Advertisement

der markt

, Volume 50, Issue 4, pp 249–266 | Cite as

Warum wirkt sich Conceptual Fluency auf Bewertungen aus?

  • Heribert GierlEmail author
  • Janine Schweider
Original Empirical Research

Zusammenfassung

In der Literatur werden verschiedene Formen des Kontexts betrachtet, die es Personen erleichtern oder erschweren, einen Zielstimulus zu identifizieren, zu bewerten und sich an ihn zu erinnern. Hat der Kontext einen Effekt auf diese Leichtigkeit, spricht man von Conceptual Fluency. Zunächst werden theoretische Überlegungen vorgestellt, warum sich Conceptual Fluency auf Bewertungen auswirkt und von welchen Bedingungen die Wirkung abhängen könnte. In der Literatur existiert zum Zusammenhang zwischen dem Kontext bzw. Conceptual Fluency und Bewertungen eines Zielstimulus eine Reihe von Studien; diese werden dahingehend analysiert, ob sie beitragen, den Grund für das Wirken von Conceptual Fluency zu erkennen. Anschließend werden vier neue Experimente mit Anwendungen im Bereich der Werbung vorgestellt. Ein wichtiges Ergebnis lautet, dass Conceptual Fluency nur im Fall schwacher Sachargumente einen positiven Effekt darauf hat, wie Konsumenten das beworbene Produkt bewerten. Des Weiteren zeigen die neuen Befunde, dass der Effekt vergleichsweise stark ist, wenn sich Konsumenten dafür rechtfertigen müssen, warum sie das beworbene Produkt als gut oder als schlecht bewertet haben. Die Ergebnisse deuten insgesamt darauf hin, dass es Conceptual Fluency ermöglicht, zusätzliche Gedanken aus dem Kontext zu generieren, die in die Bewertung des Zielstimulus einfließen.

Schlüsselwörter

Werbekontext Priming Missattribution Voraussagender Kontext 

Abstract

Previous literature considers several types of contexts which increase the ease of identifying, evaluating, and retrieving a target stimulus. The ease of these cognitive activities due to the context is denoted as conceptual fluency. First, we describe theories containing arguments why conceptual fluency affects evaluations. Additionally, we point to conditions under which conceptual fluency is expected to influence evaluations. Second, we provide an overview of previous research on the effect of conceptual fluency on evaluations. Third, we report the findings of four new experiments. We found that conceptual fluency has a positive effect on product evaluations in the weak-argument condition. The effect is rather strong when consumers have to justify their evaluations. We conclude that conceptual fluency enables people to generate additional context-based thoughts that are transferred to the target.

Keywords

Advertising context Priming Misattribution Predictive context 

Notes

Danksagung

Die Autoren danken Henry Blank, Diana Demharter, Herbert Dittrich, Isabella Gindl, Daniela Goller, Hans-Jürgen Haldenwang, Brigitte Hettenkofer, Jennifer Krings, Christina Mattern, Maryam Raoufi, Alice Riesmeyer, Janina Rößner, Melanie Schuldhaus und Carolin Stock für die Mitwirkung an dieser Studie, insbesondere für die Mitarbeit bei der Gestaltung der getesteten Werbeanzeigen und der Erhebung von Daten.

Literatur

  1. Berger J, Fitzsimons G (2008) Dogs on the street, pumas on your feet: how cues in the environment influence product evaluation and choice. J Marketing Res 45(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Davenport JL, Potter MC (2001) Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psycholog Sci 15(8):559–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fang X, Singh S, Ahluwalia R (2007) An examination of different explanations for the mere exposure effect. J Cons Res 34(1):97–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fazendeiro T, Winkielman P, Luo C, Lorah C (2005) False recognition across meaning, language, and stimulus format: conceptual relatedness and the feeling of familiarity. Mem Cognit 33(2):249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Freitas AL, Azizian A, Travers S, Berry SA (2005) The evaluative connotation of processing fluency: inherently positive or moderated by motivational context? J Exp Soc Psychol 41(6):636–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Furnham A, Gunter B, Richardson F (2002) Effects of product-program congruity and viewer involvement on memory for televised advertisements. J Appl Soc Psychol 32(1):124–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ha YM, Hoch SJ (1989) Ambiguity, processing strategy, and advertising: evidence interactions. J Cons Res 16(3):354–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hall RH, Hanna P (2004) The impact of web page text-background colour combinations on readability, retention, aesthetics and behavioural intention. Behav Inf Technol 23(3):183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Janiszewski C, Chandon E (2007) Transfer-appropriate processing, response fluency, and the mere measurement effect. J Marketing Res 44(2):309–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Janiszewski C, Meyvis T (2001) Effects of brand logo complexity, repetition, and spacing on processing fluency and judgment. J Cons Res 28(1):18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kasprik R (1995) Verstärkt ein unstimmiges Bild die Verarbeitung eines Werbemittels bei Produktinteressierten und Nicht-Produktinteressierten? Jahrb Absatz- Verbrauchsforschung 41(1):37–52Google Scholar
  12. Labroo AA (2006) Do products smile? When fluency confers liking and enhances purchase intent. In: Pechmann C, Price L (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, vol 33. Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, pp 558–561Google Scholar
  13. Labroo AA, Dhar R, Schwarz N (2008) Of frog wines and frowning watches: Semantic priming, perceptual fluency, and brand evaluation. J Cons Res 34(6):819–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Labroo AA, Lee AY (2006) Between two brands: a goal fluency account of brand evaluation. J Marketing Res 43(3):374–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee AY, Labroo AA (2004) The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. J Marketing Res 41(2):151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Moore RS, Stammerjohan CA, Coulter RA (2005) Banner advertiser-web site context congruity and colour effects on attention and attitudes. J Advert 34(2):71–84Google Scholar
  17. Moorman M, Neijens PC, Smit EG (2002) The effects of magazine-induced psychological response and thematic congruence on memory and attitude toward the ad in a real-life setting. J Advert 31(4):27–39Google Scholar
  18. Nedungadi P (1990) Recall and consumer consideration sets: influencing choice without altering brand evaluations. J Cons Res 17(3):263–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT (1986) Communication and persuasion: central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Reber R (2001) Klar erkannt – schon entschieden: Der Einfluss der Perzeptuellen Geläufigkeit auf Evaluative Urteile. Verlag Hans Huber, BernGoogle Scholar
  21. Reber R, Schwarz N, Winkielman P (2004a) Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personal Soc Psychol Rev 8(4):364–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reber R, Wurtz P, Zimmermann TD (2004b) Exploring “fringe” conspicuousness: subjective experience of perceptual fluency and its objective basis. Conscious Cogn 13(1):47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reber R, Winkielman P, Schwarz N (1998) Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychol Sci 9(1):45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schwarz N (2004) Metacognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decising making. J Consum Psychol 14(4):332–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shapiro S (1999) When an ad’s influence is beyond our conscious control: perceptual and conceptual fluency effects caused by incidental ad exposure. J Cons Res 26(1):16–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognit Psychol 5(2):207–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Unkelbach C (2006) The learned interpretation of cognitive fluency. Psychol Sci 17(4):339–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Unkelbach C (2007) Reversing the truth effect: learning the interpretation of processing fluency in judgments of truth. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 33(1):219–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Whittlesea BWA, Jacoby LL, Girard K (1990) Illusions of immediate memory: evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality. J Memory Lang 29(6):716–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Whittlesea BWA (1993) Illusion of familiarity. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 19(6):1235–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Winkielman P, Cacioppo JT (2001) Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. J Pers Soc Psychol 81(6):989–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Winkielman P, Schwarz N, Reber R, Fazendeiro TA (2003) Cognitive and affective consequences of visual fluency: when seeing is easy on the mind. In: Scott LM, Batra R (eds) Persuasive imagery: a consumer response perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associations, Mahwah, pp 75–89Google Scholar
  33. Yi Y (1990) Cognitive and affective priming effects of the context for print advertisements. J Advert 19(2):40–48Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universität AugsburgAugsburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations