Promotional phrases as analogical questions: inferential fluency and persuasion

Abstract

Purpose As an alternative to straight rhetorical questions, questions using analogies that invite the reader to think about the frame of reference to answer the target have been used in advertising to persuade. This paper aims to investigate consumer responses to the use of analogical questions in ads for incrementally new products and the important variables moderating those responses. Design/methodology/approach Four between-subjects experiments examined how product evaluations in response to analogical questions differ from non-analogical variants as a function of consumers’ persuasion awareness (Studies 1 and 2) and also tested if the effectiveness of an analogical question among potential consumers who are more aware of persuasion attempts might be enhanced only when it is proposed with a strong rather than a weak frame of reference (Study 3), and when the frame of reference and the target share underlying similarities (Study 4). Findings Analogical questions are more persuasive than non-analogical variants for participants who are more aware of persuasion attempts. Inferential fluency mediates the results. Furthermore, the positive impact of analogical questions for participants high in persuasion awareness is diminished when the frame of reference is weak or from a dissimilar domain. The same patterns are not evident for participants who are less aware of persuasion attempts. Research limitations/implications Drawing on the concepts of inferential fluency, this study offers an empirically-based view of how the analogical questions in advertising may bias the responses exhibited by individuals who demonstrate either a high or low level of persuasion awareness. Practical implications The inclusion of an analogy can lower consumers’ tendency to behave in a defensive manner by facilitating inferences about intended claims that are implicitly stated in a rhetorical question and achieve higher levels of persuasion. Originality/value This study contributes to prior study on rhetorical questions within a persuasion communication by adopting inferential fluency as an underlying mechanism for analyzing the impact of analogical questions and individual’s awareness of persuasion.

When transparency pays off: Enticing sceptical consumers with two‐sided advertising

“…Consistent with other studies on persuasion knowledge (e.g. Isaac & Grayson, 2017Kim et al, 2016;Ku & Chen, 2020;Seo et al, 2019), we have shown that, in the domain of advertising, increased levels of scepticism lead to higher trustworthiness and, therefore, to higher evaluations of a more credible (two-sided message) relative to a less credible tactic (one-sided message). However, these effects occur only beyond a certain threshold level; below this level, the effect of message sidedness is not significant.…”

“…Past research has shown support for Friestad and Wright's (1994) proposition. Responses to marketing stimuli are more distinctive among people with higher (vs. lower) persuasion knowledge, or when people are primed to access persuasion knowledge (Isaac & Grayson, 2017, 2020; Forehand & Grier, 2003; Bambauer‐Sachse & Mangold, 2013; Hamby & Brinberg, 2018; Kim et al, 2016; Ku & Chen, 2020; Lim et al, 2020; Morales, 2005; Seo et al, 2019; Wei et al, 2008). Therefore, more persuasion knowledge increases the ability to distinguish honest from deceitful marketing practices.…”

“…Consumers with higher persuasion knowledge tend to distinguish well between deceptive and more honest persuasion attempts. They tend to resist deceptive persuasion agents but reward truthful ones (Hamby & Brinberg, 2018; Isaac & Grayson, 2017, 2020; Ku & Chen, 2020; Lim et al, 2020; Seo et al, 2019). Hence, in an advertising context, both consumers with higher advertising scepticism and consumers with higher persuasion knowledge should respond differently to more (vs. less) credible advertising tactics (Joireman et al, 2018; Lee et al, 2019; Yang & Mundel, 2021), such as two‐ and one‐sided messages.…”

Webcare as a signal: exhaustive-selective webcare strategy and brand evaluation

“…and maximize the internal validity of the study (Lanseng and Olsen, 2012; Newmeyer and Ruth, 2020). Further, such an approach helps eliminate brand familiarity effects that might have a confounding effect on the dependent variable (Ku and Chen, 2020; Lieven et al , 2015). The length of the reviews and responses has had an impact on consumer perceptions such as information diagnosticity and review helpfulness thereby affecting review readers’ perceptions (Karimi and Wang, 2017; Mudambi and Schuff, 2010; Pan and Zhang, 2011; Qazi et al , 2016; Salehan and Kim, 2016; Zhou and Guo, 2017) and reviewer behavior (Chen and Huang, 2013).…”

Using choice query to persuade consumers with different construal of self: Purchase uncertainty as a mediator

“…Consumer researchers have explored how rhetorical queries, those designed with an implied answer, and their tag variants impact persuasion (Ahluwalia & Burnkrant, 2004; Burnkrant & Howard, 1984; Chang, 2011; Howard, 1990; Munch & Swasy, 1988; Petty et al, 1981; Swasy & Munch, 1985). Alternative phrasings to persuade, such as directive questions and concession questions (Areni, 2003), hypothetical questions (Fitzsimons & Shiv, 2001), analogical questions (Ku & Chen, 2020), and problem‐focused and benefit‐focused questions (Ku et al, 2019), have also been addressed.…”