Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Second-Order Conditioning Pair CS 1 with US Pair CS 2 with CS 1 CS 2 produces CR CS 1 serves as US for CS 2.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Second-Order Conditioning Pair CS 1 with US Pair CS 2 with CS 1 CS 2 produces CR CS 1 serves as US for CS 2."— Presentation transcript:

1 Second-Order Conditioning Pair CS 1 with US Pair CS 2 with CS 1 CS 2 produces CR CS 1 serves as US for CS 2

2 Blair & Shimp (1992) Unpleasant experience paired with music Brand paired with music

3 Design Pre-conditioning phase –Subjects listen to theme music –Sessions during bad weather –Usually, music induces mood, so US –But, here treat music as CS 1 and bad weather as US Conditioning phase –Fictitious sportswear brand paired with theme music –Brand is CS 2 Control group –Random pairing of CS 2 and CS 1 Test –Measure affect toward brand

4 Terminology Article uses older terminology –Music as US, not CS 1

5 Results Negative conditioning to brand in pre- conditioning group Music acquired negative affect Negative affect transferred to brand

6 Implications Music choice in advertising significant May have previously conditioned connotations –Enhance or impede intended effect –Transfer to brand Overshadowing effects –Popular music –More salient than brand (ignore CS)

7 US Pre-exposure Repeatedly present US More difficult to subsequently condition CS –US occurs without predictive stimulus

8 Second Order Classical US is affective state, mood, etc. CS1 is celebrity, expert, consumer, or TPO CS2 is brand

9 Celebrities Famous people Associations –Popular –Rich –Attractive

10 Experts Known or unknown –e.g., scientist, doctor, lawyer, mechanic, etc. Associations –Knowledge –Authorities

11 “Typical”Consumer Average shopper –Real or fake Association –Nothing to gain (leads to trust) –Credibility

12 Third Party Organizations Popular in advertising Independent organizations –Rank, rate, or promote a product Quality indicators

13 Effectiveness of TPOs Work through credibility vector Indicate quality –TPO won’t want to lose public opinion –Won’t endorse a poor product Good for –Products of high financial value and low psychological risk

14 Social Learning Theory Bandura Observational learning Attributes of model and learner

15 Characteristics Model –Rewardingness –Authority –Dominance –Similarity –Sincerity Learner –Uncertainty –Age –Sex

16 Operant Observe Reinforcement or punishment Imitate with expectation Generalized imitation

17 Attractiveness Important for –Celebrity endorsers Less important (but not ignored) for –Experts, typical consumers

18 Attractiveness Can act as US itself Innate predispositions Evolved –Health, genotype –Evolutionary psychology Mating, social interactions

19 Nature vs. Nurture Debate Is attractiveness/beauty learned or innate? Until early 1980s, common consensus was learned Langlois and collegues –Infant gaze studies –Tips to innate predispositions (with subsequent learning)

20 Attractiveness as US With actors and celebrities, usually attractive –Both the recognition of the individual and association with specific traits –Innate attractiveness Consider –Antonio Banderas –Danny DeVito Image:Danny_DeVito_2008.jpg

21 Cognitive Factor Attention and recall Celebrities, experts Associated with specific aspect of product –Athlete with sports car (fast) –Ex-drug addict with anti-drug campaign (credibility)

22 Appropriateness Any celebrity/expert for any product? Achieving a match Changes in celebrity/expert’s status? –e.g., O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson, Kobe Bryant, Madonna, Kate Moss, etc. –Associated with brand Change in brand status? –e.g., tobacco

23 Ohanian (1991) Attractiveness, expertise, and trustworthiness Use of product –For self or for gift Male or female consumer

24 Fictitious Pairings Celebrities and products Madonna and designer jeans John McEnroe and tennis rackets Tom Selleck and men’s cologne Linda Evans and perfume

25 Questionnaires Section 1 –Familiarity with celebrity? –Demographic information Section 2 –Credibility scale Section 3 –Subject’s likeliness to purchase product –For self or for gift

26 Subjects Residential neighborhoods Churches Graduate and undergraduate students

27 Results Age and gender No significant impact on evaluation of celebrities’ attractiveness, trustworthiness, or expertise Nor on likelihood to purchase a product promoted by the celebrity

28 Celebrity Differences John McEnroe –Least attractive and trustworthy –High levels of perceived expertise with sports gear Linda Evans –High attractiveness and trustworthiness ratings –Only average perceived expertise with perfume

29 Celebrity Attractiveness and Trustworthiness Generally perceived as important by advertisers, but: Minimal impact on subjects’ intention to purchase product –Most celebrities are attractive; minimal range, so no differentiation –Celebrities are paid for their endorsements, so not perceived as trustworthy –Expertise the determinant of intention to purchase

30 Conclusions To be useful celebrity spokespersons should be –Knowledgeable –Experienced –Qualified to endorse the product

31 Celebrity Virgin Christina Aguilera Virgin mobile phone UK release The devil makes work for idle thumbs. Keep yours busy. Text Virgin Mobile for 3P.

32 Celebrity Commodore Vic 20 Priceline William Shatner From playing on Star Trek status to playing on Shatner status

33 Celebrity Independence Air Dennis Miller Comedian Started SNL in 1980s Currently, talk radio show Endorses conservative opinions, supports Republican candidates, pro military action

34 Celebrity 7/11 S.H.E. –Selina Ren, Hebe Tian, Ella Chen Taiwanese girl band 10 albums, $4.5 million sales since 2001, multiple TV roles

35 Celebrity Power drink Arnold Schwarzenegger Japanese commercial Sometimes celebrity does cross cultures…but the ad might not

36 Expert Nike Tiger Woods Use the product, be like the expert

37 Expert Chesterfields Opinion of a physician Trusted

38 (Anti-) Expert BT information technology Gordon Ramsay Area of specialization

39 Expert Ask an expert Future Shop Spoofing use of experts in ads

40 Typical Consumer Tide Moroccan commercial, 1993

41 Typical Consumer Salem's cigarettes Supposedly average couple Note music score Gives performance information

42 Co-Branding Higher order conditioning association Two brands are deliberately paired Favourable attitude to second brand due to positive attitude to first brand MI

43 Does it Work? Well… sometimes BMW Z3 Sales increase + Sony Mini Disk No benefit +

44 Prior Associations First brand should be: familiar, popular Coca-Cola –Celebrities, characters, Olympics, concepts, music, even colour –Not an ideal co-branding candidate Change the context –Present familiar brand in different context, causing increased attention & processing

45 Belongingness See Rescorla & Furrow (1977); classic study on 2nd order stimulus similarity increasing learning rate Similar to product-model match Need to find some way to link two brands Worked: Bill Cosby and JelloBill Cosby and Jello Failed: Bill Cosby and E.F. HuttonBill Cosby and E.F. Hutton

46 Similarity Too much similarity can work against brand –E.g., see Rescorla & Gillan (1980), exp. 2 Mistake other brands for co-brand Salem cigarettes –Freshness positioning –Other brands followed this –Consumers made association to more familiar Salem ads, benefiting Salem

47 Bidirectional? Associative conditioning could work both ways Familiar brand (CS1) can be influenced by targeted brand (CS2) Negative affect from targeted brand Greater attention paid to familiar brand; more processing Erosion (additional associations weaken those initially created)

48 Changing CS1 Post 2nd Order Conditioning Rescorla (1973), Holland & Rescorla (1975a,b) 2nd order conditioning –Tone & light as CSs, food as US –Devalue US via satiation or rapid rotation; extinction of CS1 Reduced CR for CS1 but not for CS2 Subsequently restoring US returns some CR for CS1 (not a repairing of CS1-US here)

49 Brand Counterfeiting Illegally made products resembling genuine product Traditionally lower quality –Starting to shift for some counterfeits –Outsourced factories run extra “fake” shift –Sometimes shifts counterfeiters into legitimacy Becoming a serious problem –Over $600 billion in sales

50 Types Deceptive –Consumer unaware product is fake Nondeceptive –Consumer is aware product is fake –Especially prevalent in luxury brand markets

51 Reasons to Purchase See: Eisend & Schuchert-Guler (2006) Person –Demographic and psychological issues –E.g., purchasers often of lower social status Aspects of product –Price, uniqueness, availability –E.g., likelihood of purchase negatively related to price Social and cultural –Cultural norms to shopping environment –E.g., consumer more likely to purchase counterfeit if shopping experience more appetitive

52 Attitudes Social-adjustive attitude (SAA) –Purchase motivated by effort to improve individual’s approval level in social situations –“Status-symbol” Value-expressive attitudes (VEA) –Purchase demonstrate’s consumer’s central beliefs, attitudes, values –“Self-expression” Luxury brand purchases may serve both these functions

53 Ad-Consumer Interaction See: Snyder & DeBono (1985) If holding SAA, more favourable to product appeals showcasing social validation goals If motivated by VEA, consumer more favourable to ads highlighting intrinsic aspects (“product function” appeals)

54 Luxury Items & Counterfeits VEA will motivate purchase for product function (quality-related reasons) –Less likely to purchase luxury counterfeits SAA will motivate purchase of counterfeit luxury items (aim is to make social statement) –More likely to purchase luxury counterfeits

55 Brand Identifiability Recognizable logo/brand characteristic Easier higher-order conditioning vector Real product already paired with celebrity, sports figure, social class, etc. Logo serves as CS2 for idealized trait

56 High Recognition Brand Counterfeits Counterfeit gives same association, but for less money Appearance of social elite…even if you aren’t Actual quality irrelevant for social validation vector “Surface” level analysis

57 Quality-Driven Luxury Brands Often non-explicit logo, characteristics, etc. –Luxury detail based on subtle quality distinctions –“If you have to ask”… Not ideal items for counterfeit –VEA-driven, not SAA-driven 2nd order conditioning just not there to begin with –Salience on identifying these luxury items is low

58 Consumer Personality Traits Moral/ethics re: counterfeit –Lower on scale more likely to purchase High-self monitors –More likely to adopt SAA Low-self monitors –More likely to adopt VEA

59 Anti-Counterfeiting Campaigns Difficult to police Negative publicity to designer brands –E.g., Louis Vuitton Fashion industry appeals –Hurts designers –Appealing to those who can already afford high-end luxury items Negative ad framing –Might highlight loss in social status if counterfeit detected

60 Knock-offs Technically, not counterfeits Inspired by more innovative, higher-end brands –E.g., GAP, H&M Lacks the same moral/ethical objections to purchase Kim KardashianKnock off

Download ppt "Second-Order Conditioning Pair CS 1 with US Pair CS 2 with CS 1 CS 2 produces CR CS 1 serves as US for CS 2."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google