바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

The Effects of Advertising Message Types Based on the Social Distance: Focusing on Cooperative Advertising between Different Types of Businesses

Abstract

This study is performed to examine the effects of social distance and two different types of advertising messages on ad notice and attitudes in cooperative advertising. Possible hypotheses were social distance will interact with two different types of advertising messages in ad notice and attitudes. This study divided participants into 4 experimental groups with social distance(close vs. far) and two different types of advertising messages(concrete vs. abstract message). A total of 4 experimental ads were used in this experiments, one for each experimental group. A total of 158 participants were allocated to a 4 experimental groups, participated in the experiment. Two-way ANOVA showed that there was significant interacting effects in ad notice and attitudes between social distance and two different types of advertising messages. That is, the concrete message is considered more effective in building ad notice and attitudes to the experimental group with close social distance to brands in cooperative advertising, while the abstract message is more effective in building ad notice and attitudes to the group with far social distance to brands in cooperative advertising. Based on the results, theoretical and practical implications as well as limitations and further research directions were presented and discussed.

keywords
cooperative advertising, social distance, concrete message, abstract message, ad notice, ad attitude

Reference

1.

강미선, 정만수, 박현수 (2004). 변형광고의 유형별 주목효과, 한국언론학보, 48(4), 58- 80.

2.

김민철, 이경렬 (2015). 시간적 거리와 행동 정체성 수준에 따른 광고메시지 유형별 효과에 관한 연구: 공인영어시험 광고를 중심으로, 광고학연구, 26(8), 119-144.

3.

나준희 (2013). 비교광고, 어떻게 실행해야 하는가?: Johnson (1984) 연구결과의 이론적 재해석. 광고학연구, 24(8), 229-255.

4.

문강환 (1987). 연합(Tie-up)광고에 관한 연구, 홍익대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

5.

송정미(2011). 시장지위에 따른 동업종 기업 간 수평적 공동광고의 소비자반응. 한국 심리학회지: 소비자․광고, 12(1), 217-234.

6.

송정미 (2013). 수평적 공동광고에 있어서 제품사용기회의 적합성에 따른 광고정보처리전략유형별 소비자반응. 한국 심리학회지: 소비자․광고, 14(1), 225-246.

7.

송정미, 하영희 (2015). 브랜드의 시장지위에 따른 직접비교광고와 간접비교광고의 소비자반응, 한국심리학회지: 소비자․광고, 16(1), 63-82.

8.

양영종 (2003). 인터넷광고의 복잡성과 집중도에 따른 광고태도, 브랜드태도, 구매의도 계층효과, 광고연구, 60(가을), 107-129.

9.

우석봉, 이성수 (2013). 시간적 거리에 따른 광고소구유형과 제품유형이 광고효과에 미치는 영향, 광고학연구, 24(5), 117-136.

10.

최고은 (2013). 시간적 거리와 사회적 거리가 브랜드평가에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구, 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

11.

홍가람 (2018). 사회적 거리와 메시지 유형이 광고메시지 효과에 미치는 영향: 광고매체와 모델을 중심으로, 연세대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

12.

Dhar, R., & Kim, E. Y. (2007). Seeing the forest or the trees: Implications of construal level theory for consumer choice, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 96-100.

13.

Donthu, N. (1992). Cooperative advertising intensity, Journal of Advertising Research, 32, 53-58.

14.

Fiedler, K. (2007). Construal level theory as an integrative framework for behavioral decision-making research and consumer psychology, Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 101-106.

15.

Fujita, K., Henderson, M., Eng, J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Spatial distance and mental construal of social events, Psychological Science, 17(4), 278-282.

16.

Hashida, Y. (2004). 共同広告の心理的効果. 産業経営, 早稲田大学産業経営硏究所, 36, 99 -113.

17.

Hashida, Y. (2005). ブランドに及ぼす共同広告の効果.平成16年度(第38次), 吉田秀雄記念事業財団研究助成報告書, 吉田秀雄記念図書館蔵

18.

Johnson, M. (1984). Consumer choice strategies for comparing noncomparable alternatives, Journal of Consumer Research, 11(December), 741-753.

19.

Joseph, R. P., John G., DJ N., & Park, K. W. (2004). Brand congruity and comparative advertising: When and why comparative advertisements lead to greater elaboration, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1&2), 115- 123.

20.

Ledgerwood, A., Wakslak, C. J., & Wang, M. A, (2010). Differential information use for near and distant decision, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 638-642.

21.

Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance, Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463.

22.

Liviatan, I., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2008). Interpersonal similarity as a social distance dimension: Implications for perception of others’ actions, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1256-1269.

23.

Mackenzie, S. B., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanation, Journal of Consumer Research, 23(2), 130-143.

24.

Samu, S. H., Krishnan, S., & Smith, R. E. (1999). Using advertising alliance for new product introduction: Interactions between product complementarity and promotional strategies, Journal of Marketing, 63(1), 57-74.

25.

Shimp, T. A. (2000). Advertising promotion, 5th ed., Orlando: Harourt, Inc.

26.

Smith, P. K., & Trope, Y. (2006). You focus on the forest when you're in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 578-596.

27.

Stephan, E., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2010). Politeness and psychological distance: A construal level perspective, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 268-280.

28.

Trope, Y., Antonio L., & Gollwitzer, P. (2004). The influence of abstract and concrete mindsets on anticipating and guiding others' self-regulatory efforts, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(6), 739-752.

29.

Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2000). Temporal construal and time-dependent changes in preference, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 876-889.

30.

Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal, Psychological Review, 110(3), 403.

31.

Wakslak, C. J., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Alony, R. (2006). Seeing the forest when entry is unlikely: probability and the mental representation of events, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 641-694.

logo