and Part-
Category Cues on the Recall of Competing Brands," Journal of Marketing
Research, 22 (August), 340-349.

Alba, Joseph W., J. Westley Hutchinson, and John G. Lynch Jr. (1991), "Memory and
Decision Making," in Handbook of Consumer Research, Thomas S. Robertson
and Harold H. Kassarjian, eds., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1-49.

Alba, Joseph W. and J. Westley Hutchinson (1987), "Dimensions of Consumer
Expertise," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (March), 411-454.

227

228

Allen, C. T. and Thomas J. Madden (1983), Examining the Link between Attitude toward
' an Ad and Brand Attitude: A Classical Conditioning Approach, Working Paper,
School of Management, University of Massachusetts, September.

Alsop, Ronald (1989), "Brand Loyalty is Rarely Blind Loyalty," The Wall Street Journal,
October 19, Bl and B10.

Andrews, J. Craig, Steven Lysonski and Srinivas Durvasula (1991), "Understanding
Cross-cultural Student Perceptions of Advertising in General: Implications for Ad
Educators and Practitioners," Journal of Advertising, 20 (2), 15-28.

Andrews, J. C. (1988), "Motivation, Ability and Opportunity to Process Information:
Conceptual and Experimental Manipulation Issue," Advances in Consumer
Research XV, 219-227.

Andrews, J. Craig, S. Durvasula, and SH. Akhter (1990), "A Framework for
Conceptualizing and Measuring the Involvement Construct in Advertising
Research," Journal of Advertising, 19 (4), 18-26.

Assael, Henry (1992), Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action, fourth edition, Boston:
PWS-Kent Publishing Co.

Atkin, Charles (1985), "Information Utility and Selective Exposure to Entertainment
Media," in Selective Exposure to Communication, Dolf Zillman and Jennings
Bryant, eds., NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso., 63-91.

Bagozzi, Richard P. and Youjae Yi (1989), "On the Use of Structural Equations in
Experimental Designs," Journal of Marketing Research, 26 (August), 271-84.

Baker, William, J. Westley Hutchinson, Danny Moore, and Prakash Nedungadi (1986),
"Brand Familiarity and Advertising: Effects on the Evoked Set and Brand
Preference," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13, Richard J. Lutz, ed.,
637-642.

Baldinger, Allan L. (1990), "Defining and Applying the Brand Equity Concept: Why the
Researcher Should Care," Journal of Advertising Research, 30 (3), RC2-5.

Banks, A. (1987), "Clutter in the Era of Control," Marketing and Media Decisions, 22,
51-2.

Bargh, John A. (1989), "Conditional Automaticity: Varieties of Automatic Influence in
Social Perception and Cognition," in Unintended Thought, J. S. Uleman and John
A. Bargh, eds., Guilford, 212-250.

229

Batra, Rajeev and M. L. Ray (1983), "Advertising Situations: The Implications of
Differential Involvement and Accompanying Affect Responses," in Information
Processing Research in Advertising, R. J. Harris, ed., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Asso., 127-147.

Batra, Rajeev and M. L. Ray (1985), "How Advertising Works at Contact," in
Psychological Processes and Advertising Efi’ects. L. F. Alwitt and A. A. Mitchell,
eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso., 13-44.

Battaglia, Michael J. (1991 ed.) "Magazine Advertising Revenues," Mediaweek’s Guide
to Media, Vol. 14, 2, 89.

Battig, William, F. (1979), "The Flexibility of Human Memory," in Levels of Processing
in Human Memory, Laird S. Cermak and Fergus I. M. Craik, eds., Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bearden, William 0., Richard G. Netemeyer, and Mary F. Mobley (1993), Handbook of
Marketing Scales, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Bell, Stephen S. (1988 ed.), Evaluating the Efl'ects of Consumer Advertising on Market
Position Over Time. Marketing Science Institute Conference, June 8-10.
Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

Berger, Ida E. (1993), The Role of Advertising Provided Information and Exposure
Frequency in Memory and Attitude-Behavior Consistency. Paper presented at the
American Academy of Advertising Annual Conference, Montreal, April.

Bettrnan, James R. (1979), "Memory Factors in Consumer Choice: A Review," Journal
of Marketing, 43 (Spring), 37-53.

Biehal, Gabriel, Debra Stephens, and Eleonora Curlo (1992), "Attitude Toward the Ad
and Brand Choice," Journal of Advertising, 21 (3), 19-35.

Biel, Alexander L. (1992), "How Brand Image Drives Brand Equity," Journal of
Advertising Research, (N ovember/December), RC6- 12.

Bloch, Peter H., Daniel L. Sherrell, and Nancy M. Ridgeway (1986), "Consumer Search:
An Extended Framework," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (June), 119-126.

Bogart, Leo and Charles Lehman (1973), "What Makes a Brand Name Familiar?" Journal
of Marketing Research, 1, 17-22.

Bogart, Leo (1966 ed.), Psychology in Media Strategy, Chicago: American Marketing
Association.

230

Bransford, J. D., J. J. Franks, C. D. Morris, and B. S. Stein (1979), "Some General
Constraints on Learning and Memory Research," in Levels of Processing in
Human Memory, Laird S. Cermak and Fergus I. M. Craik, eds., Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associaties, 331-354.

Brehm, Jack W. (1966), A Theory of Psychological Reactance, San Diego, CA: Academic
Press. -

Brehm, S. S. and J. W. Brehm (1981), Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom
and Control, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Broadbent, Donald E. (1958), Perception and Communication. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Brown, Tom and Michael L. Rothschild (1993), "Reassessing the Impact of Advertising
Clutter," Journal of Consumer Research, 20(June), 138-146.

Brown, John (1975), "An Analysis of Recognition and Recall and of Problems in Their
Comparison," in Recall and Recognition, John Brown ed., London: John Wiley
and Sons, 1-35.

Burgoon, Michael and Michael D. Miller (1990), "Overcoming Resistance to Persuasion
via Contiguous Reinforcement and Repetition of Message," Psychological Reports,
66(3), 1011-1022.

Burgoon, Michael, J. Hall, M. Pfau (1991), "A Test of the "Messages-as-Fixed-Effect
Fallacy" Argument: Empirical and Theoretical Implications of Design Choices,"
Communication Quarterly, 39 (1), 18-35.

Burke, Raymond R. and Thomas K. Srull (1988), "Competitive Interference and
Consumer Memory of Advertising," Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (June), 55-
68.

Burke, Marian C. and Julie A. Edell (1986), "Ad Reactions Over Time: Capturing
Changes in the Real World," Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 114-119.

Bumkrant Robert E. and Sawyer Alan G. (1983), "Effects of Involvement and Message
Content on Information Processing Intensity," in Information Processing Research
in Advertising, R. J. Harris, ed., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso., 43-63.

Burton, Scot and Donald R. Lichtenstein (1988), "The Effect of Ad Claims and Ad
Context on Attitude Toward the Advertisement," Journal of Advertising, 17 (1),
3-11.

231

Campbell, Donald T. and Julian C. Stanley (1966), Experimental and Quasi-experimental
Designs for Research, Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Co.

Carlston, Donald E. (1992), "Impression Formation and the Modular Mind: The
Associated Systems Theory," in Construction of Social Judgment, Tesser and
Martin, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 301-340.

-

Carpenter, Gregory S. and Kent Nakamoto (1989), "Consumer Preference Formation and
Pioneering Advantage," Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 285-298.

Celsi, Richard L. & Jerry C. Olson (1988), "The Role of Involvement in Attention and
Comprehension Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 210-224.

Celuch, Kevin G. and Mark Slama (1993), "Program Content and Advertising
Effectiveness: A Test of the Congruity Hypothesis for Cognitive and Affective
Sources of Involvement," Psychology and Marketing, 10(4), 285-299.

Chaiken, Shelly, Akiva Liberman, and Alice H.Eagly (1989), "Heuristic and Systematic
Information Processing within and beyond the Persuasion Context," in Unintended
Thought, J. S. Uleman and John A. Bargh, eds., 212-253.

Chatterjee, Sayan and Birger Wemerfelt (1991), "The Link between Resources and Type
of Diversification: Theory and Evidence," Strategic Management Journal, 12, 33-
48.

Cobb, Cathy J. (1985), "TV Clutter and Advertising Effectiveness," in Proceedings of the
Educators ' Conference, Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Cohen, Patricia, Cohen Jacob, Jeanne Teresi, Margaret Marchi, and C. Noemi Velez
(1990), "Problems in the Measurement of Latent Variables in Structural Equation
Causal Models," Applied Pyschological Measurement, 14 (2), 183-196.

Compaigne, Benjamin M. (1982), The Business of Consumer Magazines. White Plains.
NY: Knowledge Industry Publications.

Cook, William A. (1992), "Brand Equity as a Love Story," Journal of Advertising
Research, Nov/Dec, 7-8.

Cook, Thomas D. and Donald T. Campbell (1979), Quasi-Expermientation. Boston,
Houghton Mifflin Co.

Cox, Dena Saliagas and William B. Locander (1987), "Product Novelty: Does it Moderate
the Relationship between Ad Attitude and Brand Attitudes?" Journal of
Advertising, 16(3), 39-44.

 

232

Craig, A. J. (1988), "Motivation, Ability and Opportunity to Process Information:
Conceptual and Experimental Manipulation Issues," in Advances in
Consumer Research XV, M. J. Houston ed., Prova, UT, Association for
Consumer Research, 219-225

Cronin, John J. and Nancy E. Menelly (1992) "Discrimination Vs. Avoidance. ’Zipping’
of Television Commercials," Journal of Advertising, 21 (2), 1-.8

Dawes, Robyn M. and Tom L. Smith (1985), "Attitude and Opinion Measurement," in
Handbook of Social Psychology, third edition, Vol. 1, Lindzey Gardner and Elliot
Aronson, ed., NY: Random House, 509-566.

De Chematony, Leslie and McDonald, Malcolm H. B. (1992), Creating Powerful Brands,
Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.

DeNitto, Emily (1993), "For a Change, the Pitch is Editorial," Magazine Buying and
Planning Special Report, Advertising Age, October 11, 818.

DeVellis, Robert F. (1991), Scale Development, Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Dillman Don A. (1978), Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method, NY:
John Wiley & Sons.

Dittus, Edward C. and Marty Kopp (1991), "Advertising Accountability in the 1990s:
Moving from Guesswork and Gut Feelings," Journal of Advertising Research, 28
(November), RC7 - 12.

Dodge, Yodolah (1985), Analysis of Experiments with Missing Data, NY: John Wiley
& Sons.

Donaton, Scott (1994), "Ad Pages End Year On Modest Up Note," Advertising Age,
January 24, 32.

Eagly, Alice H. and Shelly Chaiken (1993), The Psychology of Attitudes, Forth Worth:
Harcout Brace J ovanovich College Publishers.

Edell, Julie A and Marian C. Burke (1986), "The Relative Impact of Prior Brand Attitude
and Attitude Toward the Ad on Brand Attitude after Ad Exposure," in Advertising
and Consumer Psychology, Vol. 3, Jerry Olson and Keith Sentis, eds. 93-107.

Edell, Julie A. and Marian C. Moore (1993), "The Impact and Memorability of Ad-
induced Feelings: Implications for Brand Equity," in Brand Equity, and
Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands, David A. Aaker and
Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 195-211.

 

233

Edell, Julie & R. Staelin (1983), "The Information Processing of Pictures in Print
Advertisements," Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (June), 45-61.

Farquhar, Peter H. (1991), "Managing Brand Equity," Journal of Advertising Research,
RC7-12.

Farquhar, Peter H. and Paul M. Herr (1993), "The Dual Structure of Brand Associations,"
in Brand Equity and Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands,
David A. Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, 263-277.

Fawcett, Adrienne W. (1993), "Even Ad Pros Hate Ad Clutter," Advertising Age,
February 8, 33.

Fazio, Russell H. (1989), "On the Power and the Functionality of Attitudes," in Attitude
Structure and Function, Anthony Pratkanis et al. eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 153-179.

Flynn, Reinecke Leisa and Ronald E. Goldsmith (1993), "Application of the Personal
Involvement Inventory in Marketing," Psychology and Marketing, 10 (4), 357-
366.

Fortini-Campbell, Lisa (1993), Planning Beyond Measured Media: The Brand Contact
Approach, Paper presented at the Annual Conference of American Academy of
Advertising, Montreal, April.

Freud, Sigmund (1946), The Ego and the Mechanism of Defense, New York:
International Universities Press.

Gainer, Brenda (1993), "An Empirical Investigation of the Role of Involvement with a
Gendered Product," Psychology and Marketing, 10 (4), 265-283.

Gardner, Meryl R, Andrew A. Michell and J. Edward Russo (1985), "Low-Involvement
Strategies for Processing Ads," Journal of Advertising, 14 (2), 4-13.

Gelb, Betsy D. and Charles M. Pickett (1983), "Attitude Toward the Ad: Links ot Humor
and to Advertising Effectiveness," Journal of Advertising, 12 (2), 34-42.

Gill, James D., Sanford Grossbart, and Russell N. Laczniak (1988), "Influence of
Involvement, Commitment, and Familiarity on Brand Beliefs and Attitudes
of Viewers Exposed to Alternative Ad Claims Strategies," Journal of
Advertising, 17 (2), 33-43.

Goldstein, Larry S. (1982), Inducing Resistance to Persuasion: An Attempt to Extend

234

Inoculation Theory to a Marketing Context. Doctoral Dissertation, City University
of New York.

Goodstein, Ronald C. (1993), "Category-based Applications and Extensions in
Advertising: Motivating More Extensive Processing," Journal of Consumer
Research, 20 (June), 87-99.

Grant, Robert M. (1985), "The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage:
Implications for Strategy Formulation," California Management Review, Spring,
114-135.

Greenwald, Anthony G. (1968), "Cognitive Learning, Cognitive Response to Persuasion,
and Attitude Change," in Psychological Foundations of Attitudes, A. G.
Greenwald, T. C. Brock and T. M. Ostrom, eds., New York: Academic Press, 147-
170.

Greenwald, Anthony G. and Clark Leavitt (1984), "Audience Involvement in Advertising:
Four Levels," Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (1), 581-792.

Greenwald, Anthony G. (1989), "Why Attitudes Are Important: Defining Attitude and
Attitude Theory 20 Years Later," in Attitude Structure and Functions, Anthony
Pratkanis et al., eds., 429-441.

Ha, Louisa (1986), "Women’s Programs in Women’s Eyes: A Uses and Gratifications
Study in an Informational Program Setting," Communication and Journalism
Journal, Chinese University of Hong Kong, 24-33.

Ha, Louisa and Barry Litman (1993), Diminishing and Negative Returns from Advertising
Clutter: An Empirical Analysis for Consumer Magazines, Working Paper,
Michigan State University.

Haller, T. F. (1974), "What Students Think of Advertising," Journal of Advertising
Research, 14 (1), 33-38.

Haugtvedt, Curtis P., Clark Leavitt and Wendy L. Schneier (1993), "Cognitive Strength
of Established Brands: Memory, Attudinal, and Structural Approaches," in Brand
Equity and Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands, David A.
Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 247 -
261.

Hayduk, Leslie A. (1987), Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, Baltimore: The
John Hopkins University Press.

Heeter, Carrie and Bradley S. Greenberg (1985), "Profiling the Zappers," Journal of

235
Advertising Research, 25, (April/May), 15-19.

Higie, R. A. and C. F. Feick (1989), "Enduring Involvement: Conceptual and
Measurement Issues," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 16, Thomas K.
Srull, ed., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 690-696.

Houston, F. S. and Diane Scott (1984), "The Determinants of Advertising Page
Exposure," Journal of Advertising, 13 (2), 27-33.

Hunter, John E. (1986), "Multiple Dependent Variables in Program Evaluation," in
Multiple Methods, M. M. Mark and R. L. Shotland, eds., San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Hunter, John E. and Frank L. Schmidt (1990), Methods of Meta-Analysis, Newbury Park,
CA: Sage Publications.

Imber, Jane & Betsy Ann Toffler (1987), Dictionary of Advertising and Direct Mail
Terms, N Y:Barron’s Educational Series, Inc.

J acoby, Jacob, Donald E. Speller, and Carol A. Kohn (1974a), "Brand Choice Behavior
as a Function of Information Load," Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (Feb), 63-
69.

J acoby, Jacob, Donald E. Speller, and Carol A. Kohn (1974b), "Brand Choice Behavior
as a Function of Information Overload: Replication and Extension," Journal of
Consumer Research, 1 (June), 33-42. .

Jain, K. and N. Srinivasan (1990), "An Empirical Assessment of Multiple
Operationalizations of Involvement," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17,
M. E. Goldberg and R. W. Pollay, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer
Research, 594-600.

James, William L. and Arthur J. Kover (1992), "Observations: Do Overall Attitudes
toward Advertising Affect Involvement with Specific Advertisements?" Journal
of Advertising Research, Sept/Oct, 78-83.

Jensen, Jeff (1993), "Prime-time Clutter Falls Slightly," Advertising Age, March 8, 33.

Jones, John Philip (1986), What ’s in a Name? Advertising and the Concept of Brands.
Lexington: DC Heath and Co.

J oreskog, Karl G. (1990), "New developments in LISREL: Analysis of Ordinal Variables
Using Polychoric Correlations and Weighted Least Squares," Quality and
Quantity, 24, 387-404.

236

Joreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sorbom (1989), USREL 7: A Guide to the Program and
Applications. Second edition. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

Kaatz, Ronald B. (1987a), "The Zapping Problem and Suggestions for Solutions," Journal
of Media Planning, Spring, 29-34.

Kaatz, Ronald B. (1987b), "Creativity and Clutter," Marketing and Media Decisions,
22(May). 109-110.

Kahneman, D. and A. Treisman (1984), "Changing Views of Attention and Automaticity,"
in Varieties of Attention, Raja Parasuraman and D. R. Davies, eds., New York:
Academic Press, 29-63.

Kamins, Michael A., Lawrence J. Marks and Debra Skinner (1991), "Television
Commercial Evaluation in the Context of Program Induced Mood: Congruency
Versus Consistency Effects," Journal of Advertising, 20 (2),1-14.

Kapferer, Jean-Noel and Gilles Laurent (1993), "Further Evidence on the Consumer
Involvement Profile: Five Antecedents of Involvement," Pyschology and
Marketing, 10 (4), 347-355.

Kaplan, Barry M. (1985), "Zapping - The Real Issue is Communication," Journal of
Advertising Research, 25 (April/May), 9-12.

Keller, Kevin L. (1993), "Conceptualizing, Measuring and Managing Customer-Based
Brand Equity," Journal of Marketing, 57 (January), 1-22.

Keller, Kervin L. (1991), "Memory and Evaluation Effects in Competitive Advertising
Environments," Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 463-476.

Keller, Kevin L. (1987), "Memory Factors in Advertising: The Effects of Retrieved Cues
on Brand Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (Dec), 316-333.

Kent, Robert J. (1993), "Competitive Versus Non-Competitive Clutter in
Television Advertising," Journal of Advertising Research, (March/April),
40-45. --

Kent, Robert J. (1990), The Impact of Exposure to Competitor Advertisement on Recall
and Recognition Tasks: Difi'erential Efi'ects and the Moderation of Differences in
Ad Processing, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cincinnati.

Kirmani, Amna and Valerie Zeithaml (1993), "Advertising Perceived Quality, and Brand
Image," in Brand Equity and Advertising: Advertising 's Role in Building Strong

237

Brands, David A. Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 143-161.

Kitchen, Philip J. (1986), "Zipping, Zapping, and Nipping," International Journal of
Advertising, 5, 343-352.

Krishnan, H. Shanker and Dipankar Chakravarti (1993), "Varieties of Brand Memory
Induced by Advertising: Determinants, Measures, and Relationships," in Brand
Equity and Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands, David A.
Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 213-
245.

Krugman, Herbert (1986), "Low Recall and High Recognition of Advertising," Journal
of Advertising Research, 26, 79-86.

Krugman, Herbert (1965), "The Impact of Television Advertising: Learning without
Involvement," Public Opinion Quarterly, 29 (Fall), 349-356.

Laczniak, Russell N. and Darrel D. Muehling (1993), "Toward a Better Understanding of
the Role of Advertising Message Involvement in Ad Processing," Psychology and
Marketing, 10 (4), 301-319.

Laczniak, Russell N., Darrel D. Muehling, and L. Carlson (1991), "Effects of Motivation
and Ability on Ad-induced Cognitive Processing," in Proceedings of the 1991
Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, 81-87.

Lamond, James (1987), "The Impact of Channel Switching on Commercial Audiences,"
Journal of Media Planning, Fall, 27-32.

Lannon, Judie (1993) "Asking the Right Questions: What Do People Do with
Advertising?" in Brand Equity and Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building
Strong Brands, David A. Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 163-176.

Lastovika, John L. and Meryl P. Gardner (1979), "Components of Involvement," in
Attitude Research Plays for High Stakes, J. C. Maloney and B. Silverman, eds.,
Chicago: American Marketing Association, 53-73.

Laurent, Gilles and Jean-Noel Kapferer (1985), "Measuring Consumer Involvement
Profiles," Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41-53.

Lawhom, Charla (1992), "Edit and Ad Sales: Team of the 90s?" Folio, April, 103-105.

Leckenby, John D. and Joseph T. Plummer (1983), "Advertising Stimulus Measurement

238

and Assessment Research: A Review of Advertising Testing Methods," Current
Issues and Research in Advertising, 6(2), 135-165.

Leigh, James H. and Anil Menon (1987), "Audience Involvement Effects on the
Information Processing of Umbrella Print Advertisements," Journal of Advertising,
16 (3), 3-12.

Lord, Kenneth R. and Robert E. Bumkrant (1988), "Television Program Elaboration
Effects on Commercial Processing," Advances in Consumer Research XV, 213-
217.

Lutz, Richard J. (1985), "Affective and Cognitive Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad:
A Conceptual Framewo " in Psychological Processes and Advertising Efi'ects:
Theory, Research, and Application, L. F. Alwitt and A. A. Mitchell, eds.,
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 45-63.

Machleit, Karen A. and R. Dale Wilson (1988), "Emotional Feelings and Attitude Toward
the Advertisement: The Role of Brand Familiarity and Repetition," Journal of
Advertising, 17 (3), 27-35.

MacInnis, Debra & Bernard J. Jaworski (1989), "Information Processing from
Advertisements: Toward an Integrative Framework," Journal of Marketing, 53
(Oct), 1-23.

MacKenzie, Scott 8., Richard J. Lutz, and George E. Belch (1986), "The Role of Attitude
Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing
Explanations," Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 130-43.

MacKenzie, Scott B. and Richard J. Lutz (1982), Monitoring Advertising Efi'ectiveness:
A Structural Equation Analysis of the Mediating Role of Attitude toward the Ad,
Working Paper Series No. 117, Center for Marketing Studies, University of
California, Los Angeles.

Macrae, Chris (1991), World Class Brands, Wokingham, England: Addison-Westley
Publishers Ltd.

Madden, Thomas J ., William R. Dillon, and Jacqueline L. Twible (1986), "Construct
Validity of Attitude Toward the Ad: An Assessment of Convergent/Discriminant
Dimension," in Advertising and Consumer Psychology, Vol. 3, Jerry Olson and
Keith Sentis, eds., 74-92.

Mahoney, Joseph T. and Rajendran Pandian (1991), "The Resource-based View within
the Conversation of Strategic Management," Strategic Management Journal, 13,
363-380.

239

Malhotra, Naresh K., Arun K. Jain, and Stephen W. Lagakos (1982), "The Information
Overload Controversy: An Alternative Viewpoint," Journal of Marketing, 46

Mandese, Joe (1992), "How Dayparts Stack up on Zapping," Advertising Age, July 27,
32.

Marketing Research Institute (1991), Research Priorities: I 992-1994. A Guide to MSI
Research Program and Procedures.

Martin, Greg S. and Tom J. Brown (1991), "In Search of Brand Equity: The
Conceptualization and Measurement of the Brand Impression Construct," in AMA
Winter Educator Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2, Terry Childers, Scott B.
MacKenzie, Thomas W. Leigh, Steven Skinner, John G. Lynch Jr., Susan Heckler,
Herbert Gatignon, Raymond P. Fisk, and John L. Graham eds., 431-438.

McCollum Spielman Worldwide (1993), "AdAuditor Report," Journal of Advertising
Research, July/August, 33 (4), 1-3.

McGuire, William J. (1985), "Attitude and Attitude Change," in Handbook of Social
Psychology, Vol. 2, Gardner Lindzey and Elliot Aronson, eds., 233-347.

McGuire, William J. (1964), "Inducing Resistance to Persuasion: Some Contemporary
Approaches," in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 1,
L. Berkowitz, ed., San Diego, CA; Academic Press, 191-229.

McQuarrie, E. F. and J. M. Munson (1987), "The Zaichkowsky Personal Involvement
Inventory: Modification and Extension," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.
14, M. Walldendorf and P. Anderson eds., Ann Arbor, MI: Association for
Consumer Research, 36-40.

McQuarrie E. F. and J. M. Munson (1991), "A Revised Product Involvement Inventory:
Improved Usability and Validity," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 19,
John F. Sherry and Brian Stemthal, ed., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer
Research, 108-115.

Messmer, D. J. (1979), "Repetition and Attitudinal Discrepancy Effects on the Affective
Response to Television Advertising," Journal of Business Research, 7, 75-93.

Miller, G. A. (1956), "The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on
Our Capacity for Processing Information," Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

Mitchell, Andrew A. and Jerry C. Olson (1981), "Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only
Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitudes?" Journal of Marketing

 

240
Research, 18 (August), 318-332.

Mittal, Banvari (1993), "Public Assessment of TV Advertising: Faint Praise and Harsh
Criticism," Journal of Advertising Research, 34(1), 35-53.

Moore, Danny J. and J. Westley Hutchinson (1983), "The Effects of Ad Effect on
Advertising Effectiveness," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, R. D.
Bagozzi and A. M. Tybout, eds., Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer
Research, 526-531.

Moran, William T. (1990), "Brand Presence and the Perceptual Frame," Journal of
Advertising Research, October/November, 9-16.

Mord, Marvin S. and Edith Gilson (1985), "Shorter Units: Risk-Responsibility-Reward,"
Journal of Advertising Research, 25 (Aug/Sept), 9-19.

Moriarty, Sandra E. (1991a), Creative Advertising: Theory and Practice, NJ: Prentice-
Hall Inc.

Moriarty, Sandra E. (1991b), "Explorations Into the Commercial Encounter," in
Proceedings of the 1991 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising,
Rebecca Holman, ed., American Academy of Advertising, 215-222.

Muehling, Darrel D. (1987), "An Investigation of Factors Underlying Attitude-
Toward-the-Advertising in General," Journal of Advertising, 16(1), 32-40.

Muehling, Darrel D., Russell. N. Laczniak, and Jeffrey J. Stoltman (1991), "The
Moderating Effects of Ad Message Involvement: A Reassessment," Journal of
Advertising, 20 (2), 29-42.

Norris, Claire E. and Andrew M. Colman (1992), "Context Effects on Recall and
Recognition of Magazine Advertisements," Journal of Advertising, 21 (3), 37-46.

Norusis, Marija J. (1988), SPSS/PC+ V2.0 Base Manual, Chicago, Illinois: SPSS Inc.

O’Leary, Mike J. and Paul J. Barber (1993), "Interference Effects in the Stroop and
Simon Paradigms," Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 19 (4), 830-844.

Olney, Thomas J ., Morris B. Holbrook, and Rajeev Batra (1991), "Consumer Responses
to Ad Content, Emotions, and Attitude toward the Ad on Viewing Time," Journal
of Consumer Research, 17 (March), 440-453.

Oppenheim, Abraham N. (1992), Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Audience

241
Measurement, New Edition, London: Pinter Publishers.

Otter, J. (1984), "Networks Keep Word about Clutter," Marketing and Media Decisions,
19, 90.

Owen, Bruce M. and Steven S. Wildman (1992), Video Economics, Cambridge,
Massachusetts. Harvard Univeristy Press.

Page, Thomas J. Jr., Esther Thorson, and Maria Papas Heide (1990), "The Memory
Impact of Commercials Varying in Emotional Appeal and Product Involvement,"
in Emotions in Advertising, Stuart J. Agres, Julie A. Edell and Tony M. Dubitsky,
eds., New York: Quorum Books, 35-52.

Packard, Vance (1957), The Hidden Persuaders, New York: D. McKay Co.

Paivio, Allan (1975), "Imagery in Recall and Recognition," in Recall and Recognition,
John Brown, ed., London: John Wiley and Sons, 103-129.

Park, C. Whan and S. Mark Young (1983) Types and Levels of Involvement and Brand
Attitude Formation," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, Richard P.
Bagozzi and Alice M. Tybout eds., Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer
Research, 320-24.

Park, Chan Su and V. Srinivasan (1994), "A Survey-Based Method for Measuring and
Understanding Brand Equity and Its Extendibility," Journal of Marketing
Research, 31 (May), 271-288.

Parks, Jerry (1993), "US Like Print, UK Doesn’t," Advertising Age, May 31, 12.

Peter, J. Paul and Peter A. Dacin (1991) "Measurement Scales, Permissible Statistics and
Marketing Research," in AMA Winter Educator Conference Proceedings,
Vol. 2, Tom Childers et al., eds., 275-283.

Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacciopo, and David Schumann (1983), "Central and
Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating of Role of
Involvement," Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September), 135- 146.

Pfau, Michael (1990), "Efficacy of Inoculation Strategies in Promoting Resistance to
Political Attack Messages: Application to Direct Mail," Communication
Monograph, 57 (1), 25-43.

Pillai, Sankara (1990), "Impact of Clutter on Advertising Viewership and Recall: An
Indian Experiment," Journal of the Market Research Society, 32 (2), 187-196.

242

Pomerantz, James R. (1981), "Perceptual Organization in Information Processing," in
Perceptual Organization, M. Kubovy and J. R. Pomerantz, eds., NJ: Hillsdale:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 141-180.

Postman, Leo (1975), "Interference Theory Revisited," in Recall and Recognition, John
Brown, ed., London: Wiley & Sons, 157-181.

Pratkanis, Anthony R. and Anthony G. Greenwald (1993), "Consumer Involvement,
Message Attention, and the Persistence of Persuasive Impact in a Message-Dense
Environment," Psychology and Marketing, 10 (4), 321-332.

Pratkanis, Anthony R. (1989), "The Cognitive Representation of Attitudes," in Attitude
Structure and Function, Anthony Pratkanis et al., eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 71-98.

Priemer, August B. (1989), Effective Media Planning, Lexington: D.C. Heath and Co.

Ratchford, Brian T. (1987), "New Insights about the FCB Grid," Journal of Advertising
Research, 27 (August/September), 24-38.

Ray, Michael L. and Peter H. Webb (1986), "Three Prescriptions for Clutter," Journal of
Advertising Research, 26, 69-77.

Reid, Leonard N ., Herbert Rotfeld and James Barnes (1984), "Attention to Magazine Ads
as a Function of Layout Design," Journalism Quarterly, 61(2), 439-441.

Rodgers, Williams C. and Kenneth C. Schneider (1993), "An Empirical Evaluation of the
Kapferer-Laurent Consumer Involvement Profile Scale," Psychology and
Marketing, 10 (4), 333-345.

Rudolph, Harold J. (1947), Attention and Interest Factors in Advertising, NY: Funk and
Wagnalls Co.

Rukeysers, Louis, John Cooney, and George Winslow (1991 ed.), Business Almanac, New
Revised Edition, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Sandage, Charles H. and John D. Leckenby (1980), "Student Attitudes toward
Advertising: Institution Vs. Instrument," Journal of Advertising, 9 (2), 29-32.

Scammons, Debra L. (1977), "Information Load and Consumers," Journal of Consumer
Research, 4 (Dec), 148-55.

Schiffman, Leon G. & Leslie L. Kanuk (1991), Consumer Behavior, fourth edition,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

 

 

243

Schneider, W., S. T. Dumais, and R. M. Shiffrin (1984), "Automatic and Control
Processing and Attention," in Varieties of Attention, Raja Parasuraman and D. R.
Davies, eds., New York Academic Press, 1-28.

Schumann, David W. and Esther Thorson (1989), "The Influence of Viewing Context on
Commercial Effectiveness: A Selection-Processing Model," Current Issues and
Research in Advertising, 12(1), 1-24. ‘

Scissors, Jack and Lincoln Bumba (1993), Advertising Media Planning, fourth edition,
Lincolnwood: NTC Business Books.

Seamon, John G. (1980), Memory and Cognition, New York: Oxford University Press.

Shaw, Marvin E. and Jack M. Wright (1967), Scales for the Measurement of Attitudes,
NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Sherman, Steven J. (1987), "Cognitive Processes in the Formation, Change, and
Expression of Attitudes," in Social Influence, Mark Zanna, Jerry Olson and J.
Herman, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso., 75-105.

Shimp, Terence A. (1981), "Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Consumer Brand
Choice," Journal of Advertising, 10 (2), 9-15.

Shimp, Terence A. and J. T. Yokum (1981), "The Influence of Deceptive Advertising on
Repeat Purchase Behavior," in The Changing Market Environment: New Theories
and Applications, K. Bernhardt et al., eds., Chicago: American Marketing
Association: 266-270.

Sibley, D. (1983), "60’s to 30’s to 15’s - Clutter, Clutter, Clutter," Marketing and Media
Decisions, 18, 94.

Singh, Surendra N., Michael J. Rothschild, and Gilbert A. Churchill (1988), "Recognition
Versus Recall as Measures of Television Commercial Forgetting," Journal of
Marketing Research, 25 (Feb), 72-80.

Smith, Robert E. and Laura M. Buchholz (1991), "Multiple Resource Theory and
Consumer Processing of Broadcast Advertisements: An Involvement Perspective,"
Journal of Advertising, 20 (3), 1-8.

Snyder, Mark and Kenneth G. DeBono (1989), "A Functional Approach to Attitudes and
Persuasion," in Attutude Structure and Emotion, Pratknais et. al., eds., Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso., 107-125.

Soley, Lawrence C. and Robert L. Craig (1992), "Advertising Pressure on Newspapers,

 

244
a Survey," Journal of Advertising, 21(4), 1-10.

Soley, Lawrence C. and Gary Kurzbard (1984), "Selective Exposure Reexamined,"
Proceedings of the 1984 Convention of the American Academy of Advertising, 92-
97.

Srull, Thomas K. (1990), "Individual Response to Advertising: Mood and Its Effects from
an Information Processing Perspective," in Emotion in Advertising, Stuart J.
Agres, Julie A. Edell, and Tony M. Dubitsky, eds., New York: Quorum Books,
35-52.

Starch, Daniel (1966), Measuring Advertising Readership and Results, NY: McGraw-Hill,
Inc.

Steenhuysen, Julie (1993), "Custom Publishing is Catching on," Magazine Buying and
Planning Special Report, Advertising Age, October 11, 24-5.

Steiner, Gary A. (1966), "The People Look at Commercials: A Study of Audience
Behavior," Journal of Business, 39 (April), 272-34.

Stewart, David W. (1992), "Speculations on the Future of Advertising Research," Journal
of Advertising, 21 (3), 1-18.

Stewart, David W. and Scott Koslow (1989), "Executional Factors and Advertising
Effectiveness: A Replication," Journal of Advertising, 18 (3), 21-32.

Stewart, David W. and David H. Furse (1986), Efi’ective Television Advertising: A Study
of 1000 Commercials, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Stewart, David W., Connie Peckman, Srivivasan Ratneshwar, Jon Stroud, and Beverly
Bryant (1985), "Methodological and Theoretical Foundation of Advertising
Copytesting: A Review," Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 8 (2), 1-74.

Stout, Patricia A. and L. Burda Benedicta (1989), "Zipped Commericals: Are They
Effective?" Journal of Advertising, 18 (4), 23-32.

Stroop, J. R. (1935) "Studies of Interference in Serial Verbal Reactions," Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.

Summers, J. O. (1974), "Less Information is Better?" Journal of Marketing Research, 11
(Nov), 469-470.
Surmanek, Jim (1989), Media Planning, Lincolnwood: NTC Business Books.

Tabachnick, Barbara G. and Linda S. Fidell (1983), Using Multivariate Statistics, New

 

245
York: Harper and Row Publishers.

Tauber, Edward M. (1993), "Fit and Leverage in Brand Extension," in Brand Equity and
Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands, David A. Aaker and
Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 313-318.

Telser, Lester (1978), "Toward a Theory of the Economics of Advertising," in Issues in
Advertising: The Economics of Persuasion, David Tuerck, ed., American
Enterprise Institute, 71-90.

Thorson, Esther (1989), "Consumer Processing of Advertising," Current Issues and
Research in Advertising, 12 (2), 197-230.

Traylor, Mark B. and W. Benoy Joseph ( 1984), "Measuring Consumer Involvement with
Products: Developing a General Scale," Psychology and Marketing, 1 (Summer),
65-77.

Tulving, Endel (1975), "Ecphoric Processes in Recall and Recognition," in Recall and
Recognition, John Brown, ed., London: John Wiley and Sons, 38-73.

Unnava, H. Rao and Robert E. Bumkrant (1991), "Effects of Repeating Varied Ad
Executions on Brand Name Memory," Journal of Marketing Research, 28
(November), 406-16.

Upshaw, Lynn (1990), "Calling All Clutterbusters," Marketing and Media Decisions, Dec
25, 101-2.

Vaughn, Richard (1986) "How Advertising Works: A Planning Model Revisited,"
Journal of Advertising Research, 27(February/March), 57-66.

Walston, Carl and Moriarty, Sandra E. (1992), "The Marketplace Power of Aesthetics: A
Model," in Proceedings of the I 992 Conference of the American Academy of
Advertising, Leonard N. Reid, ed., 214—221.

Wansink, Brian and Michael L. Ray (1993), "Expansion Advertising and Brand Equity,"
in David A. Aaker and Alexander Bell (eds.) Brand Equity and Advertising:
Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, 177-194.

a—

Warshaw, Paul R. (1978), "Application of Selective Attention Theory in TV Advertising
Displays," Journal of Applied Psychology, 63 (June), 366-372.

Webb, Peter H. ( 1979), "Consumer Initial Processing in a Difficult Media Environment,"
Journal of Consumer Research, 6 (December), 225-36.

246

Webb, Peter H. & Michael L. Ray (1979), "Effects of TV Clutter," Journal of
Advertising Research, 9 (3), 7-12.

Wentz, Laurel (1993), "Major Global Study Finds Consumers Support Ads," Advertising
Age, Oct 11,11 and 121.

Weir, Walter (1993), How to Create Interest-evoking, Sales-inducing, Non-irritating
advertising, NY: The Haworth Press.

Wells, William D. (1993), "Brand Equities, Elephants and Birds: A Commentary," in
Brand Equity and Advertising: Advertising ’s Role in Building Strong Brands,
David A. Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, 343-355.

Wheeless, L. R. & Cook, J. A. (1985), "Information Exposure, Attention and Reception,"
in Information and Behavior, B. D. Ruben, ed., New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
Books.

Wickens, Christopher D. (1984), "Processing Resources in Attention," in Varieties of
Attention, Raja Parasuraman and D. R. Davies, eds., New York Academic
Press, 63-102.

Wicks, Jan LeBlanc (1991), "Varying Commercialization and Clutter Levels to Enhance
Television Airtime Attractiveness in Early Fringe," Journal of Mass Media
Economics, (Summer), 3-18.

Wicks, Jan LeBlanc (1989), The Efiect of Market Structure, Profitability, and
Organization Size on Commercialization, Clutter, Clearance and Complaint
Practices Used by Commercial Televisions Nationwide, Doctoral Disssertation,
Michigan State University.

Wilkie William L. (1974), "Analysis of Effects of Information Load," Journal of
Marketing Research, 11 (Nov), 467-468.

Wilson, Timothy D. and Sara D. Hodges (1992), "Attitudes as Temporary Constructions,"
in Construction of Social Judgment, Martin and Tesser, eds., Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 37-65.

Woodside, Arch G. and Randolph J. Trappey III (1992), "Finding out Why Customers
Shop Your Store and Buy Your Brand: Automatic Cognitive Processing Models
of Primary Choice," Journal of Advertising Research, November/December, 59-7 8.

Yi, Youjae (1990), "Cognitive and Affective Priming Effects of the Context for Print
Advertisements," Journal of Advertising, 19 (2), 40-48.

 

247

Yi, Youjae (1993), "Contextual Priming Effects in Print Advertisements: The Moderating
Role of Prior Knowledge," Journal of Advertising, 22 (1), 1-10.

Zaichkowsky, Judith L. (1985), "Measuring the Involvement Construct," Journal of
Consumer Research, 12 (Dec), 341-352.

Zanna, Mark P. and John K. Rempel (1988), "Attitudes: A New Look at an- Old
Concept," in Social Psychology of Knowledge, D. Bar-Ta] and A. W. Krugelnaski,
eds., Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 315-335.

Zufryden, Fred 8., James H. Pedrick, and Avu Sankaralingam (1993), "Zapping and Its
Impact on Brand Purchase Behavior," Journal of Advertising Research,
January/February, 58-66.

Zufryden, Fred S. (1986), "Measuring Media Reach and Frequency Elasticities of
Demand," Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 9(1), 119-131.

General References

Duryea, Elias J. (1990), "Pyschological Immunization: Theory, Research, and Current
Health Behavior Applications," Health Education Quarterly, 17 (2), 169-178.

Goethals, George R. and Paul R. Solomon (1993), "Interdisplinary Perspectives on the
Study of Memory," in Memory: Interdisplinary Approaches, Paul R. Solomon,
George R. Goethals, Colleen M. Kelley, and Benjamin R. Stephens, eds., New
York: Springer-Verlag, 1-13.

Goldsmith, Ronald E., Janelle Emmert, and Charles Hofacker (1991), "A Causal World
of Consumer Involvement," in I 991 AMA Winter Educator Conference
Proceedings, Vol.11, Tom Childers et al., eds., 330-338.

Heeter, Carrie (1989), "Implications of New Interactive Technologies for Conceptualizing
Communication, in Media Use in the Information Age: Emerging Patterns of
Adoption and Consumer Use, J. L. Salvaggio & J. Bryant, eds., Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 217-235.

Jenkins, Joseph (1979), "Four Points to Remember: A Tetrahedral Model of Memory
Experiments," in Levels of Processing in Human Memory, L. S. Cermak and
Fergus I. M. Craik, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso, 429-446.

Kerlinger, Fred N. (1986), Foundations of Behavioral Research, third Edition, Fort
Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc.

Meyers-Levy, Joan and Durairaj Maheswaran (1991), "Exploring Differences in Males’

248

and Females’ Processing Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (June),
63-70.

Ostrom, Thomas M. (1989), "Three Catechisms for Social Memory," in Memory:
Interdisplinary Approaches, Paul R. Solomon, George R. Goethals, Colleen M.
Kelley, and Benjamin R. Stephens, eds., New York: Springer-Verlag, 198-220.

Pedrick, James H. and Fred S. Zufryden (1993), "Measuring the Competitive Effects of
Advertising Media Plans," Journal ofAdvertising Research, November/ December,
1 1-20.

Reynolds, Nina, Diamantopoulos Adamanios, and Bodo Schlegelmilch (1993), "Pretesting
in Questionnaire Design: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Further
Research," Journal of the Market Research Society, 35 (2), 171-181.

Simon, J. R. and A. P. Rudell (1967), "The Effect of an Irrelevant Cue on Information
Processing," Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300-304.

Singh, Surendra N. and G. Churchill (1987), "Response-bias-free Recognition Tests to
Measure Advertising Effects," Journal of Advertising Research, J unelJ uly, 23-26.

Soley, Lawrence C. and Leonard W. Reid (1983), "On the Validity of Students as
Subjects in Advertising Experiments," Journal of Advertising Research, 12 (4), 57-
59.

Stem, Bruce, Dean Krugman, and Alan Resnik (1981), "Magazine Advertising: An
Analysis of Its Information Content," Journal of Advertising Research, April, 39-
44.

Stoltrnan, Jeffrey J. (1991), "Advertising Effectiveness: The Role of Advertising
Schemas," in 1991 AMA Winter Educator Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2, Tom
Childers et al., eds., 317-318.

Zajonc, Robert B. (1980), "Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences,"
American Psychologist, 35 (2), 151-175.

 

"lllllllllllllllll