IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxiy2018ispecial3p413-422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Message Framing and Source Credibility in Product Advertisements with High Consumer Involvement

Author

Listed:
  • Euis Soliha
  • Suzy Widyasari

Abstract

The general objective of this research was to analyze the use of message framing and the source appropriately used in product advertisement with high consumer involvement. The category of experimental design used in this study was the lab experiment. The factorial designs in this study experiments were: 2x1 between subjects at the time of testing of hypotheses 1 and 2; 2x2 between subjects at the time of testing of hypothesis 3. The method of analysis used to test hypotheses 1 and 2 used one way ANOVA, and to test hypothesis 3 used n-ways ANOVA with main effects and interaction effect. First, the results showed that there were significant differences in the performance risk perception, psychological risk perception, financial risk perception, and social risk perception on advertisement using positive and negative message framing. Consumers felt a lower risk perception on the advertisement with positive message framing. Thus, the product's advertisements with high consumer involvement will be more effective by using positive message framing. Second, the results also showed that there were significant differences in the risk perception in advertisement using high and low source credibility. Consumers felt a lower risk perception in the advertisement by using high source credibility. Therefore, the product advertisements with high consumer involvement will be more effective by using high source credibility. The last, based on the testing of hypothesis, there was no significant difference in the risk perception in the advertisements using positive and negative message framing and high and low source credibility.

Suggested Citation

  • Euis Soliha & Suzy Widyasari, 2018. "Message Framing and Source Credibility in Product Advertisements with High Consumer Involvement," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 3), pages 413-422.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxi:y:2018:i:special3:p:413-422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ersj.eu/journal/1392/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ers:journl:v:volumexxi:y:2018:i:issue4:p:493-501 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. A. Yuniawan & U. Udin & A. Abdurrahman & R. Puji Suci, 2018. "A Systematic Literature Review of Altruism: Challenges, Outcomes and Future Research Directions," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 493-501.
    3. Levin, Irwin P & Gaeth, Gary J, 1988. "How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information before and after Consuming the Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(3), pages 374-378, December.
    4. Euis Soliha & BM. Purwanto, 2012. "Pengaruh Pererangkaan Pesan pada Persepsi Risiko Konsumen dengan Motivasi sebagai Variabel Pemoderasi," Jurnal Siasat Bisnis, Management Development Centre (MDC) Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Economics Universitas Islam Indonesia, vol. 16(1).
    5. Grewal, Dhruv & Gotlieb, Jerry & Marmorstein, Howard, 1994. "The Moderating Effects of Message Framing and," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 145-153, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berger, Paul D & Smith, Gerald E, 1998. "The Impact of Prospect Theory Based Framing Tactics on Advertising Effectiveness," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 593-609, October.
    2. Brian G. Moss & Peter Riley Bahr & Leigh Arsenault & Meghan Oster, 2019. "Knowing is Half the Battle, or Is It? A Randomized Experiment of the Impact of Supplemental Notification Letters on Placement Exam Participation, Preparation, and Performance," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 60(6), pages 737-759, September.
    3. Nitin Walia & Mark Srite & Wendy Huddleston, 2016. "Eyeing the web interface: the influence of price, product, and personal involvement," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 297-333, September.
    4. Mark Groza & Mya Pronschinske & Matthew Walker, 2011. "Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 639-652, September.
    5. Daniella Kupor & Kristin Laurin & Chris Janiszewski & J Jeffrey Inman, 2020. "Probable Cause: The Influence of Prior Probabilities on Forecasts and Perceptions of Magnitude [Perceived Intent Motivates People to Magnify Observed Harms]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(5), pages 833-852.
    6. Meents, S. & Verhagen, T. & Vlaar, P.W.L., 2011. "How sellers can stimulate purchasing in electronic marketplaces: Using information as a risk reduction signal," Serie Research Memoranda 0014, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    7. Shapiro, Stephen L. & Reams, Lamar & So, Kevin Kam Fung, 2019. "Is it worth the price? The role of perceived financial risk, identification, and perceived value in purchasing pay-per-view broadcasts of combat sports," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 235-246.
    8. Souheila Kaabachi & Mohamed Karim Kefi & Monyédodo Régis Kpossa & Ahmed Anis Charfi, 2021. "Celebrity Endorsement vs Influencer Endorsement for Financial Brands: What does Gen-Z think?," Post-Print hal-03767446, HAL.
    9. Meloria Meschi & Carla Pace, 2012. "Accounting for Behavioral Biases for Non-biased Demand Estimations," Chapters, in: Michael A. Crew & Paul R. Kleindorfer (ed.), Multi-Modal Competition and the Future of Mail, chapter 24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Zeeshan Ahmed & Shahid Rasool & Qasim Saleem & Mubashir Ali Khan & Shamsa Kanwal, 2022. "Mediating Role of Risk Perception Between Behavioral Biases and Investor’s Investment Decisions," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    11. Shlomo Benartzi & Alessandro Previtero & Richard H. Thaler, 2011. "Annuitization Puzzles," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 143-164, Fall.
    12. Dan K. Hsu & Johan Wiklund & Richard D. Cotton, 2017. "Success, Failure, and Entrepreneurial Reentry: An Experimental Assessment of the Veracity of Self–Efficacy and Prospect Theory," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(1), pages 19-47, January.
    13. Teo, Thompson S. H. & Yeong, Yon Ding, 2003. "Assessing the consumer decision process in the digital marketplace," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 349-363, October.
    14. Tomi Rajala, 2019. "Mind the Information Expectation Gap," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(1), pages 104-125, March.
    15. Can, Ali Selcuk & Ekinci, Yuksel & Pino, Giovanni, 2021. "Joint brand advertising for emerging heritage sites," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    16. Sunita Guru & Jitendra Nenavani & Vipul Patel & Nityesh Bhatt, 2020. "Ranking of perceived risks in online shopping," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 47(2), pages 137-152, June.
    17. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas, 2012. "The Importance of Taste for Food Demand and the Experienced Taste Effect of Healthy Labels - An experiment on potato chips and bread," HUI Working Papers 68, HUI Research.
    18. Jain, Gaurav & Gaeth, Gary J. & Nayakankuppam, Dhananjay & Levin, Irwin P., 2020. "Revisiting attribute framing: The impact of number roundedness on framing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 109-119.
    19. Fennell, Patrick B. & Coleman, Joshua T. & Kuo, Andrew, 2020. "The moderating role of donation quantifiers on price fairness judgments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 464-473.
    20. Tubetov, Dulat & Maart, Syster Christin & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Comparison of the investment behavior of Kazakhstani and German farmers: An experimental approach," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124650, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxi:y:2018:i:special3:p:413-422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.