Advertisement

Marketing Letters

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 473–485 | Cite as

The trustworthy brand: effects of conclusion explicitness and persuasion awareness on consumer judgments

  • Brett A. S. Martin
  • Carolyn A. Strong
Article

Abstract

Two studies examine how a consumer’s awareness of marketing tactics influences the effectiveness of conclusion explicitness advertising (implicit, open-ended or explicit, closed-ended conclusions). Study 1 shows that persuasion awareness and conclusion explicitness influence brand evaluations. Persuasion aware consumers prefer implicit conclusions in comparative advertising that allow them to decide which brand is superior, rather than explicit conclusions which state the superior brand. Persuasion unaware consumers show no difference for conclusion explicitness. Brand trust mediates the results. Study 2 demonstrates the robustness of these effects. Research contributions include persuasion awareness as a moderator of conclusion explicitness effects and the role of trust as a mediator. For managers, results show how implicit conclusions can improve the brand evaluations of persuasion aware consumers.

Keywords

Conclusion explicitness Persuasion awareness Trust Persuasion knowledge 

References

  1. Ahearne, M., Jelinek, R., & Jones, E. (2007). Examining the effect of salesperson service behavior in a competitive context. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(4), 603–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahluwalia, R., & Burnkrant, R. E. (2004). Answering questions about questions: a persuasion knowledge perspective for understanding the effects of rhetorical questions. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 26–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Bearden, W. O., Hardesty, D. M., & Rose, R. L. (2001). Consumer self-confidence: refinements in conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burnkrant, R. E., & Howard, D. J. (1984). Effects of the use of introductory rhetorical questions versus statements on information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1218–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Büttner, O., & Göritz, A. S. (2008). Perceived trustworthiness in online shops. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 7, 35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Campbell, M. C., & Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 292–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Campbell, M. C., & Kirmani, A. (2000). Consumers’ use of persuasion knowledge: the effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell, M. C., Mohr, G. S., & Verlegh, P. W. J. (2013). Can disclosures lead consumers to resist covert persuasion? The important roles of disclosure timing and type of response. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(4), 483–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chebat, J. C., Charlebois, M., & Gélinas-Chebat, C. (2001). What makes open vs. closed conclusion advertisements more persuasive? The moderating role of prior knowledge and involvement. Journal of Business Research, 53(2), 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chernev, A., Hamilton, R., & Gal, D. (2011). Competing for consumer identity: limits to self-expression and the perils of lifestyle branding. Journal of Marketing, 75(3), 66–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Darke, P. R., Ashworth, L., & Main, K. J. (2010). Great expectations and broken promises: misleading claims, product failure, expectancy disconfirmation and consumer distrust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(3), 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fitzsimons, G. J. (2008). Death to dichotomizing. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(June), 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: how people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(June), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 21(June), 70–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grewal, D., Kavanoor, S., Fern, E., Costley, C., & Barnes, J. (1997). Comparative versus noncomparative advertising: a meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing, 61(October), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gürhan-Canli, Z., & Maheswaran, D. (2000). Determinants of country of origin evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 96–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  19. Herbst, K. C., Finkel, E. J., Allan, D., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2012). On the dangers of pulling a fast one: advertisement disclaimer speed, brand trust, and purchase intention. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(5), 909–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kardes, F. R. (1988). Spontaneous inference processes in advertising: the effects of conclusion omission and involvement on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kardes, F. R., Kim, J., & Lim, J. S. (1994). Moderating effects of prior knowledge on the perceived diagnosticity of beliefs derived from implicit versus explicit product claims. Journal of Business Research, 29(3), 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirmani, A., & Zhu, R. (2007). Vigilant against manipulation: the effect of regulatory focus on the use of persuasion knowledge. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(November), 688–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu, W. (2008). Focusing on desirability: the effect of decision interruption and suspension on preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(4), 640–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Martin, B. A. S., Lang, B., & Wong, S. (2004). Conclusion explicitness in advertising: the moderating role of need for cognition (NFC) and argument quality (AQ) on persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 57–66.Google Scholar
  25. Martin, B. A. S., Gnoth, J., & Strong, C. (2009). Temporal construal in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 38(3), 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sawyer, A. G., & Howard, D. J. (1991). Effects of omitting conclusions in advertisements to involved and uninvolved audiences. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(November), 467–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schlosser, A. E., White, T. B., & Lloyd, S. M. (2006). Converting web site visitors into buyers: how web site investment increases consumer trusting beliefs and online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing, 70(April), 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stayman, D. M., & Kardes, F. R. (1992). Spontaneous inference processes in advertising: effects of need for cognition and self-monitoring on inference generation and utilization. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(2), 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consumer Research Group, QUT Business SchoolQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Cardiff Business SchoolCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations