IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v28y2002i4p589-602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combinatory and Separative Effects of Rhetorical Figures on Consumers' Effort and Focus in Ad Processing

Author

Listed:
  • Mothersbaugh, David L
  • Huhmann, Bruce A
  • Franke, George R

Abstract

Previous research demonstrates that rhetorical figures differentially affect the extent of ad processing. Specifically, tropes (a type of figure) deviate more from expected language use than schemes, with the greater deviation yielding more extensive ad processing. We extend previous research in two ways by focusing on the incongruity differences that exist between schemes and tropes. Study 1 uses syndicated data (Starch readership scores) to test how figures combine to affect the extent of processing. Results show that when figures leverage unique mechanisms (i.e., schemes and tropes), their combination yields incremental processing gains. Alternatively, when figures leverage redundant mechanisms (e.g., multiple tropes), their combination yields no incremental processing. Study 2 is an experiment that tests how figures separate in affecting the focus of ad processing. Results show that schemes generate a generalized focus on the entire ad, including both ad-stylistic and message-related aspects, while tropes generate a more selective focus on message-related aspects. Copyright 2002 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Mothersbaugh, David L & Huhmann, Bruce A & Franke, George R, 2002. "Combinatory and Separative Effects of Rhetorical Figures on Consumers' Effort and Focus in Ad Processing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(4), pages 589-602, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:28:y:2002:i:4:p:589-602
    DOI: 10.1086/338211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/338211
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/338211?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anne A. Christopher, 2013. "Rhetorical Strategies in Advertising: The Rise and Fall Pattern," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 2, October.
    2. Shuo Cao & Huili Wang & Xiaoxia Zou, 2020. "The Effect of Visual Structure of Pictorial Metaphors on Advertisement Attitudes," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(4), pages 1-60, March.
    3. Varsha Jain & Subhadip Roy & Adwita Pant, 2013. "Effect of colour and relative product size (RPS) on consumer attitudes," Transnational Marketing Journal, Oxbridge Publishing House, UK, vol. 1(1), pages 41-58, October.
    4. Bing Yuan & Alessandro M. Peluso, 2021. "The Influence of Word-Of-Mouth Referral on Consumers’ Purchase Intention: Experimental Evidence from WeChat," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Gavin L. Fox & Stephen J. Lind, 2020. "A framework for viral marketing replication and mutation," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 206-222, December.
    6. Chaohua Huang & Rui Guo, 2021. "The effect of a green brand story on perceived brand authenticity and brand trust: the role of narrative rhetoric," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(1), pages 60-76, January.
    7. Huang, Wen-Hsien & Hsieh, Shao-Yu, 2023. "The impact of animal metaphors on consumer response to courtesy advertising," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    8. Chu, Kyounghee & Lee, Do-Hee & Kim, Ji Yoon, 2019. "The effect of verbal brand personification on consumer evaluation in advertising: Internal and external personification," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 472-480.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:jconrs:v:28:y:2002:i:4:p:589-602. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.