The above advert is for an over the counter headache remedy
called ‘Head On’. The advert has been joked about on YouTube extensively for
its irritating repetition of the phrase ‘Head On – apply directly to the
forehead’, with one user even looping the video multiple times to use as a joke
to annoy people. It could be argued that regardless of people’s opinion of the
advert, the fact that is it repetitive means it will be remembered, which in
turn means it is effective. However, there is research which suggests
otherwise; in other ways the advert can be seen as highly ineffective.
The advert clearly uses the technique of repetition, which has been found to be
successful in increasing liking of something due to the mere exposure effect
(Zajonc, 1968). However, subsequent research has discovered that people will
eventually get bored of a repeated message and will become more motivated to
argue against it, making said message less persuasive. Schumann, Petty and
Clemons (1990) acknowledged this in a paper which set out to examine how
variation of adverts could be more effective – the ‘repetition-variation hypothesis’.
In Schumann et al.’s (1990) study, 294 participants were
assigned to either high or low personal relevance advertisements and either
high or low cosmetic variation (same or different) advertisement groups. They
were also put into groups for amount of repetitions of the advert (4 and 8
being moderate and high respectively), making the study a 2x2x2 design. They
were shown short TV program segments separated by 20 ads lasting 22-25 seconds
each, and were then asked to complete a questionnaire measuring the dependent
variables (most importantly, attitude towards the advertising campaign).
Results showed that generally, when an advert was repeated,
attitudes towards it were less favourable in the condition where there was no
variation in comparison to the condition where the advert was varied over
showings, particularly in the low relevance condition (p < .04). As the table below illustrates, significant variation
effects were present for moderate exposures of the advert in terms of attitude
towards the advertising campaign and the product itself.
These results led Schumann et al. (1990) to conclude that
varying an advert (for example, cosmetic variation) that is shown many times will
increase its favourability amongst viewers, and prevent them from becoming
tired of the same repeated advert. Head on could perhaps use this technique by
having different phrases about the product as a voiceover rather than the same
one, or perhaps different people saying the phrase in whilst applying the
product, instead of the same woman repeating the sentence.
References
Schumann, D. W., Petty, R. E., & Clemons, D. S. (1990). Predicting the effectiveness of different strategies of advertising variation: A test of the repetition-variation hypotheses. Journal of Consumer Research, 192-202.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 9(2p2), 1.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.