Consumers’ Processing of Persuasive Advertisements: An Integrative Framework of Persuasion Theories

Abstract

In this article, the authors propose an integrative model of advertising persuasion that orders the major theories and empirically supported generalizations about persuasion that have been offered in the information-processing literature. The authors begin by reviewing this literature, placing particular emphasis on the assorted processes or mechanisms that have been suggested to mediate persuasion. To consolidate this material, the authors propose a framework that delineates three alternative strategies that people may use to process persuasive communications and form judgments, in which each strategy represents a different level of cognitive resources that is employed during message processing. In addition, the framework identifies a judgment correction stage that allows people to attempt to correct their initial judgments for biases that they perceive may have affected such judgments. The authors add to this by identifying particular processes that appear to mediate when and how these judgment formation and judgment correction processes operate. They also attempt to foster growth by specifying some of the critical issues and gaps in the knowledge that appear to impede further progress. Finally, the authors clarify how the proposed framework can inform the decisions advertising practitioners make about advertising execution and media factors. E very day, U.S. consumers are exposed to no less than 1000 commercial messages (Kotler 1997*). Regardless of their content and the techniques they employ, most messages share a common final goal: persuading target consumers to adopt a particular product, service, or idea. How do advertising messages influence consumers' judgments and preferences and thereby advance persuasion? A vast body of work has explored this question from various perspectives, seeking to develop a theoretical understanding of the persuasion process. Yet, to date, no single theory or framework that has been developed has been able to account for all the varied and sometimes conflicting persuasion findings. Presumably, this is because the complex process of persuasion is intricately dependent on a myriad of contextual, situational, and individual difference factors, whereas the theories remain relatively simplistic and narrowly developed.The inability of existing theories to accommodate all persuasion findings need not suggest, however, that these theories are inaccurate. Rather, we propose that these theories simply may represent pieces of persuasion processes that operate in certain conditions that are not always clearly specified. This view is consistent with the popular assump-*Authors were limited in the numberof references used in text, therefore, those references marked with an * are available at www.

Search Engine Advertising Effectiveness in a Multimedia Campaign

“…Third, the survey administration included only measures of the effect of SEA five days after the experiment, so it was not possible to assess the long-term effects of the advertisements. Fourth, the SEA was related to the search task the respondents were completing, but SEA effectiveness likely depends on the consumer's motivation to process advertising information [52,54,83]. Future research may deliver more insight into how the degree of congruence between the SEA and the user's search query affects advertising effectiveness.…”

“…This characteristic should increase users' willingness to process related brand information. Research on information processing indicates that advertising communication effectiveness depends on consumers' motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information [52,54]. In an online setting, clicking a sponsored link is a clear indication that a person is motivated, in information-processing theory terms [61].…”

Prototypes reflect normative perceptions: implications for the development of reasoned action theory

“…Prototypes are a component of a dual-processing model used to understand how individuals process persuasion attempts from heterogeneous sources such as political campaigns and commercial advertising (Cobb & Kuklinski, 1997; Dillard & Peck, 2000; Meyers-Levy & Malaviya, 1999). Dual processing assumes that decision-making is a combination of cognitive styles (Evans, 2011; Wood, 2000; Wood, Kallgren, & Preisler, 1985): “systematic” processing focuses on the logic and internal consistency of the persuasion attempt requiring focused cognition while “peripheral” (or “heuristic”) processing supplants systematic analysis with rules that ignore the structure of the argument in formulating responses (e.g., “Experts are usually credible”, or “People like me approve of this message, so I should also”).…”

Deliberate ambiguity in slogans: recognition and appreciation

“…How does humor enhance the e¬ectiveness of advertisements? An interesting model for the processing of advertisements is given in Meyers- Levy and Malaviya (1999). The model is a thorough extension of dual-process models like the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986).…”

“…In general, the textual and visual rhetorical devices known as tropes are appreciated more than those that follow ¼xed schemes like rhyme (McQuarrie & Mick, 1999). A general e¬ect of rhetorical devices might be that more attention is paid to their processing, given an extended dualprocess model of advertisements (Meyers-Levy & Malaviya, 1999). If the rhetorical device is humor, it has a positive e¬ect on appreciation, but this e¬ect is not unproblematic (Spotts, Weinberger, & Parsons, 1997;Zhang, 1996).…”