The
underwear advert for H&M above uses a huge range of persuasive techniques.
Fashion adverts often need to do this since the products they advertise have no
specific personal or opinionated attributions to their audience. The advert exploits
the fact that people tend to take interest in humans as sexual and fertile beings
(i.e. naked), as well as utilising the physically attractive-admirer altercast
technique. However, what stands out the most (along with the hundreds of other
adverts starring celebrities, star athletes and movie stars) is the use of the
high status-admirer altercast technique.
This
technique is used on the basis that we admire and seek to be like high-status
persons or win their approval in order to acquire the preferential treatment
they get. In this case, the star athlete, David Beckham, is used to advertise
H&M’s new underwear, enabling the advert to incorporate many techniques, particularly
the high-status admirer altercast.
Lefkowitz
and colleagues (1955) were one of the first to empirically test this in their
pedestrian violation study. They hypothesised and found that a naïve subject is
more likely to violate a prohibition (in this case, crossing a road when the
pedestrian traffic signal flashed ‘wait’) after watching a high-status person
(compared to a low-status person) violate it. Participants unknowingly stood
with a confederate at a crossing and were observed for any
prohibition-violating or conforming behaviour. Violators were defined as those
pedestrians reaching or passing the white line in the centre of the street
within the 40 seconds that the signal flashed ‘wait’. Perceived status was
manipulated through clothing changes, with high-status confederates dressed in
freshly pressed suits, shined shoes, white shirts, ties and straw hats (clothing
intended to typify a high-status person), and low-status confederates dressed
in well-worn scuffed shoes, soiled patched trousers and crumpled blue denim
shirts.
As shown above,
when a perceived high-status confederate was seen to violate the prohibition,
14% of pedestrians violated the signal forbidding movement across the road (in
comparison to 4% of those perceiving low-status confederates). Both
experimental groups violated the prohibition more than controls (those in the
condition with an absent confederate only violated the prohibition 1% of the
time, regardless of status), but those in the high-status condition violated
significantly more than both the low-status and the control conditions.
From this,
we can understand how an advert using a high-status, highly respected or
well-known person (in this case, a highly-admired professional athlete) will be
effective in persuading customers to purchase certain products. People are more
likely to succumb to these persuasive messages, even if the message is wrong,
not good for them, or violates a law.
Lefkowitz, M., Blake, R.R., & Mouton, J.S. (1955). Status factors in pedestrian violation of traffic signals. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 704-706.
Riana Mahtani
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.