Studies
IntroductionStudies have indicated that not only attitude predict the behavioral intention, in fact, recent studies based on planned behavioral intention framework have outlined many antecedents of behavioral intention (Kenney and Khanfar, 2009). Therefore, scholar such as Walden (2012) has called more studies to identify the underlying attitude process variables linking advertising appeal and behavioral outcomes in advertising. To date, the direct and indirect effect of attitude on behavioral intention remains lacking in term of empirical evidence in advertising studies. In fact, previous studies assume that attitude is directly link to advertising appeal and the behavioral intention specifically in the attitude towards advertising brand or product (Zarantonello and Schmitt, 2010). The recent direction in advertising appeal studies suggests that attitude might be the underlying mechanisms that link advertising appeal and behavioral intention. However, it remains lack of the systematic inquiry in explaining the mediation of the attitude to predict the behavioral intention and its association with the advertising appeals (Zarantonello and Schmitt, 2010).Ajzen (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) has been criticized in several meta-analyses (see Armitage and Conner, 2001, Glasman and Albarracín, 2006, Sniehotta, Presseau, and Araújo-Soares, 2014 as attitude explaining only 27% to 39% of the variance in predicting behavioral intentions. Mullan, Wong, and Kothe, (2013) assert that the other key antecedents of behavioral intentions need to be accounted for further investigation to clarify the part of the attitude. Many studies assume that advertising appeal due to its persuasion characteristic can be one of the antecedents in predicting intention (Ajzen, 2014, Cranoand Prislin, 2008, Sniehotta, 2009. However, previous studies remain unclear in explaining attitude as the underlying mechanisms within the framework of the (TPB). Thus, this current study contributes to