Asia Pacific Journal of Management

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 33–46 | Cite as

Comparative advertising: Superiority despite interference?

Articles

Abstract

The effect of comparative versus noncomparative advertising on consumer cognitions, attitudes, and behavioural intentions toward an advertised brand with or without interference from other ads was investigated. The experimental results indicated that the superiority of comparative over noncomparative advertising on attitudinal and behavioural intention responses observed immediately after exposure diminished following interference from subsequent exposure to other ads. However, its superiority on two cognitive dimensions — perceived brand similarity and quality — was maintained despite such interference. Implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

Behavioural Intention Cognitive Dimension Subsequent Exposure Consumer Cognition Comparative Advertising 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Asian Wall Street Journal Weekly, 19 August 1991, Pepsi ads return to Japan airwaves with a bit of a blur.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baumgardner, M H, Leippe, M R, Ronis, D L and Greenwald, A G, (1983), In search of reliable persuasion effects: II. associative interference and persistance of persuasion in a message-dense environment,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol 45, September, 524–537.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Belch, G E, (1981), An examination of comparative and noncomparative television commercials: The effects of claim variation and repetition on cognitive response and message acceptance,Journal of Marketing Research Vol 18, 3, 333–349.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burke, R R and Srull, T K, (1988), Competitive interference and consumer memory for advertising,Journal of Consumer Research Vol 15, June, 55–68.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deighton, J, (1984), The interaction of advertising and evidence,Journal of Consumer Research Vol 11, December, 763–770.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Demirdjian, Z S, (1983), Sales effectiveness of comparative advertising: An experimental field investigation,Journal of Consumer Research Vol 10, December, 362–364.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    —— (1986), Attitudinal and behavioral response to comparative advertising: An experimental field analysis, inDevelopments in Marketing Science Vol 9, Naresh K Malhotra, (ed), Akron, O H: Academy of Marketing Science, 288–292.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Droge, C, (1989), Shaping the route to attitude change: Central versus peripheral processing through comparative versus noncomparative advertising,Journal of Consumer Research Vol 26, May, 193–204.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    —— and Darmon, R Y, (1987), Associative positioning strategies through comparative advertising: Attribute versus overall similarity approaches,Journal of Marketing Research Vol 24, November, 377–388.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fishbein, M A and Azjen, I, (1975),Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frith, K T and Frith, M, (1989), Western advertising and eastern culture: The confrontation in Southeast Asia, inCurrent Issues & Research in Advertising, James H Leigh and Claude R Martin Jr (ed) Ann Arbor, 63–73, The University of Michigan, Illinois.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Golden, L L, (1979), Consumer reactions to explicit brand comparisons in advertisements,Journal of Marketing Research Vol 16, 4, 517–532.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gorn, G J and Weinberg, C B, (1984), The impact of comparative advertising on perception and attitude: Some positive findings,Journal of Consumer Research Vol 11, September, 719–727.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iyer, E S, (1988), The influence of verbal content and relative newness on the effectiveness of comparative advertising,Journal of Advertising Vol 17, 3, 15–21.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jenkins, J G and Dallenbach, K M, (1924), Obliviscence during sleep and waking,American Journal of Psychology Vol 35, October, 605–612.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Levy, R, (1987), Big resurgence in comparative ads,Dun's Business Month Vol 129, 2, 56–58.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mitchell, A A and Olson, J C, (1981), Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude?Journal of Marketing Research Vol 18, August, 318–332.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Muehling, D D, (1987), Comparative advertising: The influence of attitude-toward-the-ad on brand evaluation,Journal of Advertising Vol 16, 4, 43–49.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Murphy, J H and Amundsen, M S, (1981), The communications effectiveness of comparative advertising for a new brand on users of the dominant brand,Journal of Advertising Vol 10, 1, 14–20.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ohanian, R and Cunningham, I C M, (1987), Application of primacy-recency in comparative advertising,Current Issues and Research in Advertising Vol 10, 1 & 2, 99–121.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pechmann, C and Stewart, D W, (1990), The effects of comparative advertising on attention, memory, and purchase intentions,Journal of Consumer Research Vol 17, September, 180–191.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rogers, J C and Williams, T G, (1989), Comparative advertising effectiveness: Practitioners' perceptions versus academic research findings,Journal of Advertising Research Vol 29, October/November, 22–37.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Smith, R E and Swinyard, W R, (1983), Attitude-behavior consistency: The impact of product trial versus advertising,Journal of Marketing Research Vol 20, August, 257–267.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Singapore Code of Advertising Practice, (1976), Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore, Singapore.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Srull, T K and Wyer Jr, R S (1985), The role of chronic and temporary goals in social information processing, inHandbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, Richard M Sorrentino and E Tory Higgins (eds), Guilford, New York, 503–549.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Straits Times 28 May 1991, Comparative ads in for a knocking if European regulators get their way.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Swayne, L E, Starling, J M and Ginter, P M, (1981), Toward a contingency theory of comparative advertising: A guide for advertising strategy,Akron Business and Economic Review Vol 12, Summer, 29–34.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Swinyard, W R, (1981), The interaction between comparative advertising and copy claim variation,Journal of Marketing Research Vol 18, 2, 175–186.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Taschian, R O and Slama, M E, (1984), Involvement and the effectiveness of comparative advertising,Current Issues and Research in Advertising Vol 1, 79–92.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Turgeon, N and Barnaby, D J, (1988), Comparative advertising: Two decades of practice and research,Current Issues and Research in Advertising Vol 11, 1, 41–65.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Faculty of Business Administration National University of Singapore 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Department of Marketing, Faculty of Business AdministrationNational University ofSingapore

Personalised recommendations