IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iim/iimawp/wp2010-08-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Eye for an Eye: Impact of Sequelization and Comparison in Advertisements on Consumer’s Perception of Brands

Author

Listed:
  • Banerjee, Bibek
  • Chakrabarty Patrali

Abstract

In this paper we demonstrate that the positive effects of comparative advertising are significantly diluted when a compared-to brand retaliates. Retaliation introduces sequencing in advertisements. We therefore evaluate sequelized advertisements (both comparative and noncomparative) alongside comparative advertisements and ordinary advertisements. We show that, given no threat of comparative advertising from competitors, sequelizing a popular advertisement may be as potent as comparative advertising, in terms of improving consumers’ recall as well as preference for the sponsored brand. Furthermore, an advertisement message may be directed at core benefits (and/or attributes) that a brand promises, or at a stylized theme or storyline that use peripheral cues to indirectly convey the brand’s deliverables. We incorporate this dimension of communication focus and conclude that while comparative advertisements are more effective with objective messages, noncomparative sequelized advertisements work better with thematic or story based messages.

Suggested Citation

  • Banerjee, Bibek & Chakrabarty Patrali, 2010. "An Eye for an Eye: Impact of Sequelization and Comparison in Advertisements on Consumer’s Perception of Brands," IIMA Working Papers WP2010-08-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:iim:iimawp:wp2010-08-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iima.ac.in/sites/default/files/rnpfiles/2010-08-01Banerjee.pdf
    File Function: English Version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nedungadi, Prakash, 1990. "Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(3), pages 263-276, December.
    2. Greenwald, Anthony G & Leavitt, Clark, 1984. "Audience Involvement in Advertising: Four Levels," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 11(1), pages 581-592, June.
    3. Pechmann, Cornelia & Stewart, David W, 1990. "The Effects of Comparative Advertising on Attention, Memory, and Purchase Intentions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(2), pages 180-191, September.
    4. Pechmann, Cornelia & Ratneshwar, S, 1991. "The Use of Comparative Advertising for Brand Positioning: Association versus Differentiation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(2), pages 145-160, September.
    5. Demirdjian, Z S, 1983. "Sales Effectiveness of Comparative Advertising: An Experimental Field Investigation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(3), pages 362-364, December.
    6. Falk, Armin & Fehr, Ernst, 2003. "Why labour market experiments?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 399-406, August.
    7. Celsi, Richard L & Olson, Jerry C, 1988. "The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 210-224, September.
    8. Ravid, S Abraham, 1999. "Information, Blockbusters, and Stars: A Study of the Film Industry," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(4), pages 463-492, October.
    9. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    10. van Dijk, Frans & Sonnemans, Joep & van Winden, Frans, 2001. "Incentive systems in a real effort experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 187-214, February.
    11. Gresham, Larry G. & Bush, Alan J. & Davis, Robert A., 1984. "Measures of brand attitude: Are cognitive structure approaches really needed?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 353-361, September.
    12. Bartels, Larry M., 1993. "Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 267-285, June.
    13. Mohanbir S. Sawhney & Jehoshua Eliashberg, 1996. "A Parsimonious Model for Forecasting Gross Box-Office Revenues of Motion Pictures," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 113-131.
    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. Simon Gächter & Lingbo Huang & Martin Sefton, 2016. "Combining “real effort” with induced effort costs: the ball-catching task," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(4), pages 687-712, December.
    2. Schoormans, Jan P. L. & Robben, Henry S. J., 1997. "The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 271-287, April.
    3. O'Donoghue, Amie C. & Williams, Pamela A. & Sullivan, Helen W. & Boudewyns, Vanessa & Squire, Claudia & Willoughby, Jessica Fitts, 2014. "Effects of comparative claims in prescription drug direct-to-consumer advertising on consumer perceptions and recall," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Shun-Yang Lee & Julian Runge & Daniel Yoo & Yakov Bart & Anett Gyurak & J. W. Schneider, 2023. "COVID-19 Demand Shocks Revisited: Did Advertising Technology Help Mitigate Adverse Consequences for Small and Midsize Businesses?," Papers 2307.09035, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    5. O'Cass, A., 2000. "An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 545-576, October.
    6. A. Yeşim Orhun & Sriram Venkataraman & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2016. "Impact of Competition on Product Decisions: Movie Choices of Exhibitors," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 73-92, January.
    7. C F Elliott & R Simmons, 2007. "Determinants of UK box office success: the impact of quality signals," Working Papers 584026, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    8. Gaenssle Sophia & Budzinski Oliver & Astakhova Daria, 2018. "Conquering the Box Office: Factors Influencing Success of International Movies in Russia," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 245-266, December.
    9. Rosbergen, Edward & Wedel, Michel & Pieters, Rik, 1997. "Analyzing visual attention tot repeated print advertising using scanpath theory," Research Report 97B32, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    10. Easley, Richard W. & Bearden, William O. & Teel, Jesse E., 1995. "Testing predictions derived from inoculation theory and the effectiveness of self-disclosure communications strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 93-105, October.
    11. repec:lan:wpaper:1090 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Edgardo Bucciarelli & Nicola Mattoscio, 2021. "Reconsidering Herbert A. Simon’s Major Themes in Economics: Towards an Experimentally Grounded Capital Structure Theory Drawing from His Methodological Conjectures," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 57(3), pages 799-823, March.
    13. Elberse, Anita & Anand, Bharat, 2007. "The effectiveness of pre-release advertising for motion pictures: An empirical investigation using a simulated market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 319-343, October.
    14. Kim, Jooyoung & Ahn, Sun Joo (Grace) & Kwon, Eun Sook & Reid, Leonard N., 2017. "TV advertising engagement as a state of immersion and presence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 67-76.
    15. Gill, David & Prowse, Victoria, 2019. "Measuring costly effort using the slider task," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 1-9.
    16. Cardella, Eric & Depew, Briggs, 2016. "Testing for the Ratchet Effect: Evidence from a Real-Effort Work Task," IZA Discussion Papers 9981, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Natalia Gmerek, 2015. "The determinants of Polish movies’ box office performance in Poland," Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 1(1), pages 15-35.
    18. Don M. Chance & Eric Hillebrand & Jimmy E. Hilliard, 2008. "Pricing an Option on Revenue from an Innovation: An Application to Movie Box Office Revenue," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 1015-1028, May.
    19. Pieters, R. & Warlop, L., 1998. "Visual Attention During Brand Choice : The Impact of Time Pressure and Task Motivation," Discussion Paper 1998-69, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    20. Shalom Levy & Israel Nebenzahl, 2008. "The influence of product involvement on consumers’ interactive processes in interactive television," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 65-77, March.
    21. Khan Md Raziuddin Taufique & Chamhuri Siwar & Basri Talib & Farah Hasan Sarah & Norshamliza Chamhuri, 2014. "Synthesis of Constructs for Modeling Consumers’ Understanding and Perception of Eco-Labels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-25, April.

    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:iim:iimawp:wp2010-08-01. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eciimin.html .

    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.