The Effects of Rhetorical Figures and Cognitive Load in Word‐of‐Mouth Communications

Abstract

Advertising messages often are intended to ignite large‐scale word‐of‐mouth campaigns among consumers. Drawing primarily from memetic theory, cognitive fit theory, and perceptual fluency, this research examines how rhetoric and cognitive load interact to enhance or diminish desirable effects such as retention of the original intent of the message (copy‐fidelity) and engendering a desire to pass the message along (fecundity). Certain types of rhetoric are shown to aid this process by making some messages more attractive for retransmission and increasing retention of the original message, while cognitive load modifies which types are effective in accordance with cognitive fit and perceptual fluency. The results suggest that low‐deviation high‐complexity message forms (known as reversal) are the most effective for creating positive word‐of‐mouth outcomes and limiting potentially negative outcomes. Additionally, the results show that destabilization messages are more likely to yield mutated word‐of‐mouth messages that consumers still feel a strong desire to pass along to others. For practitioners, the results indicate what message forms should be used to effectively spark word‐of‐mouth campaigns.

A MAP for effective advertising: the metaphoric advertising processing model

“…By containing explicit claims and factual information, straightforward advertising informs consumers in a direct, literal, or straight way (Moriarty 1987;Rossiter and Percy 1997;Toncar and Munch 2001). Note that what we denote as straightforward advertising has also been referred to as literal (Gentner et al 2001;Moriarty 1987), representational (Dondis 1973), or straight (Rossiter and Percy 1997, p. 287) advertising.…”

“…When considering the second object of knowledge (see Table 2), there is consensus in the current literature that metaphoric advertising elicits higher levels of cognitive elaboration than straightforward advertising (e.g., Gkiouzepas and Hogg 2011;Lagerwerf and Meijers 2008;DeRosia 2008;Kim et al 2012;McQuarrie and Mick 1999). Moreover, several authors assume that metaphors are cognitively demanding and thus, processed on a deep semantic level (e.g., Fox et al 2015;Mohanty and Ratneshwar 2015;Scott 1994). These observations raise the question of why metaphoric advertising triggers higher levels of cognitive elaboration.…”

“…In terms of the processing difficulty of metaphoric ads, some researchers studying marketplace symbolism have assumed that symbols and metaphors are easy to process, but they have not provided a detailed explanation or empirical evidence to support this assumption (e.g., Levy 1959). Others have assumed that metaphoric advertising is processed less fluently (Fox et al 2015). We refine both perspectives by proposing that metaphoric ads are initially more difficult to process than straightforward ads and that further processing may dynamically change the fluency experience.…”

Communicating a Key Benefit Claim Creatively and Effectively through Five Conveyor Properties

“…The product (popsicle) replaces a symbol (strawberry) consistent with the conveyed message (e.g., fresh fruit). The Replacement template is illustrative of a more general advertising principle, namely the use of rhetorical devices (Fox, Rinaldo, & Amant, 2015), such as analogies or metaphors, for conveying a message (Phillips & McQuarrie, 2002). Visual or written analogies or metaphors "cause the receiver to experience one thing in terms of another" (Morgan & Reichert, 1999, p. 1) and can be used to communicate a product's key benefit claim (KBC) in a manner that is original and effective (Ang & Low, 2000;Dahl, Chattopadhyay, & Gorn, 1999;Chen et al, 2016;Kilgour & Koslow, 2009).…”

“…The product (popsicle) replaces a symbol (strawberry) consistent with the conveyed message (e.g., fresh fruit). The Replacement template is illustrative of a more general advertising principle, namely the use of rhetorical devices (Fox, Rinaldo, & Amant, ), such as analogies or metaphors, for conveying a message (Phillips & McQuarrie, ).…”