Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T22:54:46.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Waste in Advertising Is the Part That Works

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2005

TIM AMBLER
Affiliation:
London Business School, tambler@london.edu
E. ANN HOLLIER
Affiliation:
Cogent Consortium, ann.hollier@insightbb.com
Get access

Abstract

This study shows that “waste”—the perceived extravagance of an advertisement—contributes to advertising effectiveness by increasing credibility. It draws especially on the “Handicap Principle” in biology: animals use wasteful characteristics to signal their exceptional biological fitness. It hypothesizes that excesses in advertising work in a similar way by signaling “brand fitness.” TV advertisements were evaluated online for perceived advertising expense, message, brand familiarity, quality, reliability, and likelihood of choosing. High perceived advertising expense enhances an advertisement's persuasiveness significantly, but largely indirectly, by strengthening perceptions of brand quality.

Type
INSIGHTS INTO MARKETING COMMUNICATION AT LARGE
Copyright
© Copyright © 1960-2004, The ARF

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Advertising Statistics Yearbook. Henley on Thames, U.K.: World Advertising Research Council, 2001.
Ambler, Tim, and Scott Goldstein. Pre-testing: Practice and Best Practice. London: Advertising Association, April 2003.
Bonate, Peter L. Analysis of Pretest-Posttest Designs. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2000.
Broadbent, Tim. “Pre-testing Methods—The Agony of Choice.” Admap 377, (October 1997): 1115.Google Scholar
Cook, William A., and Theodore F. Dunn. “The Changing Face of Advertising Research in the Information Age: An ARF Copy Research Council Survey.” Journal of Advertising Research 36, 1 (1996): 5571.Google Scholar
Davis, Evan, John Kay, and Jonathan Star. “Is Advertising Rational?Business Strategy Review 2, 3 (1991): 123.Google Scholar
Gale, Bradley T. Managing Customer Value. New York: The Free Press, 1994.
Gollins, Jan. “Discover Why Ads Work.” Proceedings of the Advertising Research Foundation 47th National Conference, New York, 2001.
Hollier, E. Ann, and Kristen C. Remington. “Advertising Research in the 21st Century: A New Method for the Internet Age.” ESOMAR International Conference on Marketing in Latin America, Mexico City, Mexico, 2001.
Kirmani, Amna. “The Effect of Perceived Advertising Costs on Brand Perceptions.” Journal of Consumer Research 17, 2 (1990): 16071.Google Scholar
Kirmani, Amna. “Advertising Repetition as a Signal of Quality: If It's Advertised So Much, Something Must Be Wrong.” Journal of Advertising 26, 3 (1997): 7786.Google Scholar
Kirmani, Amna, and Peter Wright. “Money Talks: Perceived Advertising Expense and Expected Product Quality.” Journal of Consumer Research 16, 3 (1989): 34453.Google Scholar
McDonald, Colin. Pre-Testing Advertisements. Admap Monograph. Henley-on-Thames, U.K.: NTC Publications, 1997.
Marketing Leadership Council. Report on Membership Survey into Marketing Effectiveness and Measurement. Washington, DC: Marketing Leadership Council, 2001.
Milgrom, Paul, and John Roberts. “Price and Advertising Signals of Product Quality.” Journal of Political Economy 94, 4 (1986): 796821.Google Scholar
Nelson, Phillip. “Information and Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Political Economy 78, 2 (1970): 31129.Google Scholar
Nelson, Phillip. “Advertising as Information.” Journal of Political Economy 82, 4 (1974): 72954.Google Scholar
Scipione, Paul. “Too Much or Too Little? Public Perceptions of Advertising Expenditures.” Journal of Advertising Research 37, 3 (1997): 4958.Google Scholar
Veblen, Thorstein. The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Macmillan. Page references are to the 1994 London: Penguin edition, 1899.
Zahavi, Amotz. “Mate Selection: A Selection for a Handicap.” Journal of Theoretical Biology 53 (1975): 20514.Google Scholar
Zahavi, Amotz, and Avishag Zahavi. The Handicap Principle. A Missing Piece of Darwin's Puzzle. Oxford: OUP, 1997.