9722602 Jenny
Transcript of 9722602 Jenny
The effects of visual enhancement The effects of visual enhancement on attribute/benefit desirability and on attribute/benefit desirability and
brand perception measures: brand perception measures: Implications for reliability and Implications for reliability and
validityvalidity
Presenter: Jenny Chen 陳瑩珍Instructor: Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa Hsu
October 13, 2008
1
Clancy, K. J., & Rabino, S. (2007). The effects of Clancy, K. J., & Rabino, S. (2007). The effects of
visual enhancement on attribute/benefit desirability visual enhancement on attribute/benefit desirability
and brand perception measures: Implications for and brand perception measures: Implications for
reliability and validity. reliability and validity. Journal of Advertising Journal of Advertising
Research, 47Research, 47(1), 95-102.(1), 95-102.
2
Outline Outline
I. Introduction
II. Research Questions
III. Research Methodology
IV. Results
V. Discussion
3
IntroductionIntroduction
Advertising, marketing, and public opinion
researchers routinely investigate consumer
needs and brand perceptions using
“attribute/benefit” research.
4
IntroductionIntroduction
Tangible benefit: a benefit that is immediately obvious and
measurable.
Intangible benefit: a benefit that is difficult to measure, sometimes
refers to an emotional characteristic.
5
IntroductionIntroduction
Attribute/benefit research suggested that an
“emotional” campaign might not represent a
powerful strategy.
However, some of the most successful
advertising campaigns of the last 50 years have
been based on intangibles.
6
IntroductionIntroduction
How valid and reliable is the traditional
“verbal stimuli” methodology that
dominates the contemporary marketing
research?
7
IntroductionIntroduction
Reliability
the extent to which a commercial or print
advertisement earns a similar score when it
is tested two or more times
what really matters to practitioners is
aggregate level stability
8
IntroductionIntroduction
Validity
Are we measuring what we purport to
measure?
Does it reflect consumer needs?
9
IntroductionIntroduction
Current attribute/benefit research
methodology understates the “true” value
of emotional, intangible appeals, and
overstates the value of rational, tangible
product appeals.
10
IntroductionIntroduction
Two possible explanations for
understatement:
1. social desirability effects
2. the absence of visual enhancement
11
Research QuestionsResearch Questions
1. Does the choice of stimuli make a difference?
2. Assuming that it does matter, does the choice of the visual material make a difference?
3. Are the effects of written versus visual material different for the desirability ratings than for brand perception measures?
12
Research QuestionsResearch Questions
4. Are the effects different for tangible versus intangible attributes?
5. Are the effects different for different product categories?
6. How stable are attribute/benefit ratings and what, if anything, can be said about their validity?
13
Research MethodologyResearch MethodologyPersonal interview survey
Cross-sectional sample of 700 adult men and
women in the Boston metropolitan area
45 minutes
Two-week period
Two 5-point verbally defined scales
(a desirability scale and a brand perception
scale)
Shuffled deck/sorting board
Repeated measures ANOVA 14
Research MethodologyResearch Methodology
Three product categories:
1. beverage alcohol (gin)
2. credit cards
3. presidential candidates
six “show cards” representing six product
characteristics (three tangible, three
intangible)
- shuffled to minimize order effects and
acquiescence response set effects 15
Research MethodologyResearch Methodology
16
Three shuffled decks for each product category:
ResultsResults
Tangible traits are rated as more desirable
than the intangible traits in all three
categories.
Choice of stimulus has little effect on
desirability and brand perception measures.
Failure of the visual conditions to have an
effect for both the tangible and intangible
characteristics. 17
ResultsResults
The reliability of attribute/benefit
desirability and perception data is
relatively high in the aggregate
(computed by correlating pairs of
mean ratings for the attributes and
benefits across the different
conditions)18
DiscussionDiscussion
Future research might tackle this issue in a
different way, examining individual level
reliability.
Perhaps future research could focus on
“social desirability” considerations
The choice of a desirability scale over a
more traditional importance measure may
have affected the findings.19
Thanks for your attention!
20