The Effects of Comparative Advertising on Attention, Memory, and Purchase Intentions

Abstract

There is discrepancy between practitioners' views of comparative advertising and null findings by academics. However, in most studies, subjects' attention to and memory of the comparative claims were inflated, which may have precluded effects on these variables and on purchase intentions. This study manipulated market share and type of comparative claim, used nonforced exposure, measured attention via a computerized magazine, and assessed memory and purchase intentions after a 24-hour delay. Some findings are that direct comparative claims attract attention and thereby enhance purchase intentions for low-share brands but detract from purchase intentions for established brands by increasing awareness of competitors and sponsor misidentifications.

Comparison Opportunity and Judgment Revision

“…First, research on comparative advertising suggests that comparative messages receive greater attention than their noncomparative counterparts (Pechmann & Stewart, 1990). Information that invites comparisons may thus be more salient.…”

Promotions and Comparative Advertising—Key Elements in Positioning Fast Moving Consumer Goods

“…Such claims are also supported by other authors (Gorn & Weinberg, 1984) and some even consider that such commercials can influence negatively the consumer response (Goodwin & Etgar, 1980). Still, many studies (Pechmann & Stewart, 1990;Pechmann & Ratneshwar, 1991;Dröge & Darmon, 1987;Walker, Swasy, & Rethans, 1986) have showed that consumers are more influenced by comparative advertising compared to standard non-comparative advertising.…”

“…a) Low-Share Brands are recommended to apply direct comparative advertisements having more efficient results; b) High-Share Brands are more effectively advertised using no comparative claims, to have a higher purchase intention level and; c) Moderate-Share Brands are suggested to be most effectively influence purchasing through indirect comparison claims (Pechmann & Stewart, 1990).…”

“…The main purpose of this method is claiming the superiority over competition on some specific attributes. Although there are authors who consider comparative advertising to be an inefficient, unproductive, and unprofessional approach (Rogers & Williams, 1989;Gorn & Weinberg, 1984), many studies have proved that it is a great method to grow less notorious brands (Pechmann & Stewart, 1990) and intensify the positioning of an advertised brand (Pechmann & Ratneshwar, 1991;Thomson & Hamilton, 2006).…”

Salience and Health Campaigns

“…17 Consider 17 There is a broad literature analyzing the effect of counteradvertising and comparative advertising (for an empiricial investigation see Zucker et al, 2000Zucker et al, , 2001; for an experimental investigation, see Gorn and Weinberg, 1984). However, findings were mixed (see Muehling et al, 1989;Pechmann and Stewart, 1990).…”