JAMES L GINTER*

This study investigates the relationships among attitude change, advertising exposure, and choice of a nev/ brand on an individual basis. Results indicate that although attitudes change both before and after choice of the nev^^ brand, the post-choice attitude change is greater in magnitude and correlated more highly with choice.

An Experimental Investigation of Attitude Change and Choice of a New Brand

INTRODUCTION
Several studies have attempted to correlate preference or behavior with different types of predictor variables. These attempts have become somewhat more successful as researchers have moved from general variables, such as demographics and standard psychological tests, to more product-specific measures (see [3, 13]). This study extends the research using the latter variables in prediction of preference in static analyses by: 1. measuring attitLides, preference, and choice at several points in time and investigating the relationships between changes in ihtse variables. 2. using actual choice data along with stated preference data to develop information about aclual behavior, similar to Bass, Pessemier, and Lehmann |21. (Past research has often relied on proxy measures for behavior.) 3. including interval preference data, (The procedure used to test the relationship between product-specific attitude measures and brand preference has previously bcun rL:lativcly weak because of the ordinal nature of Ihc preference data.) The primary foeus of this research is on (1) the relationships between change in attitude toward a new * James L. Gintcr is Assistant Professor of Marketing, The Ohio State University. He wishes to thank Professor Frank JVI. Bass for his valuable guidance. He also wishes to acknowledge the helpful comments of Professor Louis W. Stern and his other colleagues at Ohio State. Financial support for this research was provided by the American Association of Advertising Agencies in a grant to Professor Hass.
30

brand and exposure to advertising for that brand and (2) the relationship between altitude and choice and use of the brand. This research is unique in that attitude dynamics are combined with choice behavior and advertising exposure at tlic itidlvldital level. Previous dynamic studies [5, 15] were based on aggregate data, thus obscuring understanding relationships at the individual level.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES The Attilttde Model

ln the initial applications of a multi attribute summative attitude model to the marketing setting, Lehmann [13! ynd Talarzyk [18] were successful in predicting preference ranks. The same basic attititde model is used in this study, and it can be shown in the following form;

where: Aj = attitude toward brand /", Vi ^ affective importance of attribute / (value), J5,J = perceived amount of attribute /' contained by brandy (belief), /, ^ ideal amount of attribute / (ideal), n = number of attributes considered, and k = parameter of the Minkowski space determining the method of calculation of Aj. This derivation of attitude makes use of a nnilti-

Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. Xi (February 1974), 30-40

AniTUDE CHANGE AND CHOICE OF A NEW BRAND

31

dimensional space in which the axes are the attributes considered. The indicated importance of each attribute is reflected in the scale of measurement on the axis representing that attribute. Each brand is a point in this "cognitive space" whose location is determined by the beliefs about that brand. An individual's attitude toward a brand is represented as the distance from his ideal point in the cognitive space to the location of the brand. The k parameter in the formulation of attitude determines the measure of distanee used. For example, a value of k equal to I results in ealeulation of city block distance, and a value of k equal to 2 results in calculation of Euclidian distance. This definition of attitude corresponds to that of the affective component in the traditional three-component concept of attitude [17J.^ The attitude model defined earlier can take many forms because many values can be assigned to the parameters. The specific form ofthe model used in this study was determined after consideration of (1) alternative values for eaeh ofthe K,, h, and k parameters and (2) alternative measurements of the distance between a brand and the ideal point. Parameter Vi (importance of attribute /)Two values were considered: 1. The weights of the attributes were those indicated by the subjects on the questionnaires, and 2. All attributes were weighted equally on the basis of the argument that ail attributes were very important to all subjects. Parameter Ii (location of the "idea!" brand on attribute /)Two values were considered: 1. Ideal point locations were those indicated by the subjects, and 2, Ideal point locations were considered to be the maximum level of all attributes on the basis of the assumption that all attributes were favorable and subjects desired the maximum level ofall of them. Parameter k (the Minkowski metric which determines the degree to which large differences between believed location and ideal location of a brand on an attribute are allowed to dominate the overall attitude measure) Values of ^ greater than I give large distances relatively greater importance than small distances. Two values were considered: I. The value k = \ equally weights differences on all attributes (City Block distance), and
' The techniques of multidimensional scaling, as reported by Green and Carmone [111, result in the same type of '-joint space" described in ihis section. The dimensions of the space are derived from a set of responses to all possible pairs of objects, and the number of dimensions is determined by the fit to the subject responses. This method of attitude measurement has the advantage of being unobtrusiveit is based on the judgments of the subjects rather than the dimensions selected by the researcher. The use of pre-specified attributes, however, makes it easier to interpret and apply the results because the dimensions are more clearly identified.

2. The value k = 1 measures the linear diagonal distance in the multidimensional space (Euclidian distance). Compulation of distance (calculated from the attitude model)Two forms of distance computation were considered; 1, The distances were those computed from the attitude model, and 2. The distances were normalized within each multidimensional space by uniformly scaling the distances from the brands to the ideal point so that they totaled unity. Normalization gives relative distances of the brands from the ideal points rather than the actual values of the distances. Therefore, normalization makes it possible to compare attitudes of dilferent subjects at one point in time and attitudes of one subject at different points in time. Existence of Attitude Change The data were collected from a laboratory experiment which was designed to stimulate change in attitude toward brands included in the study. Prior to detailed investigation of the relationship of attitude change with change in preference and choice and usage it was necessary to determine whether or not significant changes in attitude did occur dtiring the experiment. The following hypotheses were tested: Hi: Attitudes toward the new brands were changed during the experiment. H2: Attitudes toward the existing brands were changed during the experiment. Analysis of Overall Altitude Change Several specific hypotheses concerning attitude change were based on the notion that change in attitude is facilitated by acquisition of new information [4|. The magnitude of the overall ehange in attitude for each individual was expected to be correlated with certain subject charaeteristics. For example, it was expected that older and less educated subjects would acquire less information and exhibit less attitude cliunge. Heavy users of a product category were hypothesised to be able to assimilate new information rapidly because of their familiarity with the produet category. Because brand loyal subjects were somewhat satisfied with a brand on the market, they were expected to acquire less information. It was also hypothesized that exposure to commercials for a new brand as well as purchase and use of a new brand would give the subjects new information and result in attitude change. The following hypotheses were tested: H3: Age of the subject is negatively correlated with the mtigniiLide of the overall change in the attitude toward ihe new brand. H^: Education of the subject is positively correlated with the magnitude of overall change in the attitude toward the new brand, Hs; Usage level ofthe product category is positively cor-

32 related with Ihe magnitude of the overall new brand attitude change, Hti: The degree of brand loyalty is negatively eorrelated with the magnitude of the overall new brand attitude change. H7: The magnittide of the overall new brand attitude change is positively correlated with the numher of commercials for the new brand seen by the subjects. Hs: The magnitude of the overall new brand attitude change is positively correlated with the number of times the subject selected the new brand.

JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, FEBRUARY 1974

ures was more accurate than that based on the multiattribute attitude model. Hij: Choice predictions based on the three measures of affect were more accurate than those based on the previous week's choice, the new brand, or the brand to which the subject was previotisiy most loyal. Under the laboratory conditions it was expected that subjects frequently tnade trial choices rather than selecting the brand which they truly preferred (or had "adopted"). Since the choice predictions were based on different measures of affect, these predictions should have been more accurate for the trial purchases than for ail purchases in general. The following hypothesis was tested: Hu: Choice predictions based on affect were more accurate for "adoption" purchases than for all purchases in general. Attitude Change and Choice There has been some discrepancy in the literature eoncerning the issue of whether attitude ehange precedes or follows behavior change. Assail and Day [I] conditcted an aggregate longitudinal study to investigate the extent to which attitude and awareness changes precede or follow changes in market share. Their finding that attitude predieted market share better than market share predicted attitudes led them to the inference that attitudinal ehange precedes rather than follows a behavioral change. Festinger's [7| dissonance theory, however, states that a person who engages in discrepant behavior will experience dissonance, i.e., a psychological tension capable of motivating, among other things, attitude change. This notion was supported by a study by LoSeutio and Perloff [14] in which subjeets who were offered two similarly attractive record albums evidently experienced dissonance and attempted to reduce it. The reduction attempts took the form of reranking the rejected album to represent less desirability and reranking the chosen album as more desirable. The magnitudes of attitude ehange before and after purehase of the new brand were investigated in this analysis. It was hypothesized that a favorable change in attitude toward the new brand would lead to purchase of the new brand. The following two faetors could also lead to attitude change after choice and usage of the new brand: (1) the information acquired through use of the brand may have led to a favorable attitude ehange; (2) the choice itself may have created a state of cognitive dissonance and led to a favorable attitude change through realignment of the cognitive elements to reduce this dissonance. The following hypotheses were tested: H15: Choice of the new brand is preceded by a favorable change in attitude toward the new brand. HIB: Choice of the new brand is followed by a favorable change in attitude toward the new brand. The expectation that choice of the new brand would

Atialysi.s of Periodic Attitude Change The previous set of hypotheses concerned the overall attittidc change between the first and the last measurement. There may have been significant attitude changes during the shorter periods between successive measurements. Specific hypotheses concerning these periodic attitude changes were also based on the notion that acquisition of new information leads to attitude change within the individual. Choice and use were expected to give more information than exposure to a commercial and therefore result in greater attitude change. The following hypotheses were tested: HB: Exposure to a commercial for a new brand causes a change in attitude toward that brand. Hio: Choice and usage of a new brand causes a change in attitude toward that brand. An additional hypothesis concerning the continuity of attitude change was based on the idea that there are "carry over" eflects of attitude change. It was expected that subjects who were exposed to new brands and commercials for these brands would receive the greatest amount of new information at the beginning of the experiment and that this reception of new information would steadily decrease over time. Attitude changes were therefore expected to be greater at the beginning of the study and to decrease over time. The following hypothesis was tested: Hii: The change in attitude toward a brand during a time period is correlated with the magnitude of the change in attitude toward that brand in the preceding period.
I

Analysis of Choice The measure of attitude (affect) calculated from the attribute data was an indirect one. Both the stated ranking and the interval-scale measure of preference were more direct measures of affect. It was therefore predicted that these measures would predict choice better than the calculated attitude measure. Additional predictions were based on (1) the brand the subject selected the previous week, (2) the new brand (most frequently chosen in the HCP category), and (3) the brand to which the subject had previously been most loyal. The following hypotheses were tested: Hi.: Prediction of choice based on the preference meas-

ATTITUDE CHANGE AND CHOICE OF A NEW BRAND

33

be related to previous choice of the new brand and exposure to advertising for the new brand was tested with the following hypotheses: Hi:: Probability of choice of the new brand at a point in time is related to the purchase history with respect to the new brand. Hia: Probability of choice of the new brand at a point in time is related to previous exposure to advertising for the new brand. PROCEDURE Recruitment of Subjects The laboratory experiment was conducted over a four week period with subjects attending one session each week. All subjects were housewives from the Lafayette, Indiana area, with the specific exclusion of students and student wives. Subjects were recruited through ladies' organizations, e.g., church groups and Red Cross volunteers. While this recruiting procedure led to a set of subjects who were not representative of the population of the area, it was felt that this disadvantage was outweighed by the influence of group membership on the continuity of attendance. Of the 490 subjects who attended the first week of the study, 453 attended all four weeks (92.57o completion rate). Subject remuneration was in both of the following forms: (1) each subject received S1.90 in products and cash each week that she attended, and (2) the organization received vS5.00 for each subject who attended all four weeks of the study. Design of the Experiment The two product categories investigated in this study were spray disinfectant and a common household cleaning produet (hereafter called HCP) which cannot be identified because of an agreement with one of the manufacturers (see Table 1). Dow spray disinfectant and Brand X in the HCP category were not being sold and had never been advertised in the area from which subjects (Ss) were drawn. (The analyses in this study are primarily concerned with these new brands.) The following criteria served as guidelines in selection of these product categories: 1. Housewife is the sole decision maker. 2. Frequency of usage is high and intcrpurchase time is short. 3. Most housewives are potential users. 4. Price per unit is low. 5. Product categories have low cross-elasticity of demand. 6. Packages of all brands and copies of television commercials for the new brands are available. Each week the Ss viewed a different taped half-hour episode of the Andy Griffith Show, with commercials. This program was chosen because it was felt that it would not arouse strong feelings which could affect

Table 1
PRODUCT CATEGORIES, BRANDS, AND ATTRIBUTES

Product category Spray disinfectant Household denning product {HCP) Brand A Brand B Brand C Brand D Brand X" Stain-removing power Whitening power Sudsiness Mildness to skin Mildness to clothes Pollution control

Brands

Dow

Lysol

Attributes

Staphene Economy Freshness of odor Cerm-killing strength Mildew-killing power Confidence in manufacturer

" New brand.

the responses ofthe Ss. Commercials for the new brands were inserted at the same point throughout the fourweek period to eliminate any effects of changes of position in the program. The technical quality of the substitution made detection ofthe insertions impossible. The same commercial was used for each of the new brands throughout the experiment, and they were copies of those actually used for the brands.^ The research design (sec Figure 1) fostered different levels of exposure for each of the new brands. Groups 4 and 5 were given special treatment in order to test for sensitizing effects, since subjects were administered pre- and postexposure attitude and preference questionnaires. The results of this test showed that the various questionnaires used throughout the study had some effect on the responses to the postexposure questionnaires, but not on selections made during the shopping trip. However, the efTects did not have recognizable patterns and were not strong enough to call into question further analyses. All brands shown in Table 1 were available in the simulated shopping trip experienced by alt subjects each week. Prices were held constant at the level of retail prices in the local grocery stores at the time of the experiment. (Manufacturers' suggested prices were used for the new brands.) The prices of the most expensive brands in each product category totaled SI.90. Subjects received the difference in cash when they chose lower priced brands.^ Figure 2 shows the many combinations of events whieh each subject eould have experienced through the first two weeks for each of the new brands. The timing
* Commercials were obtained with the assistance of the Research Deparlment of BBDO, Inc, ^Two additional product categoriesfacial tissues and scouring padswere included in the study. Analysis of data concerning these products has been conducted independently by Winter |I9I.

34

JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, FEBRUARY 1974

Figure 1
COMMERCIALS ^Ns,^^ ^"^^^ GROUP 1 1 FT^ Dow Brand X Dow SP FT SP Brand X Dow Brond X FT SP SEEN BY EXPERIMENTAL CELLS Commercials seen in wek 2 FT Dow Dow SP SP Brond X Brand X FT FT 3 FT 4

Figure 2 POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS OF EVENTS" WEEK 2

Dow

Dow

2 3 4" 5*= 6

SP

SP

Brond X

Brond X

7^

" FT and SP indicate two additional product categories (facial tissues and scouring pads) not included in tliis study. '' Group 4 received no preexposurc attitude questionnaires each week. " Group 5 rfCfived no attitude questionnaires until postexposure for fourth week. 'i The assumption of independence of product categories was confirmed by comparing responses of Group 7 with those of other groups on the product categories to which they were not exposed.

of the attitude and preference measurements is itidicated by Tl throtigh T5. Selection of Attributes For each product category, the same set of attributes was used throughout all measurements and for all subjects. This facilitated comparisons of attitudes and attitude change aeross time and across people. For operational reasons, the number of attributes used in each product category was small. The selection of attributes to be used was based on an in depth group interview conducted with ten subjects who were demographically similar to the subjects from whom the main body of data was collected. Those attributes which were identified as most important in selection of brands in each product category were selected for use in this study (see Table I). There were no constraints on the number of attributes to be used in each product category. Semantic differential scales (6 points) were used for collection of data concerning Irnportance of the attributes, beheved locations of the brands on the attributes, and location of the ideal point."*
The followine is an example of one belief measurement. "Please indicate how much you think each ofthe brands of spray disinfectant has of each of the chanicteristics by circling a " I " if you believe the brand is high in the characteristic, a "6'' if you believe it is low in the characteristic, or somewhere in between

" Advertising exposure was controlled in the experimental design; product selection depended on what the subject chose in the shopping triji.

ANALYSES

AND

RESULTS

Selection of Model Parameters The specific combination o^ parameter values to be used in the remainder of the study was chosen from the previously listed alternatives on the basis of the ability of the model to predict the preference for the brands. The predietions were based on the calculated distance from eaeh brand to the ideal point. The preference data used in this analysis were interval measures derived from paired-comparison judgments. This method of dollarmetric preferenee measurement was developed by Pessemier
depending on how much of the characteristic you believe the brand has. Please give your opinion of every brand on each characteristic even if you have limited knowledge aboul the brand." Germ Killing Strength Lysol High 1 2 3 4 5 Low 6

6 The brands are located on an interval scale by applying a least squares fil criterion to the subject's original paired-preference judgments. The units on this preference scale are dollars because of the nature of the original dollarmetric response.

AHITUDE CHANGE AND CHOICE OF A NEW BRAND

35 Figure 3 ACTUAL DISTANCE FROM IDEAL POINT VS. TIME (HCP)

90 SO S. ' 0 - 60

For each eombination of parameters, a univariate regression of preference on attitude was conducted for each individual, for all brands in each produet category. There were a tnaximum of 24 to 40 observations for each subject, depending upon the produet category {8 measurements X 3 or 5 brands). A value for the correlation eoefficient {R'^) was caleulated for each person. For each set of parameters, the values of this coefficient were averaged over all subjeets. The outcome of this analysis was an average correlation coefficient in each product category for each eombination of alternative parameter values. An analysis of varianee was used to determine the effects of the alternative parameter values. The sources of the effeets on the eorrelation coefficients being investigated were (1) weighting of the attributes, (2) use of the measured ideal point, (3) type of distance measure, and (4) normalization of the distances. None of the interactions of these effects were found to be signifieant. Results for both product categories indicated that the best model employed the weighting of the attributes by the subjeets, assumed location of ideal points, City Block distance measure {k = 1), and normalized distances. This form of the model led to an average R"^ of .525 for HCP and .206 for spray disinfectant. The fact that most of the attributes were affeetive in nature could explain the superior performance of the assumption that the ideal point on each attribute occurred at its maximum value, ln other words, the concept of the measured ideal point may have little meaning when affective attributes are used, and one may therefore be measuring respondents' reactions to a measurement scale rather than their judgments about an "ideal" brand. Existence of Attitude Change The nonnormalized measures of distance were used in this analysis to eliminate change in measure of attitude toward one brand caused by change in attitude toward another brand. The average distances between the brands and ideal points for all subjeets are shown in Figures 3 and 4 for the two product categories. These graphs indieate that the attitudes toward the new brands approached those toward the existing brands during the experiment. The changes in attitudes related to Brand X, Dow, and Staphene were statistieally significant and H I was therefore supported. The attitudes related to one of the existing brands (Staphene) had the same patterns as those related to the new brands. Staphene had been introduced in the area about six months prior to the experiment and was not yet widely known or distributed. To many subjects Staphene was also a new brand, and this could explain the pattern of its average attitudes. The hypotheses of significant change in attitudes toward the existing brands (H^) was rejected. The existing brands maintained their relative distances over

S 50

a 40
3C -

Tim* ol Mioiurtmtni

time. It is interesting to note that these relative distances were indicative of their true market shares. It was clear that the attitudes toward the new brands did ehange significantly, and the plots of distance over time indicate that these changes tended to decrease in size. This meant that some level of stability of attitudes was being achieved by the end of the study. Analysis of OveraU Attitude Change The hypotheses coneerning the overall attitude during the experiment were based on the notion that change in attitude is facilitated by aequisition of new information. The measures of brand loyalty and usage level were taken from general usage data collected from each subject during the initial week of the experiment. The subjeets indicated the distribution of their last ten purchases in eaeh produet category among several brands. The largest number of purchases concentrated on any one brand was taken as the degree of brand loyalty of each subject. Usage level was determined from responses
Figure 4 DISTANCE FROM IDEAL POINT VS. TIME (Spray Disinfectant)

Time of

McoturRmeni

36

JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, FEBRUARY 1974

Table 2
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF OVERALL AHITUDE CHANGE TOWARD THE NEW BRAND (HCP) Dependent Variable: \ATTi,s

Variable Number of children Income Number of TV sets Own vs. rent Number of cars Marital status Age Education Work status Hours of TV viewing Brand loyalty score Usage level Number of exposures Interaction of hrand loyalty score and usage level Number of purchases of brand X

Coefficient

Significance level (Foa = 3.8) n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s, n,s. n.s. n.s. 5.433 n.s. 6.789 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 33,293

-.006 ,005 ,026

Overall F = 4.374 (significant at .05 level). R'^ = .178 (with all variables included). Note: The significant variables are not highly correlated (> ,5) with any of the other variables included in the analysis.

concerning usual purchase frequency and average package size. The hypotheses listed as well as several additional hypotheses were tested simultaneously through a multivariate regression analysis. The dependent variable was absolute value of the change in attitude related to the new brand between the first and last attitude measurement (see Table 2). Absolute value was used because the hypotheses concerned magnitude and not direction of attitude change. The normalized values of the attitudes were used in this analysis because of the pooling of data from all subjects. The spray disinfectant category was not analyzed because of the relative newness of one of the existing brands (Staphene). The results indicate that the only hypothesis not rejected by the data was H^. The results showed that the number of times the new brand was selected was very significantly correlated with the total attitude change. Analysis of Periodic Attitude Chatige The hypotheses concerning the periodic attitude change were also tested simultaneously through a regression analysis of the HCP data. Absolute values of the attitude changes were used in this analysis, since the hypotheses were not directional in nature. The following regression model was used; AATTi.x.T I = a + 0iNEXPi.x.T + 02NPCHSi,x.T
AATTi.x.T-i

I AATTi,x,T I = the absolute value of the change in the attitude of subject / toward Brand X from time r 1 to time T, NEXP{,x.T = the total number of times subject ( had been exposed to a cotiimercial for Brand X up to time T, NPCHS,,x.r the total number of times subject / had chosen Brand X in the simulated shopping trip up to time T, \AATTi_x,T-i\ = the absolute value of the change in attitude of subject / toward Brand X from time T 2to T 1, and Ui = random error associated with subject /. It is reasonable to expect the unexplained variance to be quite large because absolute value of attitude ehange is a very "noisy" variable. Nevertheless, statistical significance of the parameter estimates is required for rejection of the hypotheses. The data in these analyses were both eross-sectional and time series in nature. Six observations for each of the 245 subjects with complete data were used. The data were pooled with no allowance made for the two types of variation (across subjects and across time). The variable concerned with cumulative number of advertising exposures was primarily concerned with crosssubjeet variance. If one were to consider this variable only in the longitudinal sense, it would lead to the expectation that periodic ehanges in attitude increased over time. The same is true for the variable concerning the cumulative number of purchases ofthe new brand. The results in Table 3 show that all three of the independent variables were significantly related to attitude change toward the new brand. AU three hypotheses were supported, since the coefficients of all three of the independent variables were significantly

Table 3
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF PERIODIC ATTITUDE CHANGE (HCP)

Dependent variable |ATT. , .

ATT^,T

Regression coefficients Variable Brand X (new brand) Brand C

{e.xistinf ' brand)

where:

Number of 4.6 X 10-'{' = 4.41) exposures Number of 8,9 X 10-"{' = 5,87) 6.6 X 10->(t = 4,76) purchases Lagged 4.4 X 10-'(( = 20.78) 6.0 X 10-'(/ = 30,60) magnitude of R^ = .056 y?* = ,047 attitude change

ATTITUDE CHANGE AND CHOICE OF A NEW BRAND

37

positive. This means that change in attitude toward the new brand during a period was significantly correlated with the number of exposures to the commercial for that brand and the number of times the new brand had been chosen. The significant coefficient of the lagged magnitude of attitude change indicated a positive correlation In magnitude of attitude change through time. Note that the eoefficient of number of purchases was nearly twice as large as that of number of exposures to the commercial. This supports the notion that more information was gained through selection and use which resulted in a greater ehange in attitude. Hio and Hn vyere also tested for one ofthe previously existing brands. Hg was omitted from this analysis because existing brands were not advertised during the exfieriment. Brand C was used because it held the largest market share at the time of the experiment. The results as shown in Table 3 were very similar to those of the new brand analysis. Regression analyses for both Brand X and Brand C showed that choice and use atlected magnitude of attitude ehange and that magnitude of attitude change was serially correlated. In a similar analysis for separate market segments [10|, the correlations were found not to be constant for all types of individuals. This finding is also related to the issue of eross-seetional and longitudinal variance in an analysis of pooled data. Analysis of Choice Hypotheses 12 and 13, concerning relative predictive power of several bases of prediction, were tested through a set of choice predictions for the two product categories (summarized in Table 4). All predictions were made on an individual basis. For both product categories the prediction of choice based on preferenee was more accurate than that based on attitude. Hi-> was therefore not rejected. The results of these comparisons also showed that for both product categories the predic^ tions based on preferenee were more accurate than those based on previous choice, the new brand, or the brand to which the subject was previously most loyal. H13 was therefore not rejected. All predictions based on preference or attitude in Table 4 showed the same pattern, that is, decreasing in accuracy from the first to the second week and then steadily increasing in accuracy. This may have been eaused by a decreasing incidence of trial purchases whieh were not predictable. As eaeh subject made seleetions in the simulated shopping trips, information was collected concerning the nature of eaeh purchase. Subjcets indicated agreement with one of five statements about their future behavior. These statements ranged from certainty of continuing to use the seleeted brand to certainty of not continuing to use the selected brand. Responses in agreement with the two statements indicating high certainty of continuing to use the brand were classified as "adop-

Table 4
ACCURACY OF CHOICE PREDICTION (Percent Correct) HCP

Spray disinfectant Total

41 .2

Basis of prediction Weekly Stated rank preferenee Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Dollarmetric preference Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Attitude Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Last period choice Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 New brand Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Past purchase history Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4
37 .6 32 .8 40 .5 54 .0 41 .1 39 .3

Weekly
41.7

Total 40.1

22.0 38.4 57.7 38.9 42.9 24.3 36.4 32,1

33 .4

30 .5 42 .7
52 .1 29 .3

38.7 39.3

27 .8 35 .8
40 .9

23.9
37.8 53.3 35 .2 28.9 17.3 27,9 41.7
34 .9

30 .2 31,,5 44,,2 46. 4 37. 6 25. 2 30. 1 35. 8

36.2 28.4 44.3 36i2 35^8 32.1 36.7

42. 5 27. I 32. 4

41. 1

tion" purchases. Responses in agreement with the middle statement were classified as "uncertain" purchases. Responses in agreement with the two statements indicating certainty of not eontinuing to use the brand were classified as "trial" purchases.^ Hu was tested through a comparison of prediction of "adoption" purchases with the predietions shown in Table 4. The comparison of these results (sec Table 5) with the previous results in Table 4 show a great improvement (30-40%) when only "adoption" purchases were considered. Hii was therefore not rejected. Attitude Change and Choice The hypotheses eoncerning attitude ehange and choiee ofthe new brand were tested through a series of weekly
*The proportions ofall purchases falling into these three categories throughout the entire experiment were:
HCP SO

Adoption Uncertain Trial

23.2% 35.9% 40.9% 100.0%

21.yy^
43.8% 28.9% 100.0%

38

JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, FEBRUARY 1974

Table 5
ACCURACY OF CHOICE PREDICTION OF ADOPTION PURCHASES (Percent Correct} HCP Busis of prediction Weekly Stated rank preference Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Dollarmclric preference Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Altitude Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 l..ast period choice Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 84.5 83.1 87.0 87.7 81.7 84.3 77.2 78.8 84.6 62.4 54.4 67.1 64.3 63.8 65.1 69.8 62.9 63.6 58.4 47.2 50.3 79.7 70.9 76.8 77.6 51 .4 84.5 73.3 83.1 79.2 76.8 Total 85.8 85.0 72.9 80.4 82.y 80.2 Weekly Total 81.2 Spray disinfectant

the negative coeRicients indicate attitude change in a favorable direction. Attitude change in the period immediately preceding the choice was not significantly correlaled with the choice of the new brand, but the attitude change in the period prior to that was significant. These two periods of measurement were very diflcrcnt in the length of time involved. The change in attitude from the initial attitude measurement eaeh week to the postadvertising measurement occurred in about an hour, and this change was not significantly correlated with choice. The attitude change from the postadvertising measurement of the previous week to the initial measurement in the week of the choice occurred over a period of seven days, and this change was significantly correlated with the choice of the new brand. The results showed that attitude change both before and after choice were significantly correlated with choice of the new brand. The coefficient and the level o^ significance of the postdecision altitude change were almost always greater than those of the prior attitude change. This would indicate that attitude change does occur both before and after choice of a new brand, but that the postdecision attitude change is greater. Advertising exposure variables were not significantly correlated with the choice of the new brand. This could have been because of the relatively small influence of the commercial in comparison with exposure to ibc package during the shopping trip and actual use. A similar conTable 6 REGRESSION MODEL TO PREDICT PURCHASE OF BRAND X
+ (JiC/jr-i + 0iChr-% + /33(C/ir-i X Chr-i)

regression analyses. Purchase of the new brand was the dummy dependent variublc. These analyses were completed only for the HCP product category because of the confounding effects of the recent introduction o^ Staphene into the spray disinfectant product category. Previous choice behavior, exposure to commercials, and attitude change were the three types of independent variables included. Ttic analysis shown in Table 6 considered the preselection attitude change between the preadvertising and postadvcrtising measurements in the week of the choice. Only in the first week was attitude change during the television show significantly correlated with ehoice. The attitude change during selection and use was significant in each of the weekly analyses. Exposure variables were never significantly correlated with choice (His was rejected). Choice of the new brand in the third week was very significantly correlated with the variable indicating two previous purchases; Hi; was therefore not rejected. The prior attitude change was then altered to correspond to the period of selection and use of the brand chosen in the previous week (7" 2 to 7" 1). The results of this analysis {see Table 7) indicated that the prior attitude change was significantly correlated with ehoice in both of the weekly analyses. Hu was therefore not rejected. This set of analyses led to several conclusions. The attitude change during the period of selection and use following the choice was significantly correlated with ehoice in each regression analysis (Hu not rejected);

T =2 CoeffiVariable
cient [Standard error) .427 . ^ . F

r =4
Coejficii'ii I

r =6
Coefficieii I

{Standard

(Stand
ard

error) .415 -.106 (.050) 4.438

error)
.222

a Cli r-i CIIT > Clir 1 X CliT-i EXPT

n.s. - .094 (.048) 3,886 .384 (.064) 35.807 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.

EXPr-i
EXPT-1 AATTT-I.T

AATTr.Ti^i Overall F

n.s. n.s. n.s. - 1 . 0 9 9 10.894 n.s. (.333) - 1 . 3 1 4 21.370 -1.026 12.564 -.753 5,370 (.290) (.325) (.284) .071 ,084 .098 11.245 9,069 13.405

ATTITUDE CHANGE AND CHOICE OF A NEW BRAND

39 Table 7 REGRESSION MODEL TO PREDICT PURCHASE OF BRAND X CliT = a -h /3,C/(r-i -f- 82Chr-2 + ft(C//r_, X C/IT--) -h 0,EX T=4 Variable Coefficient
a

elusion was reached in the analysis of attitude change. The previous purchase pattern was significant in that two previous purchases of the brand were significantly correlated with purehase of the new brand during the current period. The results indicate that after two previous purchases the probability of repeat choice was higher. This may have been caused by a trial purehase followed by a repeat purehase and favorable attitude change during the intervening week. This would also explain the pattern of significance ofthe preselection attitude change.

r =6
F 4.092 Coefficient .173 n.s. n.s. .307 (.058) F

SUMMARY
The results of the comparison of various forms of the additive attribute model were essentially the same as those achieved previously by other researchers [12, 18, 19]. The form with the best predictive power used City Block distance measurement, attribute importances weighted by subjects, and ideal amounts assumed to be the maximum level of all attributes. An important departure from past research was the use of normalized attitude values (see [19] for a similar approach). This form ofthe model uses the relative attitudes toward eaeh of the brands and allows eomparison of attitudes across subjects and over time. Additional predictive accuracy may be gained through the use of normalized beliefs and attribute importances. Investigation of this issue is left to future researeh [4]. The existence of attitude change with respect to the new brand was veritied through the support of Ki. The hypothesis of an attitude change with respect to existing brands (HO was rejeeted, however. This overall ehange in attitude toward the new brand was not shown to be related to subjects' demographic, general produet usage charaeteristics, or the number of times they saw the commercial for the new brand (H3, H,, H5, He, H7 were rejected). Support of Hs indicated that this attitude change was correlated with the number of times the subject chose the new brand during the experiment. Analysis of weekly attitude change showed that change in attitude with respect to the new brand during a time period was significantly correlated with previous change in the new brand attitude, choiee of the new brand, and exposure to advertising for the new brand (Hg, Hiu, and Hn were not rejected). Similar results were found through analysis of data for an existing brand. Analysis of choice indicated that preference was a better predietor than the multi attribute measure of affect. The attitude measure was a better predictor than previous ehoice, the new brand, or the brand to which the subject was previously most loyal, however (Hi.> and Hu were not rejected). The prediction accuracy was increased substantially when only "adoption" purchases were considered (Hu was not rejeeted). Analysis of the relationship between attitude ehange and choice of the new brand indicated that there was a

C/lT-l CflT-i Chr^i X C/iT-.i

EXPT

.3877 -.108 n.s, n.s.

-.539 (.221) --1.254 (.320)

27 .625

EXP T-l
EXPT-2 AATTT_2.T-\

n.s. n.s.
5.934

AATTr.r^t
R^

15.343 .070 8.016

n.s. -.599 (-249) -.787 (.334)

5 .791 5 .560
.096

Overall F

12 .504

significant change in attitude toward the new brand both before and after choiee ofthe new brand (Hu and Hu were not rejeeted). The attitude ehange following choice was greater atid more significantly correlated with the choice, however. Choice oi' the new brand on two previous occasions significantly increased the probability of choosing the new brand again (Hn was not rejected). In most cases exposure to the commercial was not significantly correlated with ehoiec ofthe new brand (His was rejected). The exposure to packages of the brand during the shopping trip may have outweighed the effects of exposure to the commercial. The experimental design did not allow the relative etlects of these variables to be tested.

CONCLUSIONS
The use of actual choice behavior and the analysis of the relationship between attitude change and choiee of a new brand at the individual level differentiate this study from previous research in the area. The question of whether attitude change precedes or follows behavior change is an interesting one, and these results indicate that attitude ehange does oecur at both points in time. The postchoice attitude change was greater, however. The specific cause of this change (additional information or cognitive dissonance) was not investigated here. Although the existence of the attitude ehange -ehoice relationship was verified in this study, the data for all subjects were pooled. There may be subsets of the population in which this relationship has a very different form or does not exist at all. The identification of groups for whom this relationship is different and further analysis of these separate groups is left to future research. The managerial usefulness of differentiated ap-

40

JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, FEBRUARY 1974

proaches to these groups would be significant, and it therefore seems to be a fruitful area for future attitude study. REFERENCES
1. Assael, H. and G. S, Day. "Attitudes and Awareness as Predictors of Market Share," Journal of Advertising Research, (December 1968), 3-10. 2. Bass, Frank M., Edgar A. Pessemier, and Donald R. Lehmann. "An Experimental Study of the Relationships Between Attitudes, Brand Preference and Choice," Behavioral Science, 17 (November 1972), 532^1. 3. Bass. Frank M. and W. Wayne Talarzyk. "An Attitude Model For the Study of Brand Preference," Journal of Marketing Research, 9 (February 1972), 93-6. 4. Bass, Frank M. and William L. Wilkie. "A Comparative Analysis of Atlitudinal Predictors of Brand Preference,' Instituie Paper No. 398, Institute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic, and Management Sciences, Krannert Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Purdue University, 1973. 5. Day, George S. Buyer Atiitudct and Brand Choice Behavior. New York: The Free Press, 1970. 6. Engel, James E., David T. Kollat, and Roger D. Blackwell. Consumer Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968, 7. Festinger, Leon. "Behavioral Support for Opinion Change," Public Opinion Quarterly, 29 (Fall 1964), 404-17. 8. Fishbein, Martin. "A Behavior Theory Approach to the Relations between Beliefs about an Object and the Attitude toward the Object," in Martin Fishbein, ed.. Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1967. 9. Ginter, James L. "A Study of Attitude Change and Choice Behavior During New Product Introduction in a Laboratory Setting," unpublished doctoral dissertatioti, Purdue University, 1972.

10.

and Frank M. Bass. "An Experimental Study of Attitude Change, Advertising, and Usage in New Product Introduction," Journal of Advertising, I (1972), 33 9. 11. Green, Paul E. and Frank J. Carmone. Muliidimensinnal Scaling and Related Techniques in Marketing Analysis. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1970. 12. Lehmann, Donald R. "Television Show Preference: Application of a Choice Model," Journat of Markeling Research, 8 (February 1971), 47-55. 13 _ _ _ _ "Choice Among Similar Alternatives: An Application of a Model of Individual Preference to the Selection of Television Shows by Viewers," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1969. 14. LoScutio, L. A. and R- PcrlofT. "InHuence of Product Preference on Dissonance Reduction," Journal of Marketing Research, 4 (August 1967), 286-90. 15. O Brien, Terrenee. ''Stages of Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Marketing Research, (August 1971), 283 90. 16. Pessemier, Edgar A , Phillip Burger, Richard Teach, and Douglas Tigert. "Using Laboratory Brand Preference Scales lo Predict Consumer I*urcliases," Institute Paper No. 221, Instilute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic, and Management Sciences, Krannert Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Purdue University, 1968. 17. Rosenberg, Milton J., Carl I. Hovland, William J. McGuire, Robert P. Abelson, and Jack W. Brehm. Attitude, Organization and Change. New Haven; Yale University Press, 1966. 18. Talarzyk, W. Wayne. "An Empirical Study of an Attitude Model for the Prediction of Individual Brand Preference for Consumer Products," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1969. 19. Winter, Frederick W., Jr. "A Laboratory Experiment of Individual Attitude Response to Adverlising Exposure," Journal of Marketing Research, 10 (May 1973), 130-40. 20. and James L. Ginter. "An Experiment in Inducing and Measuring Changes in Brand Alliludes," Proceedings. Fall Conference, American Marketing Association, 1971, 411-5.