Past research exploring self-concepts in consumption behaviors has provided us with a good understanding of how consumers approach products congruent with their self-images and favor advertising messages with self-congruent user portrayals. However, what has been lacking in the research is a discus-sion with respect to whether self-congruencyhas a dominant influence in cer-tain contexts and not in others. This studyspecificallyexplored the contin-gencies under which self-congruencymayplaya dominant role in determining ad and brand evaluations.
Within the ELM framework, this studysuggests that self-congruency, like music, source credibility, or other elements of messages, could function as a peripheral cue when consumers engage in a limited mode of information pro-cessing. Consistent with expectations, findings showed that the selectivityof judgment based on self-knowledge was limited to situations in which individ-uals’ processing loads were heavyand in which theydid not have the motiva-tion to process informamotiva-tion in an analytical way. Findings from Experiment 1 provided empirical evidence for the idea that when consumers are in positive affective states, self-knowledge serves as an important processing frame through which information is evaluated in a biased way. In contrast, when consumers are in negative affective states, when their motivation to process is likelyto be high, message self-congruencydoes not have a significant impact on ad and brand evaluations.
Although this studydid not specificallyexamine the influence of program-induced affective states, given that the affective states in these two experi-ments were induced prior to advertising exposure, as is common in regular viewing situations in which the preceding program or editorial material primes viewers’ or readers’ various affective states, evidence from this study has potential implications for media planners. Although past research has demonstrated how program-induced affective responses influence how con-sumers favor advertising messages (e.g., Goldberg & Gorn, 1987; Pavelchak, Antil, & Munch, 1988; Singh & Hitchon, 1989), little attention has been paid to the influence of program-induced affective states on consumers’ ad-processing strategies. Given that the contextual materials in which an adver-tisement is embedded have alreadybeen shown to induce different affective states (Goldberg & Gorn, 1987), findings regarding how affective states implicate message perceivers’ processing strategies can help advertising pro-fessionals develop more effective media plans. For example, for an image ad
that appeals to the product user’s lifestyle or psychological characteristics, a comedy may be a better placement choice than a news program.
Yet it has been demonstrated that the impacts of affective states can be overridden byfactors that motivate ad perceivers to elaborate on messages (Bless et al., 1990). Therefore, Experiment 2 was conducted to understand whether product involvement overrides the influence of low motivation induced bypositive affective states. The results indicate that when the prod-ucts being considered are more involving, self-congruencyis not as important a determinant of product evaluations as when products are less involving.
This is consistent with ELM theorization, namely, that the elements of ad messages serve as peripheral cues and dominate attitude formation when information perceivers have no motivation to process in a systematic, detail-oriented way. Accordingly, research into the interplay of affective states and ad message processing mayprofit from a more thorough examination of other factors that motivate ad perceivers to engage in effortful, detail-oriented pro-cessing strategies.
This studydemonstrates the importance of examining self-concepts to understand how consumers respond to advertising messages. Unfortunately, the role of the self in processing advertising messages has been relativelyless explored in past literature than has the effectiveness of different appeals or message content. The self, being a salient and readilyaccessible concept, deserves more research attention. Consistent with what social psychologists would expect, when individuals’ motivation to process information in details is low, self-ad congruencyprovides sufficient information for individuals to make product judgments. Most important, it is encouraging to note that this evidence suggests that exploring ad effectiveness on the basis of self-concepts may be a fruitful framework for future advertising research.
In addition to support for the interaction of self-concepts and product images, other interesting findings regarding self-concept differences also emerged. Individuals with different self-views on personalitytraits or value orientations appeared to respond to advertising in significantlydifferent ways. Specifically, in contrast with the introvert participants, the extroverts generate more positive evaluations of the ads and brands. In addition, as opposed to the individualists, the collectivists express more favorable responses toward ads and brands. One plausible explanation for these find-ings is that individuals with certain self-concepts, such as collectivist values or an extrovert orientation, mayhave stronger urges to improve their self-images, and this stronger urge mayenhance their readiness to respond to ad messages. The motivation difference mayfurther determine how favorably theyrespond to ad messages. More systematic research seems warranted to
provide a clearer view of this aspect of the interaction between self-concepts and product images.
It has been suggested that developing a product personalityis one impor-tant wayto establish brand equity(Biel, 1993). Nevertheless, findings from this studysuggest two concerns for marketers when employing an ad cam-paign to shape product image. First, this studydemonstrates that each indi-vidual responds to an advertisement with a specific personalityportrayal in a waythat reflects his or her personal preferences. Just as a person can have a set of personalitytraits that he or she desires and another set of personality traits from which he or she disassociates himself or herself, anyspecific prod-uct personalityor value can appeal to some consumers while being perceived as unattractive byothers. Therefore, it is important for marketers to under-stand what kind of product personalitytheir target segments desire. Most important, when appealing to product image, media planning should be orchestrated to enhance the effectiveness of image appeals. Second, in situa-tions in which consumers’ motivation to process is high, even though product image is congruent with consumers’ self-images, this congruencydoes not guarantee that consumers will necessarilyfavor the ad or the product. In these situations, product personalitymaynot be as important and diagnostic as the specific attributes or functions the product offers.
Finally, this study ’s findings must be interpreted within their limitations.
First, whether individuals engage in central-route processing when theyare in negative affective states has not been specificallytested. What we can claim from these two experiments is that when individuals have low motiva-tion, theyare more likelyto treat self-congruencyas a peripheral cue for judg-ment making. However, findings do not provide sufficient evidence to claim that when individuals are highlymotivated, theywill engage in analytical processing. Second, whether self-congruencyexerts anyinfluence in high-involving conditions has not been tested. It is likelythat self-congruencymay become an argument when consumers are more motivated to process adver-tising messages, and together with individuals’ assessments of product attributes, it will influence their brand evaluations.
Although this studysuggests that self-ad congruencyis an important variable that influences consumers’ brand and ad evaluations, much regard-ing the correspondence between the self and product image is not well under-stood. For example, it is not clear whether the same dimensions we use to describe self-concepts can be applied to product images. Therefore, one important direction for future studymayinvolve more thorough and system-atic examinations of the correspondence between self-concepts and product images. Another possible approach for those who are interested in the role of self-concepts in processing messages is to explore how and whyindividuals
with different personalitytraits or value orientations respond to advertising messages in different ways.
Appendix A
Factor 1
1. I sacrifice self-interest for my group.
2. I act as fellow group members would prefer.
3. I stick with my group through difficulties.
4. I maintain harmony in my group.
5. I respect the majority’s wish.
6. I respect decisions made by my group.
7. I make an effort to avoid disagreements with my group members.
Factor 2
1. I support my group whether they are right or wrong.
2. I remain in mygroup if theyneed me, even when I maybe dissatisfied with them.
3. I avoid arguments within mygroup, even when I stronglydisagree with other members.
Appendix B
1. You are a talkative person.
2. You are rather lively.
3. You enjoy meeting new people.
4. You usually let yourself go and enjoy yourself at a lively party.
5. You usually take the initiative in making new friends.
6. You easily get some life into a rather dull party.
7. You tend to keep in the background on social occasions.
8. You like mixing with people.
9. You like plenty of bustle and excitement around you.
10. You are mostly quiet when you are with other people.
11. Other people think of you as being lively.
12. You can get a party going.
Notes
1. In past literature, different terms have been used to refer to perceivers’ affective states. The most commonlyused terms are affect, moods, and emotions. A critical ques-tion concerning emoques-tion research then is how affect, moods, and emoques-tions differ. Past reviews have tried to distinguish between these three concepts. For example, Clore, Schwarz, and Conway(1994) defined affects simplyas “valence—the positive and neg-ative aspect of things” (p. 326). Moods and emotions, according to them, are both affec-tive states; however, moods and emotions differ in terms of “external versus internal concerns, present versus future orientation, and object versus objectless focus” (p. 326).
The focus of this studyis on individuals’ affective states, including both moods and
emotions. Because most of the past literature exploring the impact of affective states on persuasion did not clearlyoutline whether moods or emotions were induced in their manipulation of individuals’ affective states, this studythus adopts an umbrella term—affective states—throughout the review to refer to both moods and emotions.
2. A varietyof different types of positive emotions has been previouslyidentified.
However, most past studies on the impacts of affective states on persuasion mainly induced happiness and treated happiness as the prototypical positive emotion (Clore et al., 1994). Similarly, although negative emotions come in various forms such as fear, anger, sadness, disgust, and guilt (e.g., Nabi, 1999), sadness has been used as the proto-type in past persuasion literature. Therefore, for the sake of continuity and clarity, this studyfocuses onlyon happiness as the prototypical positive affective state and sadness as the prototypical negative affective state.
3. All of the scales were translated into Chinese following Brislin’s (1987) transla-tion and back-translatransla-tion procedure.
4. It is important to note that past research regarding emotion and persuasion tends to applymood-induction strategies (e.g., Bless, Clone, et al., 1996). In other words, affective states are not solelycaused bypersuasive messages but also bystimuli in the context. Indeed, Jorgensen (1998) has noted that models explaining the impact of affect on the persuasion process fall into two primarycategories: models of message-relevant effects and models of message-irmessage-relevant effects. The message-message-relevant model concerns how affect can serve as a peripheral cue or how affect can determine the valence of our cognitive responses and further influence the persuasion process. Message-irrelevant effect models, on the other hand, examine how a perceiver’s emotional state affects his or her motivation or cognitive capacityto process information. Because this studyaims to understand perceiver’s processing strategies, both when his or her cogni-tive capacityis and is not limited, it is reasonable to adopt the context-priming approach to understand how individuals’ affective states can enhance or decrease their extent of message processing and further alter the waythat theyevaluate the adver-tised brand.
5. Participants used the same scale to rate product users who were portrayed in ads as theydid to rate themselves. To reduce participants’ sensitivityto the scale, they were told that other than their responses to ads, the researcher would like to know about their values and personalities. To make the bogus statement seem credible, they were also asked to rate other self-related scales. The items from all of the three scales were combined together into a long scale.
6. The first factor, with an eigenvalue of 9.06, contained the following eight items:
happy, cheerful, active, contented, energetic, satisfied, not relaxed, and not restful. The second factor, with an eigenvalue of 1.95, was composed of the following seven items:
sad, dissatisfied, depressed, jittery, tense, nervous, and alert. The third factor, with an eigenvalue of 1.20, contained two items: calm and sluggish. Two items with split load-ings were dropped from the analyses. They were tired and passive.
7. The items were “when you choose X, it is not a big deal if you make a mistake”; “it is reallyannoying to purchase an X that is not suitable”; “when I face a shelf of X, I always feel at a bit of a loss in making my choice”; “choosing X is rather complicated”;
“you can tell a lot about a person bythe X he or she chooses”; “the X that I buygives a glimpse of the type of man/woman I am”; “it gives me pleasure to purchase X”; “buying X is like buying a gift for myself ”; “I attach great importance to X”; and “one can say that X interests me a lot.”
8. The first factor, with an eigenvalue of 5.39, contained the following nine items:
happy, cheerful, satisfied, contented, active, energetic, not relaxed, not sad, and not tired. The second factor, with an eigenvalue of 3.58, was composed of the following five items: dissatisfied, jittery, tense, nervous, and alert. The third factor, with an
eigenvalue of 2.79, contained two items: calm and restful. Three items with split load-ings were dropped from the analyses. They were sluggish, depressed, and passive.
References
Andrews, J. C., & Shimp, T. A. (1990). Effects of involvement, argument strength, and source characteristics on central and peripheral processing of advertising. Psychology and Marketing, 7, 195-214.
Batra, R., Lehmann, D. R., & Singh, D. (1993). The brand personalitycompo-nent of brand goodwill: Some antecedents and consequences. In D. A. Aaker &
A. L. Biel (Eds.), Brand equity and advertising (pp. 83-96). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139-168.
Beltramini, R. F. (1982). Advertising perceived believabilityscale. In D. R.
Corrigan, F. B. Kraft, & R. H. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the Southwestern Marketing Association (pp. 1-3). Wichita, KS: Wichita State University.
Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
Biel, A. L. (1993). Converting image into equity. In D. A. Aaker & A. L. Biel (Eds.), Brand equity and advertising (pp. 67-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bless, H., Bohner, G., Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1990). Mood and persuasion:
A cognitive response analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 331-345.
Bless, H., Clore, G. L., Schwarz, N., Golisano, V., Rabe, C., & Wolk, M. (1996).
Mood and the use of scripts: Does a happymood reallylead to mindless-ness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 665-679.
Bless, H., Schwarz, N., & Wieland, R. (1996). Mood and the impact of category membership and individuating information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 935-959.
Brislin, R. W. (1987). The wording of translation of research instruments. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry(Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137-164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 210-224.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personal-ity and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, &
C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chang, C. (2000a). The effects of personalityon product evaluations.
Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 26-33.
Chang, C. (2000b, August). The role of self in processing advertising mes-sages—An exploration of gender schema. Poster session presented at the
annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Phoenix City, AZ.
Clore, G. L., Schwarz, N., & Conway, M. (1994). Affective causes and conse-quences of social information processing. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 323-418). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
DeBono, K. G., & Packer, M. (1991). The effects of advertising appeal on per-ceptions of product quality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 194-200.
Dutta, M. J. (1999, August). The effect of idiocentrism and involvement on atti-tude, cognition and behavioral intention with respect to AIDS appeal types.
Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, New Orleans, LA.
Eysenck, H. J., Eysenck, S. B. G., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the Psychoticism Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 6, 21-29.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Gelinas-Chebat, C., & Chebat, J. C. (1992). Effects of two voice characteristics on the attitudes toward advertising messages. Journal of Social Psychol-ogy, 132, 447-459.
Goldberg, M. E., & Gorn, G. J. (1987). Happyand sad TV programs: How they affect reaction to commercials. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 387-403.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psy-chological Review, 94, 319-340.
Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as media-tors of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 404-420.
Hong, J. W., & Zinkhan, G. M. (1995). Self-concept and advertising effective-ness; the influence of congruency, conspicuousness, and response mode.
Psychology and Marketing, 12, 53-77.
Isen, A. M., Means, B., Patrick, R., & Nowicki, G. (1982). Some factors influ-encing decision making strategyand risk-taking. In M. S. Clark & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and cognition (pp. 243-261). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Jorgensen, P. F. (1998). Affect, persuasion and communication processes. In P. A. Andersen & L. K. Querrero (Eds.), Handbook of communication and emotion (pp. 403-422). New York: Academic Press.
Kuykendall, D., & Keating, J. P. (1990). Mood and persuasion: Evidence for the differential influence of positive and negative states. Psychology and Marketing, 7(1), 1-9.
LaBarbera, P. A., Weingard, P., & Yorkston, E. A. (1998). Matching the mes-sage to the mind: Advertising imageryand consumer processing styles.
Journal of Advertising Research, 38(5), 29-43.
Laczniak, R., Kempf, R. S., & Muehling, D. D. (1999). Advertising message involvement: The role of enduring and situational factors. Journal of Cur-rent Issues and Research in Advertising, 21(1), 51-61.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profile.
Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41-53.
Leach, M. P., & Liu, A. H. (1998). The use of culturallyrelevant stimuli in international advertising. Psychology and Marketing, 15, 523-546.
MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 130-143.
Madden, T. J., Allen, C. T., & Twible, J. L. (1988). Attitude toward the ad: An assessment of diverse measurement indices under different processing
“sets.” Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 242-252.
Markus, H. (1999). Self-schemata and processing information about the self.
In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), The self in social psychology. Philadelphia: Psy-chology Press.
Markus, H., & Oyserman, D. (1988). Gender and thought: The role of self-concept. In M. Crawford & M. Gentry(Eds.), Gender and thought: Psycho-logical perspectives (pp. 100-127). New York : Springer-Verlag.
Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychologi-cal perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-377.
Markus, H., & Zajonc, R. B. (1985). The cognitive perspective in social psy-chology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 137-230). New York: Random House.
Matthews, G., Jones, D. M., & Chamberlain, A. G. (1990). Refining the mea-surement of mood: The UWIST Mood Adjective Checklist. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 17-42.
Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the onlymedi-ator of advertising effects on brand attitudes? Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 318-322.
Muehling, D. D., & Laczniak, R. N. (1988). Advertising’s immediate and delayed influence on brand attitudes: Considerations across message-involvement levels. Journal of Advertising, 17(4), 23-43.
Muehling, D. D., & Laczniak, R. N. (1992). An examination of factors mediat-ing and moderatmediat-ing advertismediat-ing’s effect on brand attitude formation. Jour-nal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 14(1), 23-34.
Nabi, R. L. (1999). A cognitive-functional model for the effects of discrete neg-ative emotions on information processing, attitude change, and recall.
Communication Theory, 9(3), 292-320.
Park, C. W., & Young, M. (1986). Consumer response to television commer-cials: The impact of involvement and background music on brand attitude formation. Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 11-24.
Pavelchak, M. A., Antil, J. H., & Munch, J. M. (1988). The Super Bowl: An investigation into the relationship among program context, emotional
Pavelchak, M. A., Antil, J. H., & Munch, J. M. (1988). The Super Bowl: An investigation into the relationship among program context, emotional