Processing Advertising Information: Deception, Salience, and Inferential Belief Formation

Abstract

William J. Pieper is the director of Pieper and Associates, Inc. He received a B.S. from the United States Military Academy and a M.A. from the University of South Carolina.the deceptive impact of an ad (4). The first is belief. A belief is a subjective probability of a relationship existing between two concepts, and forms the basis of attitudes. For example, the copy point, "Brand X detergent cleans clothes," suggests a relationship between Brand X detergent and clean clothes, with the strength of that relationship being reflected in the subjective probability that the relationship is true. Beliefs form the basis of attitude in that an attitude is a function of the sum of the subjective probabilities that certain outcomes will occur (bj) weighted by the evaluation of those outcomes (ej).(While "attributes" should only be used in reference to the product and "outcomes" in reference to its purchase, the terms will be used interchangably to improve readability.) Beliefs may be salient or non-salient. A salient belief (or a belief related to a salient belief) is a belief that affects behavioral intention and behavior. For example, the degree to which a housewife believes that Detergent X cleans clothes is almost certain to affect her buying intention. A non-salient belief does not affect intention. Therefore, the degree to which the housewife believes that Detergent X is made in the U.S.A. is not likely to have an effect on her intention. (Throughout the paper, it is assumed that attitudes, rather than norms, are the primary determinant of intention. The validity of this assumption has no bearing on the findings or the implications of this study.)

Differentiative Comparative Advertising: Some Positive Results Revealed by Measurement of Simultaneous Effects on the Ad-Sponsoring and Comparison Brands

“…We hypothesize, based on the previous discussion, that the use of a comparative ad claiming attribute superiority of the sponsoring brand to its competitor, should result in favorable shifts in brand attitude disparity of the former to the latter. Through a "halo effect" (Beckwith and Lehman 1975;Cooper 1981), and inferential belief formation processes (Glassman and Pieper 1980;Olson 1978), such attitudinal shifts might also be expected to affect the relative favorability of other attribute perceptions of the brands which are not explicitly mentioned in the comparative ad.…”

Evidence on the Effects of Mandatory Disclaimers in Advertising

“…Despite the drafters’ intentions, the “acceptable” alternative advertisements had the same effects on participants’ beliefs as the original advertisements. This lack of effect is not surprising, considering that 30 raters regarded none of the product attributes of concern to the FTC as relevant to their purchase decisions (Glassman and Pieper 1980).…”

“…Despite the drafters' intentions, the "acceptable" alternative advertisements had similar effects on subjects' beliefs as the original advertisements. The lack of effect is not surprising in the light of the fact that none of the product attributes of concern to the FTC were considered relevant to purchase decisions by 30 raters (Glassman and Pieper 1980). How should patients react if they are informed that their doctor has a conflict of interest in recommending a treatment?…”