When transparency pays off: Enticing sceptical consumers with two‐sided advertising

Abstract

It has been generally assumed that higher levels of scepticism towards advertising invariably lead to higher resistance to advertising appeals. The main purpose of the present research was to examine whether highly sceptical consumers' resistance can be overcome by appeals associated with higher credibility. We tested our hypotheses using message sidedness as an advertising variable that has been associated with higher (two-sided) versus lower (one-sided) credibility. In three experimental studies, we examined more versus less sceptical consumers' responses to two-versus onesided appeals. We found that two-sided messages are more effective in increasing purchase intentions, through enhanced credibility, but only for consumers who are more sceptical of advertising. Less sceptical consumers trust both messages equally and their purchase intentions are not affected by the type of message. Importantly, we also showed that highly sceptical consumers trust two-sided appeals as much as their less sceptical counterparts. The study contributes to the literature on advertising and persuasion knowledge by showing that advertising scepticism does not elicit a single response tendency, as originally conceptualized. Rather, advertising scepticism is more consistent with the underpinnings of the Persuasion Knowledge Model, in that higher knowledge about persuasion tactics aids consumers to better cope with, and not invariably resist persuasion attempts. We conclude that transparency pays off because it may entice a more sceptical audience and, at the same time, it does not harm less sceptical consumers' trust and purchase intentions.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among US Adults: Safety and Effectiveness Perceptions and Messaging to Increase Vaccine Confidence and Intent to Vaccinate

“…27,28 This finding may indicate that using transparent messaging and acknowledging uncertainty may be even more effective than other messages tested among those who are skeptical or lean against vaccination. 26,[29][30][31] Limitations Our study had several potential limitations. First, the sample represents a convenience sample of adults across the United States who agreed to be included in the online panel recruitment approach and participate in this particular study.…”

“…27,28 This finding may indicate that using transparent messaging and acknowledging uncertainty may be even more effective than other messages tested among those who are skeptical or lean against vaccination. 26,29 -31…”

Influencers and donations: The impact of source and product benefits

“…For example, an influencer who is well-known Third, while our study does not examine individual characteristics, future studies may investigate moderators for the effects of message source and product benefit appeals. For instance, the level of persuasion knowledge, involvement, and skepticism (Hernandez et al, 2023) may affect consumers' attitude, intention, and behavior toward the donation campaign. For example, prior research has found that awareness of persuasive intention (i.e., disclosure) leads to a lower attitude and intention to share the post (Evans et al, 2017).…”

How visual angle influences product recommendations in response to two-sided messages

“…As a result, there is a growing literature examining the conditions under which two-sided messages can be more persuasive and positively influence consumer evaluations. Prior research suggests that two-sided messages are perceived more favorably among consumers with high levels of skepticism (Hernandez et al ., 2023), self-confidence (Huertas and Hanna, 2020), involvement (Eisend, 2022; Pham et al ., 2016), and need for cognition (Florack et al ., 2009; Kao, 2011). However, these studies tend to focus on consumer-level differences that are relatively stable, and which marketers cannot fully control to develop effective communication strategies.…”