The Effects of Incongruity, Surprise and Positive Moderators on Perceived Humor in Television Advertising

Abstract

Few studies have tested models incorporating cognitive as well as affective mechanisms that help explain different levels ofperceived humorousness in advertising (cf Alden and Hoyer 1993;Speck 1991). In the first of two studies, an extended incongruity resolution model of humor perception in television advertising is proposed and tested. In that test, schema familiarity is found to moderate surprise resulting from ad content incongruity. Furthermore, playfulness of the ad, ease of resolution of the incongruity in the ad and warmth created by the ad moderate the effects of surprise on humor. Thus, surprise appears to be a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for humor in television advertising. In the second study, the role of surprise in generating humor is examined in more detail. Specifically, evidence supports the hypothesis that, following exposure to incongruity, surprise can be transformed into diverse affective outcomes such as fear and humor depending on the presence of different contextual moderators. Implications of the overall model are discussed from both theoretic and applied perspectives and directions for future research are suggested.

Making sense of surprise: An investigation of the factors influencing surprise judgments.

“…In recent years, surprise has emerged as an important factor in a number of different domains, including reasoning (Fisk & Pidgeon, 1998), persuasion (Petty, Fleming, Priester, & HarastyFeinstein, 2001), humor (Alden, Mukherjee, & Hoyer, 2000;Loewenstein & Heath, 2005), advertising (Derbaix & Vanhamme, 2003;Vanhamme, 2000), memory (Graesser, Gordon, & Sawyer, 1979;Whittlesea, Masson, & Hughes, 2005), creativity (Boden, 1995), and plausibility (Black, Freeman, & Johnson-Laird, 1986;Connell & Keane, 2006). However, despite its importance in these diverse areas, the factors influencing the experience of surprise are still unclear.…”

The impact of humorous advertising on consumers’ buying, word of mouth and recall

“…There was other research suggesting that humor causes less comprehension because of distraction (Bergeron & Vachon, 2008) that is changing the people's focus from the content to the context (Spielmann, 2014). However, there were some who concluded that humor causes better memorability and recall Miller, 1996;Alden et al, 2000) along with the ad's attention (Tomkovick et al, 2001;Brown et al, 2010). Therefore, this paper is to examine which one of these contradicting results is the case in Egypt.…”

“…Thus, this research assumes that attitude mediates the relation between humor and consumer's buying represented by two elements purchase intentions and actual choice. As Alden et al (2000) stated that for a factor to be a mediator between other two factors, there are mainly four terms, three of them are about having direct relations on each other; that is each independent factor affects directly on a dependent one. The fourth is that the direct relation between two factors is affected when the third factor changes.…”

“…There are different techniques of humorous ads, such as arousal-safety (A-S), incongruity resolution (IR) (Spielmann, 2014) and humorous disparagement (Hatzithomas et al, 2011;Brown et al, 2010;Alden et al, 2000). Arousal-safety (AS) comes from the relief theory (Brown et al, 2010); the situation can be funny after being sure that things are safe (Spielmann, 2014).…”

When communication challenges brand associations: a framework for understanding consumer responses to brand image incongruity

“…We conceptualize brand image incongruity as a discrepancy between a particular piece of communication about a brand and the brand image already established with consumers. The need for research on effects of such communication, which challenges brand expectations, has been registered in the existing literature (Alden et al, 2000) and this call serves as the starting point for our work.…”