This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 28 May 2015, At: 12:17

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Advertising
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujoa20

The Role of Consumer Involvement in Determining

Cognitive Response to Broadcast Advertising
Laura M. Buchholz & Robert E. Smith
Published online: 29 May 2013.

To cite this article: Laura M. Buchholz & Robert E. Smith (1991) The Role of Consumer Involvement in Determining Cognitive
Response to Broadcast Advertising, Journal of Advertising, 20:1, 4-17, DOI: 10.1080/00913367.1991.10673202

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1991.10673202

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 The Role of Consumer Involvement
in Determining Cognitive Response
to Broadcast Advertising
Laura M. Buchholz
Robert E. Smith
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
Laura Buchholz is a graduate student at
Indiana University.
Robert E. Smith (Ph.D., University of
Wisconsin-Madison) is associate professor of
marketing, Indiana University.
The authors thank Frank DiSilvestro and Dan
McQuiston for their contribution to this study.
This paper investigates the TOle of involvement in determining consumer response to mdio and
TV commercials. After reviewing relevant Iiterarure, a summary model that focuses on the
amount and type of cognitive elabomtion and subsequent effects on consumer recognition of
the bmnd and message points is presented. Hypotheses are developed that predict intemction
effects between the type of bTOadcast media and the level of consumer involvement in the
commercial. A study is conducted where mode of presentation (mdio versus television) and
level of consumer involvement now versus high) are experimentally manipulated. Analysis of
variance of the data prooide geneml support for the hypotheses. Other results and the impli-
cations for advenising research and practice are discussed.
Advertising research has provided considerable evidence regarding consumer re-
sponse to persuasive messages. Numerous models that explain consumers' cog-
nitive, affective, and conative reactions have been advanced and tested. As theories
become more detailed, greater discrimination is possible in understanding the
important dimensions of consumer response. However, further research is needed
on many fronts, including investigations of differences that exist in message pro-
cessing among alternative advertising media. For example, two types of broadcast
media-radio and TV-have obvious differences that could seriously affect the
way consumers process persuasive messages. Despite calls for research on these
issues (Edell and Keller 1989; Greenwald and Leavitt 1984), few models distinguish
between radio and TV message processing.
The importance of these broadcast media to advertisers is evident by the fact
that they spent $26 billion on TV and $7.7 billion on radio in 1988 (Marketers
Guide To Media 1989). In addition, these media are often used together in "co-
ordinated media campaigns" (Edell and Keller 1989). To most effectively com-
municate their message, creative teams and media planners need to understand
differences in the way consumers process radio and TV commercials. Knowledge
of the particular strengths and weaknesses of different broadcast media would
represent a practical advance of marketing communications theory. Accordingly,
the purpose of this paper is to review issues relevant to processing differences
between broadcast media and to advance a summary model of the important
dimensions. In addition, a study is reported that tests the key propositions of the
model.
Background Literature
The most basic difference between radio and TV is the number of sensory modes
involved. Radio messages consist of only auditory stimuli and audience processing
consists of only listening. TV messages project both auditory and visual stimuli,
and audience processing consists of listening and viewing.
©]oumal of Advenising
Volume 20, Number 1,1991, Pages 4-17
 Processing Auditory Information-
Consumer Listening. Listening was de-
fined by Barker (1971) as: "the selective
process of attending to, hearing, under-
standing, and remembering aural sym-
bols." This definition focuses upon
cognitive processes that register, com-
prehend, and retain auditory informa-
tion. The memory component was
considered necessary by Barker (1971)
because without some lasting vestige of
the input stimuli, no real evidence of the
entire listening process exists. It is also
important to note that people vary in
their motivation and ability to perform
the necessary steps in listening, making
this a complex process not just a simple
skill (Barker 1971). In addition, Spear-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
ritt (1962) notes that it is important to
distinguish between hearing, which is
the "mere physiological reception of
sound," and listening, which involves
both attending to the sounds and at-
taching meanings to them.
Research on listening frequently ex-
amines comprehension and/or recall of
auditory stimuli, and results indicate
that listening can be a difficult and de-
manding task. For example, Nichols and
Stevens (1957) tested the ability of peo-
ple to understand and remember what
they hear. Results showed that imme-
diately after listening to someone, the
average person forgets about one half
of what was just said. After two months
elapsed time, the average individual
could recall about 25 percent of what
was said. Another study by Nichols
(1957) showed that while 40 percent of
a white collar worker's day was devoted
to listening behaviors, this group lis-
tened at only a 25 percent rate of ef-
ficiency.
Bostrom and Waldhart (1980) used
three different measures to test listen-
ing abilities: (1) short-term listening, (2)
short-term listening with rehearsal, and
(3) lecture comprehension. These
measures were then compared with
scores measuring general mental abil-
ity. Results showed that short-term lis-
tening was a good predictor of oral
performance; short-term listening with
rehearsal had no apparent relationship
to any other measures; and lecture-
comprehension listening proved to be
a good predictor of written test scores.
Based on these results, Bostrom and
Waldhart (1980) believe that current
conceptualizations of listening behav-
ior need to be revised, and better meas-
urements of listening abilities need to
be developed. In addition, closer atten-
tion needs to be paid to the listener's
short-term-memory processing in or-
der to resolve the many conflicting
claims about listening behavior.
. . . two types of
broadcast media-
radio and TV-have
obvious differences
that could seriously
affect the way
consumers process
persuasive messages.
In a similar study, Bostrom and
Bryant (1980) tested a hypothesis com-
paring short-term listening and short-
term-memory-processing structures.
The results showed that short-term lis-
tening is distinguishable from the usual
definitions of listening (an "ability" to
hear; to attend to) and is different from
the kinds of storage processes usually
described as short-term memory. Ex-
actly how the process works in rela-
tionship with other memory functions
was not discussed and awaits further
investigation.
Other studies have compared the ef-
fectiveness of listening to that of vis-
ually presented information. For
example, Pauk (1984) found that "re-
membering what you have heard is
usually more difficult than remember-
ing what you have read." This may be
due to the fact that one can slow down
the rate of reading if necessary, but can
not slow down the rate of listening.
Another explanation is that seeing the
visual image of printed words processes
information at a deeper level than
merely hearing words. In the latter case,
words often are not given enough time
to allow for the construction of a men-
tal image.
Similarly, Siegel and Allik (1973)
compared visual and auditory process-
ing effects on children's and college stu-
dents' short-term memory. Modality of
stimuli (visual or auditory) and modality
of recall cue (visual or auditory) were
both manipulated. Results showed that
the recall of visually presented stimuli
was superior to the recall of auditory
stimuli, while the effect of the modality
of the recall cue was negligible. Siegel
and Allik (1973) concluded that visual
stimuli facilitate performance because a
picture can be stored simultaneously in
both a visual and an auditory-verbal
processing system.
As the review indicates, several as-
pects of listening research are disturb-
ing from the advertiser's point of view.
First, this topic has received limited at-
tention from researchers. Existing
models are still in the development
stage and often do not consider the
impact of important mediating factors
such as the individual's motivation and
opportunity to process auditory stim-
uli. Moreover, very little research on
consumer listening has appeared in
major marketing and advertising jour-
nals. This is an important gap, since
listening to a person may involve dif-
ferent processing mechanisms than lis-
tening to a radio (since visual contact
with the source is not an issue in the
latter case). Another problem is that
much of the research designed to meas-
ure a person's listening ability seems to
be a better indicator of their general
mental ability or skills; valid and reli-
able indicators of listening have yet to
be developed. Certainly, more research
needs to be conducted so that adver-
tisers can better understand and man-
age the auditory component of broad-
cast messages.
Processing Visual Stimuli-Con-
sumer Viewing. With TV; advertisers
have the opportunity to combine vis-
ual and verbal stimuli when construct-
ing the persuasive message. Although
5
 significant research has been conduct-
ed on consumer processing of visual
and verbal material, most of that re-
search has used print rather than
broadcast stimuli. For example, Child-
ers and Houston (1984) studied the ef-
fects of pictures-only versus pictures
and words in print advertisements.
They found that pictorial material con-
veying brand/product class-associa-
tions is recalled better than corre-
sponding verbal-only material when
each is processed at a sensory level (a
shallow, non-stringent form of message
processing). They also found that
greater sensory discrimination of pic-
tures improves recall over correspond-
ing verbal-only material when each is
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
processed at a sensory level.
However, the picture-superiority ef-
fects were eliminated when material is
processed at a semantic level (an in-
tense form of elaboration pertaining to
the meaning of words or pictures). In-
deed, verbal and verbal-plus-visual
stimuli were equivalent when pro-
cessed at the semantic level.
In a continuation of this research,
Houston, Childers, and Heckler (1987)
investigated consumers' memory for
messages in which the semantic con-
tent of the pictorial material is (1) con-
sistent with the verbal copy (verbal copy
and picture present the same product
attributes) or (2) discrepant from the
verbal copy (verbal copy states one at-
tribute while picture shows a different
attribute). In three separate experi-
ments they also manipulated another
independent variable: interactive pic-
tures (pictures that pictorially represent
the brand name and product class) ver-
sus non-interactive pictures (pictures that
bear no relationship to the brand name
and may or may not represent the
product class). Results indicate that in-
teractive ads were superior to non-in-
teractive ads. Also, using an interactive
picture to convey a different product
attribute than that presented in the
verbal copy used in the ad (discrepant
information) increases the audience's
recall of the material.
MacInnis and Price (1987) reviewed
research on imagery processing (a pro-
6
cessing mode in which the information
received is represented in a gestalt or to-
tal-picture form in the active memory),
and contrasted it with discursive pro-
cessing (a more abstract, symbolic, lan-
guage-like form of processing). They also
suggested some important ways in which
imagery impacts consumers' learning,
choices, and satisfaction. The authors
found that imagery is a process, not a
structure, and that imagery affects many
cognitive, physiological, and behavioral
phenomena. In addition, they found that
imagery enhances incidental learning
and helps individuals to anticipate the
future. MacInnis and Price (1987) con-
clude that imagery can help consumers
with product evaluations, purchase in-
tentions, remembering consumption,
and intentions to repurchase.
Although significant
research has been
conducted on
consumer processing
of visual and verbal
material, most of that
research has used
print rather than
broadcast stimuli.
Thus, research in print advertising
indicates that visual stimuli (and/or
creating a visual image from stimuli) en-
hance message processing and recall
under some conditions. While this
stream of research is more advanced
than the listening research, it also has
some limitations. Since most of this re-
search has been conducted with print
stimuli, it is reasonable to question
whether the same effects will occur
with broadcast ads where the consum-
er has little control over the transmis-
sion rate. Finally, it is time to begin
developing advertising-response theo-
ries that specifically account for pro-
cessing differences between radio and
TV ads.
Consumer Response to
Broadcast Advertising
Background. According to the elab-
oration likelihood model (Petty and
Cacioppo 1983), consumers can follow
two routes to persuasion. "Central
route" processing occurs when in-
volved consumers seek product-related
information to diligently consider.
Here, cognitive response to the adver-
tising message has been shown to me-
diate subsequent brand attitudes (Petty
and Cacioppo 1983; Petty, Cacioppo,
and Schumann 1983). "Peripheral
route" processing occurs when unin-
volved consumers lack sufficient mo-
tivation to pay close attention to
message points. Here, brand and ad at-
titudes have been shown to be me-
diated by incidental factors (e.g.,
attractiveness of source) or by affective
reactions (e.g., mood states). Other
models of advertising response (Green-
wald and Leavitt 1984; MacInnis and
Jaworski 1989) suggest that superficial
cognitive effects can be expected even
at lower levels of involvement. Given
the importance of cognitive effects in
understanding consumer processing,
the model developed below focuses on
the cognitive dimensions of consumer
response to broadcast advertising.
Cognitive Response to Broadcast
Advertising. Only one previous study
could be found that compared cogni-
tive response to radio and TV ads. Edell
and Keller (1989) present a concep-
tualization and empirical test of how
consumers process ads in these two
media. In their model, "TV and radio
advertising differ in the content, num-
ber, and relationship of the sensory
modes the viewer encounters" (Edell
and Keller 1989, p. 150).
At first glance, it seems that TV is
destined to be a more effective advertis-
ing medium than radio. This conclusion
is based on several facts. First, TV has
two sensory-input modes, compared to
only one for radio, allowing TV to dis-
seminate more information in the same
amount of time. Second, TV makes use
of the powerful visual mode and, as
 noted above, researchers often find a
picture-superiority effect over verbal-
only stimuli. Third, TV can create ver-
bal/visual synergy by coordinating both
stimuli (i.e., "consistent" ads).Finally, TV
viewers seem less likely to be engaged in
a distracting secondary task like driving,
talking to a friend, studying, or reading
the paper.
However, Edell and Keller (1989)
question whether TV will always be su-
perior to radio as a persuasive medium.
They note that while TV does provide
more information to the viewer, this in-
formation may require more effort to
process. As a result, "it is unclear
whether consumers will extract more or
less information and meaning from TV
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
ads than from their radio counterparts"
(Edell and Keller 1989, p. 150). Second,
Edell and Keller note that while some
studies show that multiple sensory
modes facilitate learning others have
found an interference effect. Third, re-
search has shown that it takes time (up
to 1.5 seconds) to switch from process-
ing visual to verbal inputs, which may
lessen the impact of TV vis-a-vis radio
(Edell and Keller 1989). Finally, Edell and
Keller note that concurrent distractors
(e.g., discrepant verbal and visual com-
ponents) can inhibit cognitive elabora-
tion and critical thinking. These con-
ceptual considerations are bolstered by
findings that auditory presentation of
verbal information can indeed result in
superior retention (Murdock 1967, 1968,
1969).
What factors might mediate the im-
pact of radio commercials versus TV
commercials and allow advertisers to
sort out the conflicting theories and
results noted above? Several factors
seem to playa role including: the type
of ad (consistent or discrepant; Hous-
ton et al. 1987), whether the consumer
is processing the commercial for the
first time or has seen it before (Edell
and Keller 1989), the existence of a sec-
ondary (distracting) task (Macinnis and
Jaworski 1989), stimulus complexity
(Leigh and Menon 1987), and the level
of consumer involvement (Greenwald
and Leavitt 1984; Krugman 1965). The
goal of this paper is to examine the role
of consumer involvement in the pro-
cessing of broadcast commercials.
Consumer Involvement
Media Differences in Involvement.
Krugman (1965) was one of the first to
note the important differences that ex-
ist in consumer processing of print ver-
sus broadcast advertising. In developing
his "low-involvement-learning hypoth-
esis," Krugman (1965) observed that
print media require the active partici-
pation of the audience since reading
printed words is a relatively demanding
cognitive task. Indeed, the "informa-
tion-processing-parsimony hypothesis"
(Holbrook 1978) suggests that con-
sumers attempt to minimize demand-
ing cognitive endeavors and would be
unlikely to read information of little
interest to them. Greenwald and Leav-
itt (1984) also note the limited ability
of print media to get a meaningful re-
sponse from uninvolved consumers:
"with rapid page turning and only par-
tial scanning of page contents ... , crit-
ical cues that could attract higher
involvement may simply be missed"
(Greenwald and Leavitt 1984, p. 590).
Thus, print media have limited oppor-
tunity to influence uninvolved or pas-
sive audience members who are
disinclined to read the message.
Conversely, the nature of broadcast
media makes them much better suited
for influencing passive consumers. The
verbal information is spoken and can,
therefore, impact consumers who are
not actively seeking exposure to the ad
message. Similarly, TV graphics can
convey information in an interesting
and effective manner that requires little
cognitive effort from the viewer. Thus,
while consumers rarely read print ads
that do not interest them, they are often
exposed to (i.e., see and hear) broadcast
commercials for products with which
they are not involved. Indeed, this sit-
uation was recognized as the basis for
Krugman's (1965) low-involvement-
learning model which he specifically
limited to broadcast media.
As a result, the consumer's level of
involvement with the ad, brand, or
product category can be expected to
play a major role in determining the
amount and type of cognitive response.
Of significant importance is the fact that
both low- and high-involvement con-
sumers can be impacted by broadcast
commercials, though perhaps, in dif-
ferent ways. This proposition is con-
sistent with Wright's (1973) model that
the consumer's motivation to cogni-
tively process message points mediates
subsequent cognitive and affective re-
actions.
Defining Consumer Involvement. In-
volvement is a construct that has been
defined and operationalized in many dif-
ferent ways. While no consensus ex-
ists, many researchers define involve-
ment as the extent to which a stimulus
or task is relevant to the consumer's
existing needs and values (Macinnis and
Jaworski 1989; Petty and Cacioppo
1983; Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann
1983; Wright 1973). Laczniak, Muehl-
ing, and Grossbart (1989) reviewed past
conceptualizations in advertising stud-
ies and established two basic compo-
nents of involvement in advertising. As
consumers become more involved they
should (1) pay more attention to the ad
message, and (2) focus more on brand
processing as opposed to nonbrand
processing. Since this conceptualiza-
tion was specifically developed for ad-
vertising research, and captures the
essential components of involvement,
it will be used as the conceptual basis
for operationalizing involvement in this
study.
Effects of Consumer Involvement. In
many advertising response models, the
degree of consumer involvement is ex-
pected to influence both the amount
and the quality of the consumer's cog-
nitive response (Wright 1973, 1974,
1975; Greenwald and Leavitt 1984;
Macinnis and Jaworski 1989; Edell and
Keller 1989). In terms of the amount
of cognitive response, it is clear that
involved consumers engage in more ef-
fortful information-search and acqui-
sition strategies. When actively
searching for product-related infor-
mation, interest in brand advertising is
7
 at a maximum, as is the desire to think
about the ad, its claims, and the brand.
In addition to increased cognitive ef-
fort, most advertising models predict a
qualitative difference in message pro-
cessing as involvement increases. Spe-
cifically, involved consumers are more
likely to process brand information at
a "deep leve1." As consumers begin to
engage in deeper processing, they start
to actively evaluate the message. These
cognitive evaluations can be directed
toward the importance, persuasive-
ness, or relevance of the ad's content,
and are often measured by counting
the number of support arguments or
counterarguments (MacInnis and Ja-
worski 1989). For example, in a natur-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
alistic viewing environment, just getting
the consumer to evaluate the contents
of the ad is a major accomplishment
that goes beyond superficial attention
or association.
Beyond evaluative responses to ad
stimuli are even deeper and more pow-
erful elaborative processes. In the
MacInnis and Jaworski (1989)model the
deepest form of consumer processing
is represented by "constructive pro-
cessing." Here, the consumer goes be-
yond the ad's content and connects it
in some meaningful way to his or her
own life. Examples of these construc-
tive elaborations include thinking up
novel uses for the product and/or
imagining the product in use.
Past models of involvement have also
given "deeper" processing status to
"connective elaborations" (as opposed
to evaluative processes). Krugman
(1965) suggested that at the highest lev-
el of involvement consumers produce
"personal connections:' or "bridging
experiences:' whereby they relate the
ad content to meaningful aspects of
their own life. A well-known model of
consumer involvement by Greenwald
and Leavitt (1984) also makes this dis-
tinction: "In Krugman's conception of
high involvement, the audience expe-
riences 'personal references' or 'con-
nections' to the advertising message.
This corresponds well to our highest
level of involvement, elaboration"
(Greenwald and Leavitt 1984, p. 590).
8
Accordingly, the term elaboration as
used in this paper will refer to the spe-
cific consrrucnve process of producing
personal connections and not to eval-
uative processes like support arguing
and counterarguing.
Summary Model of
Cognitive Response
to Broadcast Advertising
Based on the review above, a summary
model of consumer response to broad-
cast advertising can be proposed. Es-
sentially, when consumers are exposed
to a TV or radio commercial, process-
ing begins at relatively superficial levels
like orienting reactions, selective atten-
tion, feature discrimination, or cate-
gorization (Greenwald and Leavitt 1984;
MacInnis and Jaworski 1989). While
print media may not get far (or any-
where) in terms of processing depth for
low-involvement consumers (unwilling
to read), broadcast media can be missed
"only by walking out of the room or
by turning down the sound" (Green-
wald and Leavitt 1984, p. 590). This
conclusion may be somewhat overstat-
ed, since distracting secondary tasks or
nonattention to the stimulus (e.g., clut-
ter, day dreaming) could create condi-
tions similar to print (i.e., non-
registration of the information) for
some viewers.
Notwithstanding this possibility,
broadcast media are expected to have
some meaningful cognitive impact on
a greater number of non-interested
consumers. In this respect, low-in-
volvement consumers could engage in
superficial processing consistent with
Petty and Cacioppo's (1983) "periph-
eral route" to persuasion. Here, low-
involvement audience members focus
on executional aspects of the ad like
celebrity endorsers and source attrac-
tiveness rather than processing brand-
related data. More recent models
(MacInnis and Jaworski 1989) describe
six levels of processing, and suggest that
some superficial brand processing can
occur even at low levels of involve-
ment. If consumers are moderately in-
volved with the advertising for a brand
they will move beyond superficial anal-
ysis and perform more sophisticated
processing including comprehension of
ad points and evaluative/comparative
processing (MacInnis and Jaworski
1989). At high levels of involvement,
consumers will elaborate message claims
by forming personal connections,
bridging experiences, or imagining the
product in use (Greenwald and Leavitt
1984; Krugman 1965; MacInnis and Ja-
worski 1989).
As consumers move to deeper levels
of processing, recognition, under-
standing, and memory of the input
stimuli are enhanced (Greenwald and
Leavitt 1984; Krugman 1965). This
means that as consumers become more
involved they can better understand
and remember brand-related informa-
tion. In addition, MacInnis and Jawor-
ski (1989) state that connective
elaborations produce "self-generated
persuasion" resulting in strong beliefs
about the brand. These conclusions in-
tegrate well with Craik and Lockart's
(1972) original exposition of the levels-
of-processing framework where se-
mantic processing is expected to im-
prove the memory of input stimuli. This
is an important point because adver-
tisers are very concerned with con-
sumer's recall and recognition of ads
and frequently measure them with day-
after recall and recognition measures.
Thus, understanding how involvement
and broadcast media interact to effect
consumer's recognition of ad points
would be a practical addition to adver-
tising response models.
Hypotheses
Cognitive Elaboration of Advertis-
ing. When consumer involvement is
low, there is little motivation to cog-
nitively elaborate message claims. Ac-
cordingly, low-involvement consumers
could be expected to rely on more su-
perficial processing techniques (Green-
wald and Leavitt 1984) and/or to be
influenced by peripheral ad factors
(Petty and Cacioppo 1983). In these
circumstances, little evidence of elab-
orative processing is expected in
 consumers' cognitive responses. Spe- tions of high involvement, con- Hz: In conditions of low consumer
cifically, when only rudimentary pro- sumers exposed to radio involvement, TV commercials
cessing occurs, there should be few commercials should produce a will have Significantly greater
personal connections in response to significantly greater number of cognitive impact (in terms of
either radio or TV commercials. personal connections than recognition of brand and ad
However, at high levels of consumer those exposed to TV commer- points) than will radio com-
involvement, greater motivation exists cials. mercials. However, in condi-
to cognitively elaborate message claims. tions of high consumer in-
If these effects occur, important im-
In this case, radio seems to offer more volvement, there will be no sig-
plications exist for advertising effec-
opportunity to generate meaningful nificant difference in the cog-
tiveness. As noted above, visual stimuli
elaborations than TV Without strong nitive impact (recognition of
enhance the consumer's ability to pro-
visual cues to guide them, involved brand and ad points) of TV ver-
cess superficial aspects of ad informa-
consumers are likely to generate their sus radio commercials.
tion. It seems reasonable to extend this
own visualizations/connections/elabo-
proposition to broadcast commercials
rations in response to radio ads. These Methodology
as well. Thus, when consumers lack
highly personal, self-based elaborations
sufficient motivation to elaborate mes-
are generally expected to provide a very To test the hypotheses, a 2 X 2 factorial
sage points, the cognitive impact of
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015

deep level of processing and to produce design was used. The main independ-
commercials will be determined by rel-
a powerful cognitive impact. For ex- ent variables were type of broadcast
atively superficial processing, since few
ample, Edell and Keller (1989, p. 151) media (radio or television) and level of
elaborations occur (H j ) . In these cases,
note that " ... self-generated visualiz- consumer involvement (low or high).
picture-superiority effects are predict-
ations from the radio ad may be more
ed, since feature discrimination of mes- Target Commercials. To test the hy-
personally relevant than the TV ad's
sage points should be aided by visuai potheses, a commercial was needed that
video." Accordingly, when highly in-
stimuli. Radio, with only one sensory had several important characteristics.
volved consumers are exposed to radio
mode, will have a more difficult time First, the commercial should contain
commercials, they should freely gen-
attracting attention and creating mean- verbal material that was relevant for
erate powerful self-based cognitive
ingful feature recognition among low- either broadcast mode. Second, the
elaborations of message points.
involvement consumers. This reason- commercial should be new to the sub-
TV, however, seems to place two lim-
ing is consistent with previous findings jects to avoid previous exposure effects.
itations on the amount and type of cog-
of picture-superiority effects at super- Third, the commercial should be re-
nitive elaboration performed. First, TV
ficial processing levels in print media alistic and considered reasonably effec-
may offer less opportunity for cognitive
(Houston, Childers, and Heckler 1987). tive to make the test fair. Fourth, the
elaboration because by presenting more
However, when consumers are high- commercial should be for a product that
information (two sensory input modes),
ly involved in the ad message the su- the subject pool (college students) uses
it places greater demands on the lim-
perficial processing advantage of TV frequently and considers buying to
ited-capacity short-term memory. In
should be counterbalanced by the elab- make the experiment realistic. A target
this case, processing TV commercials
orative advantages of radio (H j ) . In the ad that met these criteria was selected
requires more of the short-term mem-
sequence of advertising response, TV from 45 award-winning regional com-
ory's capacity, thereby reducing pro-
gains its advantage in the early stages mercials as reviewed by Advertising Age
cessing resources available for
of processing, while radio gains its ad- (1986).
elaborations. Second, because of the
vantage at the deeper levels. When The test commercial selected was a
visual cues provided, TV seems to en-
consumers go all the way to elaborative 3D-second informational computer
courage ad-based elaborations as op-
processing, TV is still expected to re- commercial for a major national brand.
posed to the more potent self-based
alize advantages in the early stages, but, As summarized in the Exhibit, the
elaborations.
these gains will be offset by radio's ad- commercial had both strong verbal copy
When considered together, the re-
vantages at the deeper levels. Thus, (which mentioned several important
lationships reviewed above suggest an
measures of ad impact, like recognition product attributes), and strong visual
interaction effect between the type of
of the brand or ad points, should show elements (that were consistent with the
broadcast media and the level of the
no difference in the effectiveness be- verbal copy), making it potentially ef-
consumer's involvement in the ad.
tween radio and TV commercials, for fective as either a radio or TV spot.
HI: Under conditions of low in- highly involved consumers. Again, in- The commercial was three years old
volvement there should be no teraction effects are predicted between and had been played only in west coast
difference in the number of level of involvement and type of media markets. None of the subjects reported
personal connections between with respect to ad and brand recog- seeing the commercial previous to the
radio and TV Under condi- nition. experiment.

9
 EXHIBIT
Summary of Experimental Advertisement
Summary of Visual Stimuli:
1. Man standing facing chalkboard. His left
hand is drawing a profile of a man, his
right hand is writing an equation.
2. Zoom to right hand calculating a
mathematical equation.
3. Zoom to left hand drawing the eye area
of the portrait.
4. Scan chalkboard from left to right
showing man drawing and solving a
mathematical problem at the same time.
S. Picture of computer monitor with
multicolored geometric ball bouncing
around the screen.
6. Butterfly flapping its wings now on
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
computer screen.
7. Man playing saxophone with horizontal
lines and dots flashing in the background.
8. Return to chalkboard and man. Pan out
to show complete drawing and equation.
To enhance external validity, the tar-
get commercial was preceded by a 60-
second beer commercial and followed
by a 3D-second wine commercial. This
three-spot commercial pod was then
inserted into a four-minute section of
video material taped from Entertain-
ment Tonight. The sequence of expo-
sure was: three minutes of program
content (discussing Carol King's mu-
sical career), two-minute commercial
pod (beer commercial, target commer-
cial, wine commercial), one minute of
concluding comments from the pro-
gram (summary and sign off).
Type of Broadcast Media. Manipu-
lation of the media variable was very
direct. In the TV treatment, the vi-
deotape was played on a large TV mon-
itor so subjects could see and hear the
stimuli. For the radio treatment, the
audio portion of the tape was trans-
ferred directly to an audio cassette to
produce a high quality message. This
cassette was played on a large portable
radio similar to the type used by many
students.
Level of Involvement. Manipulation
of the involvement variable was accom-
10
Verbal Stimuli:
"Imagine a brain whose left side is as
brilliant as its right. A brain as artistic
as it is logical.
That can calculate ...
and create.
Such a brain exists in the remarkable
new ...
Apple II OS. Brilliant graphics ...
brilliant color ...
brilliant sound.
To help you use both sides of the
most personal computer of all-your
mind."
plished by giving different experimen-
tal instructions to the groups. As noted,
the conceptualization of Laczniak,
Muehling, and Grossbart (1989) sug-
gests that two factors must be manip-
ulated to create differences in
involvement (the amount of attention
paid to the commercial, and the amount
of brand processing performed). Ac-
cordingly, high-involvement subjects
were given instructions to maximize at-
tention to the ad and the amount of
brand processing:
Thank you for your time. This is a
study about how consumers use ad-
vertising information to form opin-
ions about products. You will be
shown (hear) a segment from the
program Entertainment Tonight that
contains a block of three advertise-
ments. The second commercial is for
a computer. We would like you to
carefully evaluate the brand of com-
puter advertised, so pay close atten-
tion to the second commercial. To
make your evaluation as realistic as
possible we would like you to imag-
ine that you are about to purchase
a computer and are considering var-
ious brands. Therefore, after you
view (listen to) the ad, think about
how the advertised brand would suit
your own computing needs. In oth-
er words, evaluate the product ad-
vertised as you actually would before
buying one.
To create a low-involvement condi-
tion, subjects were given instructions
to minimize attention to the target
commercial. Specifically, they were di-
rected to evaluate the beer and wine
commercials that surrounded the com-
puter spot:
Thank you for your time. This is a
study about the advertising of al-
coholic beverages on shows watched
(listened to) by teenagers. We are
trying to determine if you believe it
is appropriate for beer and wines to
be advertised on programs like En-
tertainment Tonight. To accomplish
this, you will be shown (hear) a seg-
ment that we taped from Entertain-
ment Tonight that includes a block
of three advertisements. The first ad
is for a brand of beer and the third
ad is for a brand of wine. Your task
is to view (listen to) this program
segment and determine if these al-
cohol ads are appropriate for teens
to watch (hear). Therefore, after
viewing (listening to) the alcoholic
beverage ads, think about whether
they are suitable for programs with
teenage viewers in the audience.
To verify that these instructions pro-
duced the intended results, manipu-
lation check measures were included in
the study. Laczniak, Muehling, and
Grossbart (1989) recommend testing
involvement manipulations by using a
5-item scale to measure the amount of
attention allocated to the target ad, and
a 4-item scale to measure the degree of
brand processing. These measures have
been examined for validity and relia-
bility (Laczniak, Muehling, and Gross-
bart 1989), and represent a method for
directly checking involvement manip-
ulations. These scales required only
slight modification for use with broad-
cast media and were placed at the end
of the questionnaire to minimize sen-
sitizing subjects.
 Dependent Variables. Cognition list-
ing. Subjects were asked to list all
thoughts, reactions and/or ideas that
went through their minds while watch-
ing (or listening) to the computer ad.
This technique is a common method
for extracting consumer cognitive re-
sponse to advertising, and has been
used in many studies (see Wright 1980
for a review). As usual, three minutes
were allowed for subjects to complete
this task.
Each of the resulting "primary
thoughts" was coded on three specific
dimensions. First, was the type of re-
sponse: product-related, message-relat-
ed, source-related, or unrelated. Second
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
was the intent of the thought: positive,
negative, neutral, curiosity. These two
coding schemes were selected because
they have provided useful categories in
past cognitive-response studies (Smith
and Swinyard 1983, 1988, MacKenzie
and Lutz 1989). Third, each thought
was examined for the presence of per-
sonal connections or elaborations. Ad-
vertising elaborations or "bridging
experiences" occur when consumers
relate the product or ad to meaningful
aspects of their own lives.
Definitions of these variables (shown
in the Appendix) were given to two
graduate students who served as judges.
Each learned the necessary definitions
and then practiced the coding scheme
on example statements. Finally, each
judge was given a photocopy of the
subject's cognitive responses (to avoid
revealing the treatment condition) for
final coding. Interjudge agreement was
86.3 percent for the type of thought,
88.0 percent for the intent of the
thought, and 92.4 percent for the pres-
ence of personal connections. Disa-
greements were resolved by a third
judge.
Recognition of brand name. After the
subjects completed the cognition-list-
ing task, they were given a recognition
measure for the brand name of the ad-
vertised computer. This measure was a
multiple-choice question followed by
four alternatives. Credit was given for
correct answers while no credit was
given for incorrect or missing answers.
Recognition of commercial points.
Subjects were then tested on their abil-
ity to recognize the product-related in-
formation provided in the computer
commercial. This recognition test con-
sisted of five multiple-choice questions
regarding the content of the commer-
cial. Each question was followed by four
alternatives, one of which was correct.
Again, credit was given to each correct
response while no credit was given for
incorrect responses or unanswered
questions.
Attitude Toward the Advertisement.
This variable was included in the study
because it has been shown to mediate
commercial effectiveness in some sit-
uations (MacKenzie and Lutz 1989).
Subjects were asked to rate their atti-
tude toward the commercial on three
semantic-differential scales (extremely
good-extremely bad, extremely pleas-
ing-extremely irritating, extremely in-
teresting-extremely uninteresting).
These scales were selected because they
have been used effectively in past A ad
studies (MacKenzie and Lutz 1989).
Procedure. Eighty undergraduate
seniors at a large midwestern univer-
sity were given course credit for com-
pleting the study. Subjects were
randomly assigned to one of the four
treatment conditions. Results of ques-
tions designed to verify that students
were appropriate subjects showed that
82.5 percent currently used personal
computers, and 97.5 percent planned
to use a personal computer in the next
year. In addition, 10 percent currently
owned their own computer and 17 per-
cent planned to buy one within the
next year. This suggests that college
seniors are a prime target market for
personal computers, and thus, were ac-
ceptable subjects for the study.
Upon arrival at the experiment
room, subjects were read a statement
designed to reduce demand character-
istics. Then, subjects both read and lis-
tened to the experimental instructions
noted above. At this point, the subjects
viewed or listened to the program and
commercials. Viewing/listening took
place in groups of ten subjects spaced
far apart. After the media exposure,
subjects completed the cognition-list-
ing task and filled out the remaining
questionnaire items. The entire pro-
cedure took approximately 20 minutes
per group and the same two graduate
assistants administered each of the eight
groups. Total elapsed time for the ex-
periment was about three hours. After
completion of the testing process, stu-
dents were excused and given no fur-
ther information regarding the purpose
of the experiment until all subjects had
finished.
Validity. Three precautionary steps
were taken to reduce demand effects.
First, the introduction contained a dis-
claimer stating that the researchers were
in no way connected with any broad-
cast programs and that the tone (po-
sitive or negative) of the subjects'
responses was not important; only
honest opinions mattered. Second, the
order of scale responses (positive to
negative) was alternated in order to
avoid "yea saying" response patterns.
Third, subjects were not aware that dif-
ferent media and involvement treat-
ments were applied to other groups.
Finally, students were asked if they
guessed the purpose of the study. No
student was able to guess the true pur-
pose of the study.
Reliability. Coefficient alpha was com-
puted for the multiple-item scales. Re-
sults show that for the 3-item A ad scale,
a = .92; for the 4-item brand-process-
ing scale, a = .90; and for the 5-item
attention-to-the-ad scale, a = .95.
These values indicate the scales had
high internal consistency.
Analysis and Results
Manipulation Check. The 5-item
consumer-attention scale and the 4-item
brand-processing scale were analyzed
using ANOVA. Results, shown in Ta-
ble 1, indicate that the main effect for
consumers' attention to the ad was sig-
nificant (p < .001) between the low- and
high-involvement groups. Brand-pro-
cessing responses were also significant-
ly different between involvement
11
 groups (p < .001). In addition, group TABLE 1
means showed that low-involvement ANOVA Summary for Manipulation Checks
subjects were below the midpoint of
the scales for both attention (3.39) and
Mean:
brand processing (3.01). Conversely,
high-involvement subjects were above Low High Sum of
the midpoint of the scales for attention Measure Involvement Involvement Squares DF F Sig.
(5.62) and brand processing (5.02). 5-item
In addition to the manipulation- Attention-to-Ad
check items, examination of the cog- Scale 3.39 5.62 99.90 110.47 .000
nitive responses also supports the va- 4-item
lidity of the involvement treatment. As Brand-Processing
shown in Table 1, low-involvement Scale 3.01 5.02 80.50 1 65.02 .000
consumers generated Significantly more Total Thoughts 4.75 6.10 36.45 1 15.68 .000
unrelated thoughts, while high-in- Product Thoughts .65 2.68 82.01 1 28.55 .000
volvement subjects generated signifi- Message Thoughts 2.50 3.30 12.80 1 4.05 .048
cantly more total thoughts, product 49.49 .000
Unrelated Thoughts 1.50 0.00 49.49 1
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015

thoughts, and message thoughts. To-

gether these findings provide strong
support for the success of the involve-
ment manipulation.

Hypothesis Testing. The number of

elaborations and the ad/brand-recog-
nition measures were subjected to anal-
ysis of variance. The results, shown in TABLE 2
Table 2, indicate that the predicted in- Analysis of Variance Results
teraction effect is marginally significant
(p < .10) for the number of elabora-
Sum of Mean Sig.
tions, and significant (p < .05) for the of F
Source of variation Squares DF Square F
ad- and brand-recognition measures.
These findings are taken as moderate For Number of elaborations:
support for H[ and support for Hz. Main Effects: 5.125 2 2.563 2.585 .082
However, because of the directive a. Media 4.513 1 4.513 4.55 .036
nature of the hypotheses, an appro- b. Involvement .613 1 .613 .62 .435
priate and more sensitive analysis tech- 2-Way Interactions (a X b): 2.813 1 2.813 2.83 .096
nique is a priori contrasts. Here, the Explained 7.938 3 2.646 2.66 .054
key comparisons stated in the hypothes- Residual 75.450 76 .993
es are tested using the t statistic. Hy- Total 83.388 79 1.056
pothesis 1 predicted that there would be For Brand Recognition:
no difference in the number of elabora- Main Effects: 1.250 2 .625 5.58 .005
tions between TV and radio for low- a. Media .450 1 .450 4.02 .048
involvement consumers. As shown in b. Involvement .800 1 .800 7.15 .009
Table 3, the cell means are similar and 2-Way Interactions (a X b): .450 1 .450 4.02 .048
the a priori contrast is not significant as Explained 1.700 3 .567 5.07 .003
predicted in H l- Hypothesis 1 also pre- Residual 8.500 76 .112
dicted that radio subjects would pro- Total 10.200 79 .129
duce Significantlymore elaborations than For Ad Recognition:
TV subjects under conditions of high
Main Effects: 46.925 2 23.463 29.26 .000
involvement. As shown in Table 3, the 11.36 .001
a. Media 9.113 1 9.113
cell means are in the expected direction b. Involvement 37.813 1 37.813 47.15 .000
and the a priori contrast is Significant at
2-Way Interactions (a X b): 3.613 1 3.613 4.505 .037
the p < .01 level.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that in the Explained 50.538 3 16.846 21.01 .000
Residual 60.950 76 .802
conditions of low involvement, TV
Total 111.488 79 1.411
commercials would generate more

12
 brand and ad recognition than radio TABLE 3
commercials (i.e., picture-superiority ef- A Priori Contrasts Analyses
fects at superficial processing levels). As
shown in Table 3, the cell means are
in the expected direction and the a Mean: Contrast t
priori contrasts are significant for both Measure Radio TV Value Value DF Sig.
brand recognition (p < .01) and ad rec- Elaborations
ognition (p < .001). Hypothesis 2 pre- For Low Involvement .55 .45 0.100 0.315 76 NS
dicted no difference in the brand- and Elaborations
ad-recognition scores for radio and TV For High Involvement 1.10 .25 0.850 2.698 76 .009
subjects who have high involvement Brand Recognition
with the commercials. This was be- For Low Involvement .60 .90 - .300 - 2.837 76 .006
cause TV's cognitive advantages at su-
Brand Recognition
perficial processing levels would be For High Involvement .95 .95 0.000 0.000 76 NS
offset by radio's cognitive advantages at
Ad Recognition
the elaborative processing levels for in- 3.00 - 1.100 - 3.884 .000
For Low Involvement 1.90 76
volved consumers. As shown in Table
Ad Recognition
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015

3, the cell means are similar and fail to -

For High Involvement 3.70 3.95 - .250 .883 76 NS
approach statistical significance as pre-
dicted in H".
The effects of the media-by-involve-
ment interactions on the dependent TABLE 4
variables of elaborations, and brand and ANOYA Summary for Post Hoc Analysis
ad recognition are summarized in Fig-
ures 1-3. Together these findings are Mean: Sum of
considered to support the hypotheses. Measure Radio TV Square DF F Sig.
Post Hoc Analysis. In addition to for- Message Thoughts 2.38 3.43 22.05 1 6.98 .010
mal hypothesis testing, a post-hoc anal- Product Thoughts 2.00 1.33 9.11 1 3.17 .079
ysis was conducted by examining the Positive Thoughts 2.40 3.20 12.80 1 2.97 .089
cognitive responses for significant (AN-
Negative Thoughts 1.50 0.00 49.49 1 .43 NS
OYA) main effects. Results showed in-
Attitude Toward the Ad 1.35 2.08 99.90 1 12.44 .000
teresting patterns of response on two
dimensions: (1) the focus of cognitive
response and, (2) the favor ability of they did find that TV subjects had more
cognitive response. As shown in Table positive attitudes toward the commer-
4, subjects exposed to TY commercials cials than radio subjects. This is im-
portant because A ad has been shown to
FIGUREl
produced significantly more message-
related thoughts and marginally fewer mediate brand attitudes in a variety of Media by Involvement Interaction
product-related thoughts. This indi- situations (MacKenzie and Lutz 1989; Effect for Elaborations
cates that the focus of consumer's cog- MacKenzie, Lutz, and Belch 1986;
nitive responses reflect more of a brand- Mitchell and Olson 1981). Examining
processing orientation for radio com- this issue in terms of the data collected 1.5
'"
c::
mercials and more of a message-pro- here (Table 4), TY subjects developed .9
...,

-:
cessing orientation for TV commercials. significantly more favorable attitudes ...'"0
1.0
In terms of the favor ability of cog- toward the ad than radio subjects, rep- ~
nitive response, analysis (shown in Ta- licating the findings of Edell and Keller ~
~~
'0
ble 4) indicates that, in this study, (1989). ...
CIJ
subjects exposed to TV commercials .c .5
reported more positive thoughts, Limitations Z
E
;:l ~.
though this effect was only marginally
significant (p < .10). No difference was Before discussing the implications of 0.0
found in the number of negative this study it is important to properly Low High
thoughts between the two broadcast delimit its scope. First, the results re- Involvement Involvement
media. While Edell and Keller (1989) ported here were obtained after only
did not extract cognitive responses, one exposure to the target ad. Thus,

13
 FIGURE 2 Third, this study investigated cog-
Media by Involvement Interaction nitive reactions to broadcast commer-
Effects for Brand Recognition cials. Affective responses such as
emotions or mood states may show dif-
ferent response patterns. The extent to
TV which radio commercials can evoke
systematically depending on type of
media and level of involvement. More-
over the differences in personal con-
nections predicted subsequent
differences in consumers' recognition
of brand and message points. This

7'
...... 1.0
means that the amount of personal
0 elaborations of an affective nature vis-
u
[I) a-vis TV is another area where future elaboration is an important dimension
t:: .75
0 research is needed. of consumer cognitive response that
:~ Finally, this study employed a con- should be studied in much more depth.
0 .50 venience sample of college seniors. It Especially under conditions of high
...u
~ is possible that this group has better involvement, the amount and nature of
-0 .25 cognitive skills than average con- cognitive elaboration is crucial. Future
t::
...
C'll
lXl sumers, which may enhance cognitive research is needed on this topic to pro-
0.0 processing, especially for subjects in the vide more specific scaling techniques
Low High low-involvement treatment. If true, for personal connections. For example,
Involvement Involvement however, this artifact would make it it is common to use the cognition-list-
more difficult to observe the effects hy- ing method to collect consumers' cog-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015

FIGURE 3 pothesized in this study. nitive responses, but analyzing those

Media by Involvement Interaction responses for personal connections is
Effects for Ad Point Recognition Implications rare. In this study, the mere number of
personal connections was found to be
Past Research. A review of past re- important. Future research should in-
......
0 search on listening and viewing dem- vestigate other meaningful aspects. For
u 4.0

:P
[I)
§ knowledge of how consumers process
:~ 3.0 ~~
t>Il
0 important dimension of consumer re-
...u 2.0
..
~
t::
'0 1.0
p..
'"0
<:: 0.0
Low High
Involvement Involvement
the involvement/media interactions
found here can be predicted with con-
fidence only during early exposure to
an advertising campaign. What hap-
pens to consumer elaboration and rec-
ognition of brand and copy points after
multiple exposure is certainly a worthy
area for future research along the lines
of Edell and Keller (1989).
A second limitation of this study is
that mediating factors other than con-
sumer involvement were held constant.
It is possible that variables such as de-
gree of message consistency, presence
of distracting secondary tasks, or dif-
ferences in message execution could in-
teract with involvement to form
systematic response patterns. Again,
this is considered a fertile area for fu-
ture broadcast advertising research.
onstrated significant gaps in our
broadcast advertising. Listening is a very
sponse to radio and TV commercials,
but little empirical or theoretical work
has been reported in the marketing and
advertising journals. WhUe some inter-
esting research has developed for verbal
and visual processing for print ads, tests
using broadcast media are just begin-
ning. Given the importance of broad-
cast media it is clear that substantially
more research is needed. Future broad-
cast-advertising research is needed in
order to develop a conceptual model of
processing differences. This will allow
advertisers to better understand and re-
spond to consumers' information-pro-
cessing needs.
Personal Connections. The degree of
cognitive elaboration a consumer un-
dertakes with regard to an advertising
message has been theorized to signifi-
cantly impact other important re-
sponse variables like recognition of
brand and ad points. This study found
that the amount of cognitive elabora-
tion, in the form of personal connec-
tions or bridging experiences, did vary
example, self-based connections have
been hypothesized as more personally
relevant and thus, could have a differ-
ent effect than cue-based elaborations.
This is a fertile area for future research
and would represent continued devel-
opment in the coding of cognitive re-
sponses.
Involvement Manipulation Checks.
Another implication drawn from this
research regards the involvement ma-
nipulation and the scales recommended
by Laczniak, Muehling, and Grossbart
(1989) to validate involvement manipu-
lations. The scales, slightly altered to
adapt them from print ads to broadcast
commercials, performed well. Coeffi-
cient alphas were high for both the 5-
item ad-attention scale and the 4-item
brand-processing scale. These findings
are similar to those reported by La-
czniak, Muehling, and Grossbart (1989),
and extend the external validity of the
scales to media other than print. In ad-
dition, the results from the cognitive-re-
sponse analysis showed that high-
involvement subjects generated signifi-
cantly more total thoughts, more prod-
uct thoughts, more message thoughts,
and fewer unrelated thoughts than did

14
 the low-involvement subjects. These re-
sults using a different scaling method add
covergent validity to the Laczniak,
Muehling, and Grossbart (1989) scales.
This suggests that researchers seeking to
manipulate audience involvement can ef-
fectively validate their treatment by us-
ing these scales.
Involvement by Media Effects. Re-
sults of this study showed that at low
levels of consumer involvement, ad
processing is superficial, and few per-
sonal connections occur. In these cases,
TV, with dual input modes, can be ex-
pected to achieve more cognitive im-
pact on consumers, resulting in greater
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
recognition of brand and message
points. Thus, TV with visual and au-
ditory stimuli appears well suited to at-
tract meaningful attention to the
commercial, even from uninvolved
consumers. While the processing at this
level is superficial, it can nonetheless
be effective, especially with repetition
over time. Particularly in product cat-
egories where brand differences are
small and the consequences of a non-
optimal choice minimal, superficial rec-
ognition of brand and ad points could
play a significant role in determining
choice. In these cases the higher cost
of TV commercials seems reasonable
as they provided significantly greater
recognition of brand and ad points than
the radio commercials tested here.
However, when consumers are in-
volved, the cognitive impact of radio
versus TV messages changes signifi-
cantly. Here, radio was shown to pro-
duce significantly more personal
elaborations than the TV commercials.
These results are thought to be caused
by the greater opportunity to elaborate
radio claims made possible by the fact
that no visual stimuli are presented to
(1) use short-term-memory capacity,
and (2) cue elaborations to visual ele-
ments that may not be personally rel-
evant to the consumer. When
consumers are motivated to elaborate
message claims, recognition of brand
and ad points for radio commercials is
equivalent to that of TV Here, the cost
differences between radio and TV may
not be warranted, suggesting that radio sumers exposed to TV commercials
might be a very cost-effective medium produced significantly more message
for advertisers promoting products and thoughts, but significantly fewer prod-
services to involved consumers. uct thoughts. This suggests that the
dual input modes of TV can be useful
in attracting attention, but that this in-
Managing Involvement. Research has
creased focus on the ad can come at
demonstrated that consumer involve-
the expense of brand-processing activ-
ment is a dynamic concept that can
ities. For advertisers traversing the pe-
depend on aspects of the situation, the
ripheral route, this is not necessarily a
product, the advertisement, or the con-
disadvantage since ad cues, or affective
sumer's response process. In addition,
moods created, could be the basis for
involvement can be temporary and/or
an effective campaign.
recurring (e.g., buying a new car every
However, when the advertiser seeks
five years), or can have its own life cycle
to follow the central route to persua-
(e.g., hobbies in which one loses inter-
sion, the situation changes. Here, high-
est). This makes managing involvement
involvement consumers seeking to dil-
a challenging task for advertisers.
igently consider product-related infor-
Nevertheless, some generalizations can
mation do not need to be cajoled into
be drawn. First, some products are nat-
listening/viewing. In these cases, heavy
urally more involving than others.
use of executional elements to attract
Those with high cost, high perceived
attention is not necessary and may in-
risk, a lengthy life expectancy, or sig-
terfere with brand processing since
nificant consequences of a sub-optimal
some attention is diverted to the exe-
choice can be expected to receive more
cutional aspects. Thus, advertisers
attention and elaboration in the con-
seeking to follow the central route to
sumer's decision-making process. For
persuasion are advised to include radio
products that fit these criteria, the use
in the media mix, since it can facilitate
of radio in the media mix should be
brand processing.
considered, since consumers will often
Another main-effect finding of in-
be motivated to engage in elaborative
terest was that consumers liked the TV
processing.
commercial better regardless of in-
Products that are less naturally en-
volvement. This result may simply in-
gaging (i.e., low cost, low risk, short life
dicate that the commercial (originally
expectancy, little consequence of a sub-
designed for TV) was better suited to
optimal choice) are less likely to induce
that medium. However, the commer-
elaborations in the decision-making
cial was specifically chosen because it
process. Here, two recommendations
had reasonably strong radio presence
can be made. First, higher degrees of
and was very effective in the high-in-
involvement can be attained by creat-
volvement radio group. Also, the same
ing commercials that are themselves in-
effect was reported by Edell and Keller
volving. Such commercials would be
(1989) using different commercials. An-
especially useful for advertisers of low-
other explanation is that in conditions
involvement products that include ra-
of low involvement, consumers enjoy
dio as a significant element in the media
processing TV commercials more than
mix. Radio commercials that stimulate
radio commercials because: (1) more
consumers to elaborate the copy points
sensory inputs are stimulated, (2) TV
and the brand name can be very effec-
spots are more entertaining, or (3) the
tive. Second, the results here indicate
TV spots require little cognitive effort
that TV is a very effective medium for
to process superficially (even though
advertising products to low-involve-
more information is involved). Thus,
ment consumers.
when involvement is low, TV is not
only better liked, it is also more effec-
Post Hoc Analysis. Post hoc analysis tive. This combined effect suggests that
of media main effects found that con- TV is better suited for promoting
15
 products of relatively little interest to
consumers.
At higher levels of involvement, ra-
dio requires more cognitive effort to
elaborate the claims (since no visual
cues are provided) and consumers may
find this task effortful, and thus, less
enjoyable (thereby causing lower Aads
for radio subjects). However, this may
not be a negative effect in the long run
since the diligent cognitive labor may
generate more relevant and long-last-
ing impressions of the brand and/or
ad. In this study the better liked TV
ads were no more effective than radio
ads under conditions of high involve-
ment. While these explanations are
somewhat speculative at this point, this
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015
issue is important enough to warrant
future research.
Conclusion. After finding little pre-
vious research on consumer-processing
differences between radio and TV
commercials, a preliminary model of
how consumers respond cognitively to
broadcast commercials was developed.
A test of the model showed that the
level of consumer involvement played
a significant role in determining the
number of personal connections and
subsequent recognition of brand and
copy points. While this is thought to
be a useful point of departure, consid-
erably more research is needed to de-
velop a complete model of broadcast
advertising differences. Continued re-
search along these lines will aid creative
teams and media planners in their ef-
forts to produce and deliver the most
effective marketing communications
possible.
References
'~dtlertising Age Best TV Commercials of the
Year-1986," Fred Danzig, ed., Chicago:
Crain Communications Inc.
Barker, L. L. (1971), Listening Behatlior, Pren-
tice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Bostrom, R. N. and C. L. Bryant (1980), "Fac-
tors in the Retention of Information Pre-
sented Orally: The Role of Short-Term
Listening," The Western Journal of Speech
16
Communication, 44 (Spring), 137-145.
Bostrom, R. N. and E. S. Waldhart (1980),
"Components in Listening Behavior: The
Role of Short-Term Memory," Human
Communication Research, 6, (3, Spring), 221-
227.
Childers, T. L. and M. J. Houston (1984),
"Conditions for a Picture-Superiority Ef-
fect on Consumer Memory," Journal of
Consumer Research, 11 (September), 643-
654.
Craik, Fergus 1. M. and R. A. Lockhart (1972),
"Levels of Processing: A Framework for
Memory Research," Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behatlior, 11 (6), 671-
684.
Edell, Julie A. and Kevin L. Keller (1989),"The
Information Processing of Coordinated
Media Campaigns," Journal of Marketing
Research, 26 (May), 149-163.
Greenwald, A. G. and C. Leavitt (1984). "Au-
dience Involvement in Advertising: Four
Levels," Journal on Consumer Research, 11
(june), 581-592.
Holbrook, Morris B. (1978), "Beyond Atti-
tude Structure," Journal of Marketing Re-
search, 15 (November), 546-556.
Houston, M.J., T. L. Childers, and S. E. Heck-
ler (1987), "Picture-Word Consistency and
the Elaborative Processing of Advertise-
ments," Journal of Marketing Research, 24
(November), 359-369.
Krugman, Herbert E. (1965), "The Impact of
Television Advertising: Learning Without
Involvement," Public Opinion Quarterly, 29
(Fall), 349-356.
Lacmiak, Russell N., Darrel D. Muehling, and
Sanford Grossbart (1989), "Manipulating
Message Involvement in Advertising Re-
search," Journal of Adtlertising, 18 (2), 28-
38.
Leigh, James H. and Anil Menon (1987), "Au-
dience Involvement Effects on the Infor-
mation Processing of Umbrella Print Adver-
tisements," Journal of Adtlertising, 16 (3), 3-
12.
MacInnis, D. J. and L. L. Price (1987), "The
Role of Imagery in Information Processing:
Review and Extensions," Journal of Con-
sumer Research, 13 (March), 473-491.
MacInnis, D. J. and Bernard ], Jaworski (1989),
"Information Processing from Advertise-
ments: Toward an Integrative Framework,"
Journal of Marketing, 53 (4), 1-24.
MacKenzie, Scott B. and Richard J. Lutz (1989),
''An Empirical Examination of the Struc-
tural Antecedents of Attitude Toward the
Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context,"
Journal of Marketing, 53 (April), 48-65.
MacKenzie, Scott B., Richard J. Lutz, and
George E. Belch (1986), "The Role of At-
titude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Ad-
vertising Effectiveness:A Test of Competing
Explanations," Journal of Marketing Re-
search, 23 (May), 130-143.
Marketers Guide To Media (1989), Gerri Lee,
ed., New York, NY: A/S/M Communica-
tions.
Mitchell, Andrew A. and Jerry C. Olson
(1981), ''Are Product Attribute Beliefs the
only Mediator of Advertising Effects on
Brand Attitude?" Journal of Marketing Re-
search, 18, (August), 318-332.
Murdock, B.B., Jr. (1967), ''Auditory and Vis-
ual Stores in Short Term Memory," Acta
Psychologica, 27 (Topic 4), 316-324.
Murdock, B. B., Jr. (1968), "Serial Order Ef-
fects in Short Term Memory," Journal of
Experimental Psychology MonographSupple-
ment, 76 (April), 1-15.
Murdock, B. B., Jr. (1969) "Where or When:
Modality Effects as a Function of Temporal
and Spatial Distribution of Information,"
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Be-
hatlior, 8 (June), 378-383.
Nichols, R. G. (1957), "Listening is a Ten Part
Skill," Nations Business, 45 (July), 4.
Nichols, R. G. and L. A. Stevens (1957), "lis-
tening to People," Hartlard Business Retliew,
35 (September-October), 90-97.
Pauk, Walter (1984), "Forgetting and Remem-
bering," How To Study In College, Hough-
ton Mifflin Co., 82-113.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1983),
"Central and Peripheral Routes to Persua-
sion: Application to Advertising" in Ad-
tlertising and Consumer Psychology, Larry
Percy and Arch G. Woodside, eds., Lex-
ington, MA: Lexington Books.
Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, and Dav-
id Schumann (1983), "Central and Periph-
eral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness:
The Moderating Role of Involvement,"
Journal of Consumer Rese,arch, 10 (Septem-
ber), 135-146.
Siegel, A. Wand J. P. Allik (1973), ''A De-
velopmental Study of Visual and Auditory
Short-Term Memory," Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behatlior, 12 (August),
409-418.
Smith, Robert E. and William R. Swinyard
(1983),''Attitude-Behavior Consistency: The
Impact of Product Trial Versus Advertis-
ing," Journal of Marketing Research, 20,
(August), 257-267.
Smith, Robert E. and William R. Swinyard
(1988), "Cognitive Response to Advertising
and Trial: Belief Strength, Belief Confi-
dence and Product Curiosity," Journal of
Adtlertising 17 (3), 3-14.
Spearritt, Donald (1962), Listening Compre-
hension-A Factorial Analysis, Melbourne:
G. W Green & Sons PTY. LTD.
Wright, Peter L. (1973), "The Cognitive Pro-
cesses Mediating Acceptance of Advertis-
ing," Journal of Marketing Research, 10,
(February), 53-62.
Wright, Peter L. (1974), ''Analyzing Media Ef-
fects on Advertising Responses," Public
Opinion Quarterly, 38 (Summer), 192-205.
 Wright, Peter L. (1975), "Factors AffectingRe- Wright, Peter L. (1980), "Message Evoked Receilied NOliembeT 22,1989. Revision accepted
sistance to Advertising," Journal ofConsum- Thoughts: Persuasion Research Using fOT publication FebTuary 7. 1990.
er ReseaTch, 2 (June), 1-9. Thought Verbalizations," Journal of Con-
sumer Research, 7 (September), 151-175.

APPENDIX
Coding Definitions for Cognitive Responses

I. Type of Thought:
A. PTOduct-Related Thoughts. These thoughts refer to the brand or product class (computers).
They include:
1. Identification and lor evaluation of product attributes.
2. Statements related to the performance of the product.
3. Statements related to the consequences of using the product.
4. Questions about the brand or product class.
5. Statements indicating how the product could solve a problem.
B. Message-Related Thoughts. Any thought that identifies or evaluates execution aspects of the advertising message.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 12:17 28 May 2015

1. Statements regarding the effectiveness of the ad.

2. Statements expressing interest in the ad.
3. Questions about the ad.
4. Statements regarding attributes of the ad.
C. Source Related Thoughts. The source is defined as the perceived purveyor of the message. This category includes any thought
that relates to the credibility and/or effectiveness of the source of product information (references to the "advertiser" or the
"source"). In this study the source would be the sponsor/manufacturer (Apple referred to as a company rather than as a
product).
1. Statements regarding the perceived expertise of the source (i.e., the ability of the source to make accurate assertations).
2. Statements regarding the perceived trustworthiness of the source (i.e., the willingness of the source to make accurate
assertations).
3. Statements regarding the effectiveness of the source (i.e., the source's likability, similarity, confidence, status, etc.).
D. UnTelated Thoughts. All thoughts not fitting the above categories.
II. Intent of Thought:
A. Positive Statements. Any statement that is in favor of or otherwise supports the product/message/source.
B. Neutml Statements. Declarative statements regarding the product/message/source that do not indicate a favorable or
unfavorable intent.
C. Negatilie Statements. Any statement that is unfavorable toward the product/message/source. Any question that derogates or
challenges assertions made about the product/message/source.
D. CUTiosiry Statements. Any statement that expresses a desire for additional information about the product/message/source.
These statements are distinguishable from negative statements based on your judgment of the subject's intent.
III. Presence of Personal Connections:
Thoughts are considered personal connections if respondents connect the brand, product class, or elements in the advertisement
to aspects of their own life (e.g., "I thought about using the computer," or "This computer would be great for my accounting
problems)."

17