“…A number of scholars have claimed that the comprehension and interpretation of visual metaphors in particular may differ between cultures (e.g., Kövecses, 2005;Le Pair & Van Mulken, 2008;McQuarrie & Mick, 1999;Van Mulken et al, 2010). In high-context cultures, people are used to messages that are implicit and for which it is necessary to use cues from the context to decipher the message, such as metaphors.…”
Section: High-/low-context and Comprehensionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results confirmed three of four expected differences: perceived complexity was higher for Dutch than for Spanish participants (but not than for French), and ad liking was lower for Dutch than for Spanish and French participants. Van Mulken et al (2010) also investigated perceived complexity and liking of visual metaphors in advertising among participants from the same three countries. Contrary to their expectations, French and Spanish participants did not perceive the visual metaphors to be easier to understand and did not like them more than the Dutch participants.…”
Section: High-/low-context and Comprehensionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Van Mulken et al, 2014) or to ask them to write down what they think is the meaning of the message (cf. Van Mulken et al, 2010). In the current comparative survey-based study, participants were exposed to 12 different product ads; asking for actual comprehension of all of the ads might have revealed the purpose of the study.…”
Section: Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Surprisingly, despite the research attention devoted to context theory (for a review, see Cardon, 2008), one of the central tenets of the theory has only been tested indirectly. That is, a limited number of experiments have examined whether people in countries characterized as high-context cultures comprehend and appreciate complex messages better than people in countries characterized as low-context cultures (e.g., Van Mulken, Le Pair, & Forceville, 2010). The methodological problem of this approach is that potential differences in comprehension and appreciation cannot be empirically attributed to context culture, but only to the broader notion of nationality.…”
According to Hall's context theory, people from different cultures may react differently to complex messages. The current study is the first empirical examination of context theory's role on message comprehension and appreciation. In a comparative survey-based study (N = 289), Belgian and Dutch participants judged 12 complex product advertisements with visual metaphors. As expected by context theory, perceived complexity was lower for Belgian (a higher-context culture) than for Dutch participants (a lower-context culture), and participants'personal context culture score fully accounted for this difference. Similarly, ad liking was higher for Belgian than for Dutch participants, and again, this difference was explained by context score.
“…A number of scholars have claimed that the comprehension and interpretation of visual metaphors in particular may differ between cultures (e.g., Kövecses, 2005;Le Pair & Van Mulken, 2008;McQuarrie & Mick, 1999;Van Mulken et al, 2010). In high-context cultures, people are used to messages that are implicit and for which it is necessary to use cues from the context to decipher the message, such as metaphors.…”
Section: High-/low-context and Comprehensionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results confirmed three of four expected differences: perceived complexity was higher for Dutch than for Spanish participants (but not than for French), and ad liking was lower for Dutch than for Spanish and French participants. Van Mulken et al (2010) also investigated perceived complexity and liking of visual metaphors in advertising among participants from the same three countries. Contrary to their expectations, French and Spanish participants did not perceive the visual metaphors to be easier to understand and did not like them more than the Dutch participants.…”
Section: High-/low-context and Comprehensionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Van Mulken et al, 2014) or to ask them to write down what they think is the meaning of the message (cf. Van Mulken et al, 2010). In the current comparative survey-based study, participants were exposed to 12 different product ads; asking for actual comprehension of all of the ads might have revealed the purpose of the study.…”
Section: Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Surprisingly, despite the research attention devoted to context theory (for a review, see Cardon, 2008), one of the central tenets of the theory has only been tested indirectly. That is, a limited number of experiments have examined whether people in countries characterized as high-context cultures comprehend and appreciate complex messages better than people in countries characterized as low-context cultures (e.g., Van Mulken, Le Pair, & Forceville, 2010). The methodological problem of this approach is that potential differences in comprehension and appreciation cannot be empirically attributed to context culture, but only to the broader notion of nationality.…”
According to Hall's context theory, people from different cultures may react differently to complex messages. The current study is the first empirical examination of context theory's role on message comprehension and appreciation. In a comparative survey-based study (N = 289), Belgian and Dutch participants judged 12 complex product advertisements with visual metaphors. As expected by context theory, perceived complexity was lower for Belgian (a higher-context culture) than for Dutch participants (a lower-context culture), and participants'personal context culture score fully accounted for this difference. Similarly, ad liking was higher for Belgian than for Dutch participants, and again, this difference was explained by context score.
“…Furthermore, viewers' responses to multimodal metaphors have been considered mostly in relation to metaphors appearing in political cartoons (El Refaie 2009) and visual print advertisements (see, e.g., McQuarrie and Mick 1999;Callow and Schiffman 2002;Mothersbaugh et al 2002;van Mulken et al 2010).…”
Section: Targeting the Product In Advertisingmentioning
The present paper examines two commercials promoting a Greek airliner, Aegean Airlines. Both commercials involve creative and novel multimodal metaphors through which the specific airline services are compared to the services offered by buses (informing passengers) and the Greek army (catering services and meals). The form and function of the Aegean multimodal metaphors are examined in relation to the generic dimensions of multimodal metaphors in advertising as put forth by Forceville (2007). It is shown that the metaphors in question display, in broad terms, the generic features of multimodal metaphors identified in TV commercials, but violate an established and long-preserved genre-related convention, namely that the target domain of the metaphor coincides with the advertised product. It is argued that the upsetting of generic norms attested in the specific commercials, which introduces the viewer into a counterfactual, albeit wishful, world, has repercussions on the metaphor's conceptualisation and verbalisation. In the paper, the perceived incongruity in the depiction of the main characters ('bus driver' as 'pilot', 'army caterer' as 'air-hostess') is addressed briefly as creating humour.
This research aims to explore the impacts of ad metaphors and goal orientation on the relationship between brand commitment and attitudes toward the competitor brands. Results show that prevention‐focused consumers with high brand commitment do not exhibit differentially favorable attitudes toward the competitor brands, regardless of ad metaphors. In contrast, prevention‐focused consumers with low brand commitment exhibit more favorable attitudes toward competitor brands advocated by highly metaphorical ads than those advocated by low metaphorical ads. Moreover, promotion‐focused consumers exhibit more favorable attitudes toward competitor brands advocated by highly metaphorical ads than those advocated by low metaphorical ads, regardless of brand commitment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.