Abstract
Rhetorical figures can be effective means in the persuasion process. Traditionally, rhetorical figures are subdivided into schemes (i.e., superficial deviations such as rhyme) and tropes (i.e., meaningful deviations such as metaphors and puns). This paper reports of an experiment and interviews on the effects of verbal and visual schemes and tropes (versus non-rhetorical figures) in magazine advertisements on the attitude towards the ad. A taxonomy consisting of 9 categories (verbal versus visual non-rhetorical figures, schemes, and tropes) was used, and 4 ads per category (36 in total) were each presented to 79 participants (non-students). The results showed, amongst others, that the attitude towards ads with visual tropes was higher than towards ads without rhetorical figures. If and how the attitude towards ads with tropes differs from the attitude towards ads with schemes remains to be investigated.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Berlyne, D. E. (1971), „Aesthetics and psychobiology,“ Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.
Corbett, E. P. J. and R. J. Connors (1999), “Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student,” Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford.
Dingena, M. (1994), “The Creation of Meaning in Advertising. Interaction of Figurative Advertising and Individual Differences in Processing Styles,” Thesis Publishers, Amsterdam.
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. London, New York: Routledge.
Jackson, S.; O’Keefe, D. J. and S. Jacobs (1988), “The Search for Reliable Generalizations about Messages: A Comparison of Research Strategies,” in: Human Communication Research, 15, 127–142.
Ketelaar, P. E.; Van Gisbergen, M. S. and J. A. M. Bosman (2004), “Open and Closed Advertisements: Moderating Effects of Comprehension on Appreciation,” in: Neijens, P.; Hess, C.; Van den Putte, B.; Smit, E. (2004) (eds.): Content and Media Factors in Advertising, Het Spinhuis Publishers, Amsterdam, 51–61.
Kisielius, J. and B. Sternthal (1984), “Detecting and Explaining Vividness Effects in Attitudinal Judgments,” in: Journal of Marketing Research, 21(1), 54–64.
Leigh, J. H. (1994), “The Use of Figures of Speech in Print Ad Headlines,” in: Journal of Advertising, 23(2), 17–33.
McQuarrie, E. F. and D. G. Mick (1992), “On Resonance: A Critical Pluralistic Inquiry into Advertising Rhetoric,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 180–197.
McQuarrie, E. F. and D. G. Mick (1996), “Figures of Rhetoric in Advertising Language,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 424–438.
McQuarrie, E. F. and D. G. Mick (1999), “Visual Rhetoric in Advertising: Text-interpretive, Experimental, and Reader-response Analyses,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 37–54.
McQuarrie, E. F. and D. G. Mick (2003a), “The Contribution of Semiotic and Rhetorical Perspectives to the Explanation of Visual Persuasion in Advertising,” in: Scott, L. M.; Batra, R. (2003) (eds.): Persuasive Imagery. A Consumer Response Perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, London, 191–221.
McQuarrie, E. F. and D. G. Mick (2003b), “Visual and Verbal Rhetorical Figures under Directed Processing versus Incidental Exposure to Advertising,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 579–587.
Meyers-Levy, J. and P. Malaviya (1999), “Consumers’ Processing of Persuasive Advertisements: An Integrative Framework of Persuasion Theories,” in: Journal of Marketing, 63, 45–60.
Mothersbaugh, D. L.; Huhmann, B. A. and G. R. Franke (2002), “Combinatory and Separative Effects of Rhetorical Figures on Consumers’ Effort and Focus in Ad Processing,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 589–602.
Phillips, B. J. (2000), “The Impact of Verbal Anchoring on Consumer Response to Image Ads,” in: Journal of Advertising, 29(1), 15–24.
Phillips, B. J. and E. F. McQuarrie (2002), “The Development, Change, and Transformation of Rhetorical Style in Magazine Advertisements 1954–1999,” in: Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 1–13.
Shepard, R. N. (1967), “Recognition Memory for Words, Sentences, and Pictures,” in: Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 156–163.
Sperber, D. and D. Wilson (1995 [1986]), „Relevance. Communication & cognition,“ Blackwell Publishers, Oxford (GB), Cambridge (VS).
Tanaka, K. (1992), „The pun in advertising: A pragmatic approach,“ in: Lingua, 87, 91–102.
Tanaka, K. (1994), „Advertising Language. A Pragmatic Approach to Advertisements in Britain and Japan,“ Routledge, London, New York.
Van Driel, K. (2002), „Psychology of entertainment,“ University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
Van Mulken, M. (2003), “Analyzing Rhetorical Devices in Print Advertisements,” in: Document Design, 4(2), 114–128.
Van Mulken, M.; Van Enschot, R. and H. Hoeken (2005), “Levels of Implicitness in Magazine Advertisements: An Experimental Study into the Relationship between Complexity and Appreciation in Magazine Advertisements,” in: Information Design Journal + Document Design, 13(2), 155–164.
Yus, F. (2003), „Humor and the search for relevance,“ in: Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1295–1331.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag ∣ GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Enschot, R., Hoeken, H., van Mulken, M. (2006). Rhetoric in advertising: attitudes towards schemes and tropes in text and image. In: Diehl, S., Terlutter, R. (eds) International Advertising and Communication. DUV. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-8350-5702-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-8350-5702-2_8
Publisher Name: DUV
Print ISBN: 978-3-8350-0455-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-8350-5702-9
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)