Gender Issues in Advertising-An Oversight Synthesis of Research: 1970-2002

LORI D. WOLIN

An unbiased comprehensive oversight synthesis of three decades of gender-related advertising research is undertaken. Seventy-six articles found in premiere marketing, psychology, sociology, and communications journals were reviewed. Findings of the gender role research indicate advertisements are generally moving toward a slightly

Lynn University LWolln@lynn.edu

less stereotypical stance .. Findings of the selectivity hypotheses research indicate females versus males process advertisements differently. Findings of the

spokesperson gender effects research indicate controversy exists, and the gender advertising response literature findings assert gender differences in advertising responses exist. Finally, the gender brand positioning literature specifies gender differences exist. The findings are synthesized and implications are suggested.

ADVERTISING

IS SOLD

on the basis of the demoexpected to view the and fein

forming effective advertising solutions (Darley and Smith, 1995). In an attempt ing, gender positioning
t

graphics of the audience meanings

more fully underwith advertisgen-

adverti ement . Gender, or the social and cultural associated with the maleness maleness imposed and expected by society (Alvesson and Billing, 19 '7), is a critical factor ages emphasizing persuade frequently the male developing marketing strategy via advertising mesinformation that is thought to
OJ"

stand g nder and its relationship

research has utilized several

app ·oaches. Past studies have considered

dered advertising and its relationship with different media including print (for example, MacKay and Covell, 1997; Severn, Belch, and Belch, 1990; Sullivan and O'Connor, 1988),. television (for example, Coltrane and Adams, 1997; McDal1iel and Kinney, 1998; Peirce and McBride, 1999), radio (for example, Alreck, Settle, and Belch, 1982; Debevec and Lyer, 1986), and the internet (for example, Knupfer, 1998). Additional studies considered the effects of gendered products and brands on the purchase pattents of males and females (for example, Belli.zzi and Milner, 1991; Elliott, Eccles, and Hodgson, 1992) and gender as it relates to advertising'S effect on consumer b havior (for ex-

female target. Gender is strategy be-

used as a segmentation

cause it meets several requirements for succe sfu1 implementation including (1) [tis easily identifito able, (2) gender segments are accessible, (3) gender segments are measurable and responsive marketing mix elements, and (4) gender segments are large and profitable (Darley and Smith, 1995). Consistent with gender strategy, discerning gendered advertising effectiveness differences is of paramount importance to ad ertisers, on gender issues has produced a Three decades of research and commentary advertising-related

ample, Ford, La'Iour, and Lundstrom, 1991; Wolburn and Pokrywczynski. analysis of
der

2001). studies (Eagly and (1985)

body of knowledge that needs to be synthesized without bias. When it comes to making advertising decisions, a careful, fact-based scrutiny of th
dynamic

Previous assimilation efforts include a metaocial influenc Whipple Carli, 1981) indicating the influenceability of gendifferences. and Courtney reviewed the published gender-related print adMarcH 2003

details of how consumers

are feeling,

thinking, processing, and behaving is essential in
001: 10.1017/S0021849903030125

JUURnRl ur nOUERTlSlUll RESEARCH 111

GENDER ISSUES

vertisement content analyses from 19731982 and Rutledge-Shields (1997) presents an intellectual history of gender advertising research through 1995. Though these specialized understanding reviews contribute to
OUl"

nals (Hulr, Neese, and B?shaw, 1997) are (1) !oui'YIlJl of Mai'keting, (2) Journal, of Mal'-

Table 1 displays the article groupings' classification. Clearly, the majority (76,9 percent) of research has been performed in print advertising. Upon further analysis of the research, the demarcation of the Iollowing' categories appears: (1) gender role stereotyping findings (46.1 percent), (2) selectivity hypotheses findings (7.9 percent), (3) spokesperson gender effects findIngs (5.3 percent), (4) gender advertising response findings (38.1 percent), and (5) .gendered brand positioning findings (2.6 percent). Thus,
ill

keting Research,
searcn, (4)
Joumal

(3) JOllm«/

Of Consumer Beof Marketing (6) loHI'1:1a1
ConUI.la

of the

Academy

Science, (SHOll rntl] of Advertising,
of Advel'tising Research,
(7)

of gendered advertising rehas

Advances in

search, no comprehensive oversight summary of gender issuesinadvertising been published, Such an effort is indeed needed, responding to Hunt's (1988, p. 45) call for "articles that review past research
. . . to provide

sumer Re!>enrch, (8) Psychology

Mal'ket~

ing, and (9) Irldrtstrial MarkeNilg Managcml!uj.
The top three mul ddisdpltnary journals teatl.lril;1g

gender-related
(1)

advertising
Qutll'tJ!rly .

research

used are
letin,

Sex Roles, (2) PsydlOlogical Bu.l-

neW conceptualizations

of

and (3) JOllrnalism

marketing issues." Thus, the purpose of this study is to dose the gap in dOCUOlel1' ration by building on the previous.genderrelated advertising research, synthesizing the past three decades' published literatu re, and trace gender and its relationship with advertising in different media in a. neutral perspective, following RutledgeShields's (1997) underpinnings. ARTICLE IDENTI.FICATION Several information sources were used to find the articles for this review. The top 20 marketing journals (Hult, Neese,and Bashaw, 1997) were perused to discern the most relevant literature and to promote parsimony. Though numerous other marketing journals contain seemingly
USE-

Articles published since 1970r when gen· dered'ldve.rtising research burgeoned (Jacklin and Baker, 1993), were identified using the following preeminent business, social science, and gender-related databases: (1) ABI INFORM, (2) ContmpWom~ enlss, (3) First Search, (4) GenderWatel1, (5} Humanitieaabs, (6) lAC, (7) Info'Frac, (8) PwQuest, (9) PsycFirst, and (10) SocSciAbs and identified via. library journal observation. After reading the articles, their references were screened for additional citations. That process generated a large number of articles; however, only those pertaining to specific gender-related advertising Issues were retained. These studies, akin to other advertising oversight summaries, were then grouped by media, method, and type (Abernathy and Franke, 1996; Tripp, 1997),

an attempt to analyze

the litera tuze meaningfully, the researchis further regrouped and synthesized in the afotemen honed categories.
It is meanlngful

to note that although

scales such as Bern's Sex Role· Inventory (Bern, 1974, 1981, 1985) ate used in psy~ cholQglcal and sociological evaluate individuals' masculinity der
<15

studies

to of

self-assessments

and femininjty, the majority

of marketing gender studies evaluate.gena binary variable. While it is clear and femininity that levels of masculinity

exist, typically in advertising research it is [lot necessary to evaluate gender or gender role attitudes as a self-assessed continuous variable because the results are' generally identical whether gender is operationalized as a binary or continuous construct (Garst and Bodenhausen, 19(7).

ful literature, a finite number of premiere marketing journals were used to identify empirical research performed with advertisement exposure, performed without advertisement
,eXpOSUI:E,

and content an-

alyzed. The top three gender-related sociology, psychology; and communications journalswere tions also used. The on! y ex{'ep~ and use of seem-

T~BLE1 Article Groupings
Emplrll:ca.1 Artlcles USing AdvertiSing Exposure
••••• -••• '•••••••• ,., ••••••• , •••••••••• " •• .;, ••••••• iu

to this article identification system

EmpiIiical Altlcles Without Advertising Exposure
••••• _i ' •••••••••••• ~ ••••••

are the identification

Content Ana'lyses 38.2%

Conceptual A'rtlcles 18.4%
.'•. ••••••"•••~ , ••••

ingly relevant references indicated in the above literature and the. use of the 1,991 Pmceedings of tile CoYifcnmce on Gendel' and
Com>uiHer Bel'ta.vior. Conceptual pieceswere

I., .• ,...•••~,.•. .- •••:.•.••• ,. . ,. • •••• "•••••••••".'U'"

32.9% Within These Studies

10.5%
76.9%
•• ,' •••••.•••••• , ••••••• ~ , •••••••••••• ~~ ••• ~ •••.•••• ".~, ,~ •• , ••• ~, ••• ~.,.",

Print Media
i
01 •• _ •••• ~ ~

.
•••• _ ••••••••••••••••••• ' ~ •••••••••••• " ••• ~.~ ••• ,

drawn from a broader body of Iiterature. TIle marketing publications used and ex~ trapolared from the top 20 marketing jour:112

i

Television Medium
Other Media 2003

15.4% 7.7%

JOURnAL OF RDUmlSmGi RrS£n.nCH

March

advertising information processing differences be- tween males and females [do] exist whereby females engage in more comprehensive processing. 1983. endorser ing spokesperson escalating. Durkin. objective mith. Accordingly. 1999). Caballero and Solomon. and Casey. Prakash and Flores. The selectivity hypothese findinas are xhibited i.. 1993. Cheng. and Brewer. Peirce and McBride. The literature suggests a strong I' tus and degree of employment when placing advertisements in media (Sosanie and Szybillo. Another-study posits spokesperson gemder does not significantly affect con urner attitudes toward products (Freiden.n Table 3. 1991. Ruggiero . Schn ider and Barich-Schneider. Furnham and Thomson.l-01ayan and Karande. Barry. 1988. Kilbourne. Darley and Levy. 1998.with spokesfees are persons. Inde d. Burnett. WoJ. suggesting fiNDINGS advertisers consider product-risk level and other salient Gender role stereotyping findings Advertising gender role stereotyping been a prominent has cues as they develop gendered advertising creation. consider level and othersalient ge:n. linked to increasing rates of females obtaining college degrees. and Craig. First. 1975. 1989. Decker. including gend r. thi literature confirms that advertising information proc engage ing differences between comprehensive advertisers procues males and females exist whereby females in more cessing.If'ugate. 1997. 1992. topic ill the literature when since the 1970s.1995. Hence. changing familial roles. females elWIN equally favorable response to objective and ubjecti ve claims. 1985). Table 2 displays the gender role stereotyping. gender in most of the empirical research reviewed is seen as a binary contruct and is termed "gender" as opposed to "sex. and and With highe. and Lacznis k.g the selecti vity hypotheses suggests that under lower risk conditions.. 1998). The selectivity hypotheses' powerful propositions assert females are thought to be comprehensive information processors who assimilate all available cues while males are thought to be selective information processors who assimilate only salient cues. Coltrane Kramer. 1985. advertising believability. Jasper. Several rudies suggest gender role stereotyping does exist but seems to be decreesIng over time. 1974.Ferguson. Finally. Busby and Leichty. 1993. 1999.GENDER ISSUES Hence." . 1993. 1978). Fumham and Bitar. Milner and Collins. Easton and Toner. 1986. Several studie suggest increasing gender bias (Belkaoui and Belkaoui 1976. 1979. 1997. and likeintent . 1998). several studies suggest spokesper on gender significantly affects consumer attitude toward products (Bellizzi and Milner. 1986). Soley and Kurzbard. 1993. Lundstrom. Sexton and Haberman. 1991. Honeycutt. vate lihood advertisers hope to eleproduct Diller. 2000. and Jegal pressures. Spokesperson gender effects Unsurprismgly. Specifically. TIlis suggests marketers egmenti. other 1990. Meyers-Levy March 2003 JDURnHL OF HDUERTISmG RESERReH 113 . 1998. Debevec and Iyer. 1991. and Adams. The research examini n. and Doran. Barts h. 1997. Venkatesan and Lasco. Advertisements found in predominantly male-oriented tablished publications and more esmagazines tend to stereotype advertising of purchase evaluations. as they develop curred.and Weston. Gilly. body should consider eto and Pinto. MeyersMeyers-Levy Maheswaran. 2000. and Schwartz. 1985. 1988. and Rankin-Williams. 1984). Palan. Kreshel. suggesting product-risk creation.S. firid ings.hLLrg and Pokrywczynski. 1979. Accordingly. Klassen. Wright. This litera ture str am asserts th effectiveness of spokesper ons may differ as a result of spokesperson and consumer gender but also other variables women more often than general publications (Leppard.lows a role changing movement remarkable female employment gains oc- patterns of U.:ng marital staof literature Sternthal. and Tinkham. Sciglimpaglia. 2000. 1986. 1984. image. The model acknowledges these gendered information processing differences will be elimina ted under certain conditions. revealing the value of res archeffects. 1975). 1996. Zuckerman. controversy exists in this realm of the gendered advertising literatw:eand begs for further el ucidation. Ford. Kerin. Sullivan and 01Connor. This research interest fol- . Ogletree. 199t.r risk conditions.dered advertising argurn nt for decreasing stereo- Selectivity hypotheses findings typing (Allan and Coltrane. the differences ar expected to cues evaporate when subtle information such as product risk level change. print and television advertisements~A. and Wallen. Hurtz arid 1997. Gilly. 2001). 1998. iriternational print and television advertisemeats tend to follow the role portrayal claims are more favorable (Carskyend Kempf.

•~ " . ...u. ...• H •••••••••••••••••••••••••••.. •• '~. ••••••••••••••••••••• .•••. Ogletree.i 114 .• uo" ••• .. " ••••• Print content analysis from and 1971-1980 . ~ •.••• '.u. with content analysiS General interest magazines had an increase in sexually oriented advertisements..•••. "u~ •• '"'pO. '. ••••••• " •.•. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' ~ •• O'O. •••••• ~ ••••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••• u ..•••... •••••••• . ••• ' •••••••••••• . rid u •••••••••••••• ..••••• .991 i •• ·.....••••.'.•• ... •• " •• . ••• Finding!> The images of women reflected in advertisements i ••. .. •••••••• ~ '•••••• '. • ..••••••• 0.•. and Wallen (1993) Print content analysis .•• h •••••••••••••••• ._ ••• '•••• ".'. these depictions have been decreaslng since the early 1980s and more equality poses are seen.••• .' •••• ..•• :...~ u~ ~ •••• M" •• M••• '~""'M'" . from 1961 to 1971 .•• ~••••• . . .... . ~ ••••••• '. • ••••••••••••••••• is narrow. ••••.1993) Print content analysis Content analysis of eight magazines' advertisements comparing 1958 through 1989 Wbmen shown in family and home roles have been decreasing."~"" •••••• u ••• Subject Content analysts of five magazines' advertisements · ••••••••••••••••• . i'" ... Magazine'S advertisements ~•• ~ ••••• ' ••••••••••••••••••••••• from 1973-1987 ~ •••• ' ••• '•••••••• i •••••••••••••••.· ••• • ...• ~ Stereotyping has denlined. •• ~... Kreshe. _ " ••• ._.~"""" Content analysis of Ms. . u ••••••••••• '•••••••••••• .. lyonsk. .••••.u. ••• 9 • •••• ~ Content analysis of advertisements ' •••••••• p •••• ~ •••••••••• .••.. Sexual illustrations but women's and men's magazines did not." -.. .•••.and Tinkham (1990) Print Gontent analysis •••••• '. -.. Jasper.. *. ••••••• 1 •••••.•••••• u .~ •.•. and female models are more likely to be portrayed as suggestively clad than males . ••• _ ~~ •• 'n •• •• """""""""""". •• ~••••••••.._ ..lysis ••• ~u... " •••••••••••• ". sexual elements have become more visual than verbal.· . . '. •••• .··. n ••••• ~ ••••• ~ ••••• ~ ••• " ! ~~ + •• Soley and Kurzbard (1986) Print Content analysis of six magazines' advertisements in 1964 and in 1984 The percentage of advertisements sexual content remained constant. Over time.. . but not by much. •.h •• ..••~••. and Schwartz (1993) Content analysis of three magazines' advertisements over the 1972-t989 period While there is still a disproportionately number of advertisements women in traditional high Print content analysiS that portrayed poses." analysis •• 'l~""" decreased. ~ ••• .. ~' •••••••.. but males tended to be more stereotypical than females . •• ~ •••••••• ..•.•••••••• Both males and females were portrayed stereotypically.••• Venkatesan and Losco (1975) Content analysis of magazines' advertlsementsfrom 1959-..•••.••.. •••••• ~...JDURnnL DF RDU[RTlSInD RESERnCH Marcl1 2003 .. •••••••• . .' o ...._ Content analysis of three medical journals' advertisements over 1987-i1.•••• ~••.• Ruggiero and Weston (1985) Content analysis of six established new magazines' advertisements and four Estab(ished magazines were more likely to profile women in traditional occupations employed women profiled in established magaztnes themselves are less likely to perceive as havirjg power in their jobs.'.. ••• ".•.. •.GENDER ISSUES TABLE2 Gender Role Stereotyping Findings Study {Content Analyses' Sexton and Haberman (1974) print content ana.•• I ~ .•. ~ •.•••••••• leppard..• ".. Busby and Leighty (.•••.'•••..1971 -r-·... . ••• " .... •••.-.' O~. and women's roles are more autonomous . i ••••••••••••• . ••••• _ _ Sullivan and O'Connor (1988) Print content analysis Content analysis of eight magazlnes' advertisements and 1983 comparing 1958 to 1970 The Increasing economic and social status of women in America is slowly seen in magazine advertisements over time. ••• u •••• . ••• ~. became more overt.' ' _. ••••• 22 _ magazines' "~I_ ••.• ". ••••• ""'" Ferguson..• _ •• . . ••••.... •••• . women shown without men is decreasing.. ••••••• " •••••••• . •• ~.. ••••••••••••• '••••••• _ •••••••••••••• l .. •••••• .•.h.•.•••••• ~•••••••• u~ •••. ••• . ••• "'~ •••••••• _ ••••••••••••••..•••.•.. .~. •••• _'••••••• -. •. ~..i (1983) Print content analysis ••••• ~ ' .•.••••. •• ~•••• ~ ••• ~•••• <1•••••• ~ ••• " ••• The portrayal of women as sex objects has r-•••.•• Print content ••... from 1974-75 and 1979-80 Women have been increasingly portrayed as sex objects..'.' •••••••••••••••• " •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• " •• . -.•••• . •• i.• "••.•.•• ~ .·· ~. .·..··..'.·.• ~. .' •••.••••••• -•••••• .••••••.I.. .••• . •••••••• . I ~ •• ~ ••••••••••••••••••••••••.•. ·.•••••••.. I.. ." •....• ••• _ •• " •••• .u...•• " ••. ". .•••. Klassen.

directed at males are more active and less pleasant than those directed _ •••••••••••••••••••• "" T ••••• i •••••••••••• . ••• -•••••• _ ••••••• _ •••••••••••••••• '•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• content analysis of TV commercials during U. •••• .. and men have a more significant cormectlon the future than women. ••• .analysis •••••••• ••••• ..••. •••••••••••••• .. Content analysis of fashion magazines' advertisements over 10 year? Gender bias is increasing...••• '. with Pious and Neptune (1997) Print content analysis Stephenson. •• ' •..••• from 1962-1992 •••••••••••••••• ._ Advertisers segment.•• . Sandler. •• Ford. and Long (1992) Television content analysis ... . Kramer. 0 ••••••••••••• .. ••••••••••• ' I. •••••••••••••..••. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• __ •••• . ••••• " I ••••••••••••••••• .levisioncontent analysis Shani.. .. ••••••••••••• . Content analysis of 144 magazines' advertisements p ••••••••••• " ••••• ' ••••• . made no attempt to appeal to femal...•.•••.'•. •••••••• . ~ •••••• I ••• ... ••• ... ••••••• ~••••••••..•.. 4 '.. Stover. Content analysis of 13 Japanese magazines' advertisements Japanese magazine advertisements Eastern and Western values.••• ~.S... ••••••••••••••••• .. ~ .. ••••• . ••••••• .. . ••••••••••••• .S.•••••• '..' •• .•• _. "_"" •••• ~ Content analysis of the words in 16 magazines' advertisements •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• _ ~ •••••• ~ •..••••••••••. but to a lesser degree.. •••~ •••••••••••••••••._ Over time.• .•• _ ••••••••• . ••... ••••••••••• _ ••• Siu (199B) Television content analysis Content analysis of 434 Hong Kong advertisements and 416 Singapore TV advertisements Men are more likely to be portrayed as product authorities and women as product users. •••••• 1•••• ..' •••••••••• Adverttsements at females .". depict r. Wiles. but there is a slight shift toward more positive role portrayals. •••••• .0 •• ' •• _.•• II. Zotos and LYOhSkl(1994) Prim content anlaysis Content analysis of 11 Greek magazine advertlsernents 1987-88 during 1982-'83 and The negative image of women in advertisements continues.U I ••••••••••••• ' ••••••••••••• . ••••••••••• '••• I ••••• . Role portrayals in all three countries depict cultural biases and stereotypes... and Casey (1998) Print content analysis . and Schwartz (1994) Print content ...•. I ••••••••••• 1. •••••• " •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ... •••••• ~ ••••••••••• .. . •••••••• '••• "" •••• '••• " ••••••••••••••• _ " •••••• . ••••• o •••••• . ••••••••• . and the United States Piron and Young (1996) Print content analysis •••• . . ••• .. I •• i ••••••••••• . i ••••••••••• ' ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• .' .'•••••••••. . Te.... and Arab cou ntries Content analysis of 287 TV advertisements from 1976 to compare with base advertisements studied in 1971 There were no. •• H"~" ~~. S. ••• . •••••••• . _I.. magazine advertisements 1992 0.. ~•••••••. •••••••••• exhibit many of the same gender role portrsyal patterns as U.• _ •••• . ~. • • ••••• • • •• •• •••••••• . •••••._" ••• ~ •••••• Content analysls of German and U. •• "'0' 0' •••• _. Some differences between the courrtrles existed... Women were still seen in more narrowly defined roles than men. •• _ ••••••• .. The Netherlands.•.' ••• ~ ••• .. the sexual role portrayal of women has become more subdued in both countries.. ••••••• .' •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Subject 3 year sample of Indian and U. Sex inequality in the workplace continues to exist ..e sports market as a separate ~ .S. po. ". (coJllimwri) March 2003 JOURnHL OF RDUERTISIRG RESEnRCH 11.. magazines Findings Indian advertisements adverti sements .. AI-OIayan and Karande (2000) Print content analysis Schneider and Barlch-Sehnelder (1979) Content analysis of 1...5 .. Viswanatl1. Honeycutt. significant differences fn the advertisements' gender depictions.••. ••••••••••••• .. •• from 1986. •• " •• " •• Dllevko and Harris (1997) Print content analysis Content analysis of nine professional Journals' advertisements period over the 1990-94 Female activity is more restricted than male activity... ~ _ ". .. 0.~ ••• . men achieve recognizable fame. ••••• . . Open . ••.' .••••.GENDER ISSUES TABLE 2 (cont'd) Study (Content Ana'lyses) Griffin....S.••••••••• • ~. _ ••• . •••...."""".• .••• ".•.~.•• .••.. Wiles and Tjernlund (1995) Print content analysis Content analysis of five to eight magazines falling into several categories from Sweden. and Villamor(1997) Print content analysis •••. •••••••••• . •••••••••••••••••••••••• 't' .. .. and Whissell and McCall (1997) Print content analysis ••••• •• _..' •••••••• tl ••• ~.• _. 1989.064 magazine adverti sements from the U. •••••••••••••••• . •.

. where marketing should more deeply understand gender construction. Mexico (204).· . and Turkey (62). • ••• ~ ••••• h ••••••••• _ •••••• _. •••••••••.' ••• i ••••••• I ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Milner (1994) Conceptual analysis Zuckerman and Carsky (1991) Conceptual analysis A call for International gender positioning researoh. Diller. depicting models more modernly •. with marketing 116 mnnnl Of AUU'ERTlSIHBRESEARCH Marcil 2003 .S._ u ••••••••••••••• _ ••••• _ •••• _ _ •••••••••••••• _•• . A discussion of how feminist theory links Questions are raised In terms of international advertising research. •••••••• Subject . ••••••••••• . ••• _~ ••••••••••••••••• Content analysis of web advertisements found on Yahoo search engine in 1996 and 1997 . ened since the 1980s.S.GENDER ISSUES TABLE 2 (cont'd) Study (Content Analyses) ••••••••••••••••• _••••••••••••••••••••••••• . ~ ••••••••••••• "' I ••••••• I . counterpart. •••• . _"*~"" ••••••••••••••••• ~ ••••••• I I ••••••••• 'pl'" ••• H~"" •• """' •• "'" •••••••• Study (Conceptual Analyses) Subject A review of some of the magazine advertising gender related content analyses from 1973-1982 Findings The findings indicate that to portray females in advertising effectively. United States in the Turkish advertisements. •• • • • • i •••• "' ••••••• I •••• "•••••• I " • I •• ~ II •••• _. •••• Gender bias was found. ••••••• II •••••••• _ •• _ ••••• ~ •••• . choosing appropriate role settings. and while there is still gender stereotyprng. ••••••• . ••• ~ ••• . and RankinWilliams (2000) Television content analysis Content analysis of 757 TV advertisements during spring 1998 Gender bias still exists as females are underrepresented as product representatives sented as product representatives decreased in terms of voice-overs. ••••. Hofstede's (1983) assertion that In feminine countries such as Turkey. •••••••• 1 •••• .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Findings .. Burnett. •••. Television content analysis Milner and Collins (2000) Television content .••• " •• . ••••••••• I •••••••••• ~. The feminist approach calls for a rethinking of the marketing discipline. Coltrane and Adams (1997) Television content analysis Content analysis of TV advertisements from 1992-1994 falling into several categories Women constituted 45% of ail TV characters it has less- (compared with 51% of populatlon).•••••••• '••• " ••••• . fewer sex differences exist. Gender bias has Knupfer (1998) ·Other" content analysis ••••••••••••• . There was a lack of sex role constraints following Australia (138). .and avoiding stereotypical poses...analysis Content analysis of TV commercials from three Chinese channels (247). Cheng (1997). I • I ••• __ " ••••••••••• "' • I •••• I.' ••• " ••••••••• I ••• I ••••••••••• ~ I •• I "' ••••••••••••••••••• ._ •• . advertisers should consider matching tile gender of the model with the product image. networks (420) Content analysis of TV advertisements (275). Bartsch. for domestic products and males are overreprefor n011domestic products. in Chinese TV advertisements reinforced more stereotyping than U. U. Whipple and Courtney (1985) ·Conceptual analysis Cantor (1987) Conceptual analysis Stern (1988) Conceptual analysis A discussion of the creation and distribution of mass media messages to women Messages about women's posltlon in the social structure remain subordinate to men. ••• and cable television . Opportunities exist for firms to create finan- A review of the gender differences in terms of media and the banking industry cial advertising suited to upscale women via upscale women's magazines and to downmarket women vta appropriate periodicals .

ceptual Analyses) Gould (l991) Conceptual analysis Rutledge-Shields (1997) Conoeptual analysis A review providing an intellectual history of research A key issue in advertising is how different audience members interpret advertising images and their fit with everyday experiences . Advertisers often use color. Table 4 highlights the spokespersongerider effects literature findings. and LaTm:JI. verbiage.' ••••••• ~ '. Rossi and Rossi. ~993. 1981).i$eme. vertisements' 1995). and names to define the gender of 11 brand.gly and Carli.' •••••••••••••••••• .•••• . 1998. findings differ- over time (Kates and-Shew-Carlock. Findings The expression of sex roles in their sexual nature is likely to represent a growtll opportunity.Study (Con. Stanaland. females as com pared to males are more accepting to malenudity in advert. •••••••••••. and Belch. '" ••••••• "'" •••• ~ ••••••••••• ~ ••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ . and Laczniak.' •••• I •• . 19. sound.elb. and role. '••••• i ••••••••• " ••••••••• " •••• . 1992). . 1978. 1991i]ones. logos. 1982. ••• . and C. and do not readily accept feminine brands. Knupfer. Severn. texture. tcayalin advertisements: however. 1997. 1990. 1997. Ilogos. Specifically females seem to prefer feminine brands but are accepting of masculine brands.j ••• . shape.kaging'.~ i ••• I ••• '~ i ••• Ii •••• i •• i " . the decoding of gender images in advertisinggendered ••• . Unquestlorrably. sound. Simpson. although both males and females have ethical concerns about Widge. 1997. Br'and ge. the difference in influencability is insignificant (Eagly. 1994.s thereby communi .nkatesb. Bence.~ •••• I •• . Palan.shape. graphics. Meyer$-Levy Sternthal. 1977. Brand gender is thereby communicated through the use of strong sexual appeals in advertising (La'Iour and Henthorne.'.. however. Prakash. 1987. 1985}.verbiage. He. 1980). and Belch. I. and names to defi. Pemales are more persuadable than males. females are more likely advertising .ne the gender of a brand. Horton.lgh men seem to be energized by female nudity in advertisements whereas La'Iour. For example. 1998. RutledgeShields. 1990). 'Hirschman and Thompson. MacKay and Covell.Lundstrom and Sciglimpaglia. March 2003 . and Brown.nder i. be wise to consider the gendeted ing advertisements. . Settle.98. Males also prefer more competitive advertisements 1992). ••• " ••••••••••••• .graphics.•••••••• of interest to the target market population. cated thr'ough advertising •. examining market potential for a gendered brand beCOl11eS a crucial early step when introducing a product. demographies.pac.•• . Rice.GENDER ISSUES TABLE 2 (cont'd) --~---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Subject A discussion of tile dynamics of sexuality as a consumer behavior variable. nally. ••••••••••• . Gender brand positioning packaging.nts~Jtbol.. Ea. them to purchase aproduct (Kempf. ences in advertising response when creat- female gender role attitudes can be influenced by the media (Cantor. 1993). Females tisingexposlilre versus females (prakash.and Ve. The Iitetature suggests that females continue to have a negative perception women are made tense by it (Lamarketers would toward stereotypical role por- Tour.. Cender differences in advertising processing and advertising effectiveness exist whereby both male and alive perception SeeIl1S to be less severe 19·99. this bod y persuade and of literature ~ugg'e$ts that males and females accept feminine and masculine products and brands differently (Alreck. Willicu)IS. Table 6 displays the gender brand positionh'g litera ture findings. prefer masculine brands.JUUHnRL OF RDUERTlSlnG RESERR!:" 117 .ry and McGaugh. Belch.•• .~ •••• I. Whipple and Courtney. texture. Gender differences 'response flndlngs in advertising Advertisers often use color. may require more adverthan males to. 1985). por- trayal va ry" by jifesty le.. Males highlight the distinction in gender symbols. . Further. Fi- than males to find advertisements sexist (Ford! La'Iour and Lundstrom.Accordingly. 1991). Perceptions of advertising role orientation (Ford. Table 5eJdlibits the findings of the literature pertaining to gender differences in advertising response. females and males react differently to admusic tempo and volume whereby females react more negatively to louder 1I11d faster music (Kellaris and.. 1997. this neg- 1996).nthorne.

• . •••••••• . •. ••• . researchers agree that repetitive divergence.' •••••••••••••••••••• I ••• " •••• I I ••••••••• I •••••••••• . •••••••• i •••••••••••••• " •• " ••••••••• ~• '_0_' " •••••••••• '" ••••••••• . •• I. It is likely that females process <:ldvertisements more elaborately than males. Males did not prefer objective claims.1991) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Darley and Smith (1995) Empirical stvdy with ~other· advertising exposure 200 students Print advertisement fer toothpaste Message: (1) one-side and Women do engage in more comprehenslve processing. •••••••• Manipulated Subjects 90 students Source Print advertisement for a news program Variables Incongruity cues: (1) low. •••••••• . and (3) low. This oversight summary and synthesis reveals both re earch concurrence as well as which may be developed in early childhood. ••••••••••• . Females process information more elaborately than men. (2) moderate. ••• '•••••••••• I •••• . ••••• " •••••••••••••••• . .• .•• .. ••• .•••• I •••• I •••••••• . •••••••••••• . •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. •••• . .•. " •••• I ••• " •••• I ••• " •••• I ••••••••••••••• ' •••••• 0. relying on the particulars of message claims. Product risk: (1) high. females show equally favorable response to objective and subjective claims.u . (~l separated ••• ~ •••••••••••••• . ' ••• I . (2) moderate. Furthermore. ••••••• I . " •••• ~ ••••••••••••••• ~•••• " •••••••••••••••• -1 •••••••• ~ ••• " •••• I ••. . . objective claims were more favorable.. With moderate risk. Prakash and Flores (1985) Conceptual analysrs DISCUSSION mation is different and varies with information cues such as product risk levels. .. 53 adults Product evaluation of toothpaste Positioning of two negative cues: (1) contiguously and The data are consistent with the threshold hypothesis. (2) medium. •••• . . •••• . •••••••••• .GENDER ISSUES TABLE 3 Selectlvlty Hypotheses Findings study (Empirical Analyses) Meyers-Levy and Mahaswaran (1991) Empirical study with print . with low congruity cues and females use a detailed processing strategy and males use a schema-based strategy . Researchers agree that the way in whioh males and females precess infer118 advertising exposure seems to JOURnn OF RDUERHSlnG RESERRCH March .. ••••••••••••• . ••••••••••• I •• . With low risk. . Carsky and Zuckerman (. •••••••• .••••. Study (Conceptual Analyses) Subject An exploration of psychological differences between men and women and advertising formats for each sex Meyers-Levy (1989) Conceptual analysIs A revfew of the information processing differences between men and women Findings Women process information more subjectively than men and different advertising formats should be used to target each sex. •• . •••• ' I ••• I• Meyers-Levy and Sternthal (1991) Empirical te'/evision advertising study without advertising exposure 121 adults A written message describing a new TV show Cues: (1) low.••••• i •••••••• . females generall y process ad2003 vertisernents more subjectively than males beca use of thei r elaborate processing ski] LB.••••• . and (3) high . . •••••••• . Additionally. (2) two-sided Mall intercept of 120 adults Radio copy was used for eleetrlc blankets and weighing scales Copy claim: (1) objective and (2) subjective.••• . •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Findings Females process more elaborately. and (3) high Genders differ in their threshold for elaborating on message cues.advertising exposure •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• .' . ••• I. .

Debevec and Iyer. Th on purchase intent (for example. Bellizzi and Milner. For example. . Study (Conceptual Analyses) Subject Content analysis of TV advertisements over Findings More males are used as spokes-characters and more male spokes-characters are remembered than female spokes-characters. ••••••••••••• . •• . 1986). 1984. ••• . has a significant effect Debevec and Iyer. 1988). It is likely that ences in external population. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• i •••••••••• . Lund trom. 1979). 1975). Gilly. ••••••••••••• . Conver ely. Cal' ky and Zuckerman. Several reasons can be postulated these discrepancies. •••• .984). Another difficuJ. •••••••• . 2 week multiprogramming period. in which the gender of the spokesperson example.ty of the empirical studies is that the tudes with just one advertising more Pinally. consensus indicates females seem accepting of advertisements Belkaoui. and assessments of the dep nd nt measure to create confidently calling the reliabiliries into question (for example. uggest Belkaoui it is and empirical tudies did not report reliability r exposuije. Peirce and McBride (1999) Television content analysis a 90 hour. Sullivan and O'Connor.. 1985. son gender effect. (3) expert treatment. while others u ad adult conventence samples (for example. 1986. Several studies submit a spokesper- brands directed at the mate population than males are accepting ment of advertiseand brands directed at the female majority used students as subjects (for 1991. Barry. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. males held attixpo ur .9 March 2003 JOURnAL Of RDU£RTlSma RESEARCH . Gender 0f spokesperson: (1) female and (2) male Spokesperson gender is an dishwashlng liquid (feminine) effective promotional cue in influencing respondents' perceptions ot the gender image of products. •••••••• . (2) CEO treatment. FaL'guson.red products for Testimonial: (. Peirce and Mcbride. •••• . 100 students Print advertisements three nongende.es) Freiden (1984) Empirical study With print advertising exposure Subjects 226 people in two groups: {i) local adults and {2) students Source Black and white magazine advertisements for a TV set Manipulated Variables Spokesperson: (1) celebrity treatment. First. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• . while other increasing (for example. and (4) typical consumer treatment Carsky and Zuckerman (1991) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Debevee and lyer (1986) Empirical study With "other advertising exposure P Findings Gender of the endorser did not significantly affect consumer attitudes. lllm1y of the results would be more consistent if the 11. (3) neutral. Wright. 1999). 1999. ••••••••. 1995. Kreshel. 1991. Peirce and McBride. . and Sciglimpaglia. 1990i Sexton and Haberman.. 1976. Caballero and Solomon. 104 students Radio advertisements and beer (masculine) for Gender of product: (L) feminine. Darley and.1) male and (2) temale No difference in advertising credibility was associated with gender "of endorser.•. •••• ' ••• . Smith. while one study disputesit (Frciden. be more effective for females than advertisin appear 7 ingle and Doran.GENDER ISSUES TABLE 4 Spokesperson Gender Effects Study (Empldcal Analys. . and Tinkham. Perhaps some of the variance between tudie ca 11 be explained by such differissues.••••••• ~. (2) masculine. ••••••• i ••••••••••••••••••••••••. 1. Kerin. few men smok Virginia Slims cigarettes but many women smoke Marlboro cigarettes. 1974). for areas of disagreement in lude studgender bias in advertising ies suggesting is decreasing (for example.

1 •••••••••••••• " •••••••••••••• ~ ••••••••••• T'" •••• ~~ ••••••••••• ~ ••••• ~ •••••••••• '. I ••••••••• .•• ". •••• ~ •••• . '. ••• ~•••• ..GENDER ISSUES TABLE 5 Gender DIfferences in Advertisement Response Study (Empirical Analyses) •• ~. •••• I •• ....7) Empirical stu.. . •••••• ~ 1.information: (1) positive and Females employed information inrorrnan 0 n. The persuasbllity sex role concepts and messages of either gender is are activated prior advertlsements affective. I ••••••••••••••• II .. ••. ".•••••••••••••••• Findings ' ••••• LU~'~'" u "." •••••• I .. ••••• " •••••••••••••••••• " ••. h ••• " ••.... role-eonsisrent Nature of prime: (1) agentlc (2) communal.•••• ._. self and other as a basts of Judgment (2) negative. ••• . Low and high desire to work women exhibit different attitudes and intended behavior toward the homemaker and career advertisements .. ". ••••••• I I •••••••• I I ••••••• . ••••••• I •••• .1. •••••••• .. '.~ ~"" • I ••••• . ortentatlen: (1) self and enhanced when gender-appropriate to judgment and used to interpret that embody sex values'.. ••••••••• . ••••• " •• . .'I •••••• I ~ ••• I l1B students Product persuasion verbiage and taste-testing soft drink of a Self. " •••••••••••••••••••••. ". empirical st!1dy with print adverUsing e~posure .. ••••••• .•••. ••••••••• I •••• I .. •• 'i'. ... • u . o ••• ~.••••... '•••••.".~'. i •••• " •••••••• " •••••••••••••• . •• H.·. Barry. •.o .•••. ••••••• " . .••••• " •• '. •• " ." ..•••••••• I .. u •••• _ ••••••••••••••• " •••• . •• ~ ••• I ••• I I I :L20 JOURnnL Of RUUERrlSInG Rmnn~H March 2003 .••• (2) to career women..•••••• I ••••••• ._ •• .." ••••••• I •• ". •••• .•••• . I •• r •• ' ~~ •• I • . . and (3) generic " •••••.I ••••••••••••••••• . "" Subjects LL"'~'" "P' .dy with print Image: (1) sex and (2) progressive advertising exposure 160 adult housewives Print and audib advertisements for Wright (1975) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Media: (1) print and (2) audio. •...•••. I •••• Rossi and Rossi (1985) Empirical study With prim 137 students Five magazines' advert! sernents Sexism: 1) present and 2) The target adverttsements were rated more sexist by women than men. • • • • • • __ ••••••• __ ••••• J •••••• . Gilly..•• . •••• •. . •••••• ~.. I •••• ~ ••• I. •• .) Empirical study with print advertising exposure :1-60 students Print persuasive oommunication for mouthwash Message (2) other.. Negative llheat relationships confidence measures and between a soy 'food message-acceptance audio and print.' •••• ~. measures in Processing involvement: (1) high and (2) low . ••••••• I .. affect MacKay and Covell (199.'0. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Source .. I ••••••••• I •••••••• . •••••• II .' •••• "S" ." .. ••..'..~ •• . and intention ratings of the for the professional Empirical study with print advertising Meyer:o." .. behavioral version. ••••••• . •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Varla'bles '. . Manlpulat. I •••••••• I ••• I •••••••••••••• ..•• I ••• i •••• I •• ~ •••••••••• __ • 1." •••••••• " •••••••••••••••••••••• .••• .il .. •• .••••.••. '••••••••• " ••••••• ".• '. .d . ••• I I . ••••••• I ••• I •••• I.1" " i~ Kilbourne (1986) exposure 101 adults Print advertisement for a calculator Role: (1) woman as housewife and (2) woman as professional 80tl1 male and female respondents ha.-Lew (1988..". Other information: (1) posltlve and (2) negative while males use only self •••• '.. ••• ~. ••• " •••• ..ed u<. Prime: (1) absence and (2) presence . and Doran ·(1985) 249 adult Women Print advertisements Appeal: (1) 10 housewives.· ••• _. •••••••• I r ••• I ••• I •••• I •••• .l1igher cognitive. •••••• . •••• ~•••• . ..".. adverrislng exposure 92 students Print advertisements not present Sex image advertisements acceptance of feminism...

••••••.•..••..• '...••••• ~•.. When the visual portion of the message is highly sexual. (2) fully clothed male. _••. ro-' .GENDER ISSUES TABLE 5 (cont'd) Study (iEmp.•••. and Belch (1990) Empirical study with.• . processing tends to focus more on the execution of the message in terms of its sexual elements.. No gender differences in changes In .' •••••••••••• ~••••••••••••••.••... Kempf.rrical Analyses) Subjects Source Print advertisements ManIpulated Variables Arousal: (1) high (2) medium. a single advertislng exoosure may not be as successful at creating confidently-held as for males . type: (1) only product.. ..and (1997) l.• _•••.. Information: (1) high and (2) low..•.. Simpson. and Snook- 202 students Luther (1990) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Severn.. ".. Males prefer advertisements ex- . (3) no shirt on model.•..~. and (3) low 1. Female respondents react more with favorably to advertisements male models than male respondents. Advertising.• '•••. not on the product or message.. adults (1996) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Print advertisements Product nudity interaction: (1) yes and (2) no.. Pitts. Horton. Empirical study with print advertising exposure .•••••••• ~.. attitudes _.••••• .afour. Belch.••..attitudes of men and women. Females prefer advertisements with socialization petitiveactivities groups. Carsky and Zuckerman (1991) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Prakash (1992) Empirical study With print advertising exposure Arousal can be an important mediating variable in the effects of female nudity and the advertisement on advertislng impressions. ••••••••••••••••••••••..••.• -.•••.••..80 students Magazine advertisement for a sport shoe Sex: (1) high and (2) low. .••••.. context t.•••• (continued) March 2003 JOURnRl OF ROUERnSInG RESERReH 121 .hibiting socialization in large groups and with competitive activities.• 0._.. print advertising exposure 100 students First. ~. two filler advertisements For females.. and Brown 341.aczniak 105 students Print advertisement a soft drink and two filler advertisements for One test ad.~""""""" ••••..•• _••.••. in nonsports com- or noncompetitive activities in either large or small LaTour and Henthorne (1994) Empirical study with prim advertising exposure Mall intercept study With 199 adults Black and white print advertisements jeans for Sexual theme: (1) strong and (2) mild Both men and women have potential ethical concerns about the use of strong sexual appeals in advertising. Socializing: (1) large group and (2)small group.••. subjects completed a questionnaire and then saw relevant print advertisements N/A 85 students Print advertisements Oompetition: (1) self and (2) with others.••. and (4) nude model.. Palan..•••••••••.

.... Women have more negative attitudes toward the sexy female model advertisements advertisements. . Jones......lSSUES TABLE 5 (cont'd) Study (Empirical Analyses) .. (2) sexy female model.• . than men had toward the sexy male print [ust landscape.. and (5) The nonsexy advertisements seem to do the most good with the least harm. (4) nonsexy female model.exposure 1:14 adults Radio advertisements for car maintenance service For positions directed at women..... Kates and Shaw-Garlock (1999) Empirical study with print advertising exposure •••••• _........•• ' ••••• . (2) mildly androgynous..... ••••• _ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• _••••• _ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• " •••••• I •••••••• ... women and men will react similarly.. •••• ~ ••• Magazine advertisements in women's magazines None-long Interviews Consumers interpret advertisements and negotiate personalized meanings through discursive...... Stanaland.... Gender role attitudes: (1) more traditional and (2) less traditional Men's gender role attitudes can be influenced by images of men they see in the media.'... Garst and Bodenhausen (1997) Empirical study with print advertising exposure Magazi neadverti sements with male users for coffee and computers Type of media portrayal: (1) highly androgynous... Generally. and Gelb (1998) Empirical study with adMertising exposure 300 undergraduate students Magazine advertisements for a bicycle Type of advertisement: (1) sexy male model.... •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Findings 1••••••••••••• . Bellizzi and Milner (199:L) Empirical study with advert/sing ...... Gender: (1) female and (2) male.. Age of model: (1) young and (2) Old... ••• ' .............. •••••••• " ••••••• " •••• _•• McDaniel and Kinney (199B) Empirical study with television advertising exposure 215 students Videotaped segment from the 1994 Olyrnpies with manipulated commercials Commercials: (1) three sponsor advertisements and (2) seven dummy spots Voice over: (1) male with male name of store and (2) female wlth female name of store Females tend to respond more positively to brands they perceive as supporting a favorite cause.... •••••••• . ••••• ~••••••••••• ..•••• __••••• I ••••••• I ••••••••••• ~ ••• Eight informants: two students and six strangers ~••••••••••••••••• '••••••••. For positions directed at men.. Manipulated Subjects 267 male undergraduate students Source ..GENDER.IU" ••• '·" ••••••••••••••• Variables ..... (3) nonsexy male model.I •• ... react less positively them women.. ••••••• I . and (3) traditionally masculine.. men will.. romer: Wolburg and Pokrywczynski (2001) Empirical print advertising study without exposure 368 students Survey on advertising informativeness N/ A advertising 122 JOURnRL Of RUUERTlSInG R[SERR~H Marcil 2003 ..... females versus males rated most media advertisements more informative. cultural viewpoints._ •. were implemented....

. ... and purchase intention N/A Compared with a similar 1977 study... •• .• ~••••••••••••••••• 'r ••~•....ertising study without advertising exposure ••••••••. ••••••••••••••••• " f.... •• ~ •• . ••• . •••••••••••••• Ford..~••••••••••••••••••••••••• 603 households Questionnaire designed N/A Male's ideal and real image is more that of a Jeader and is more cornellcated than females'. ••• ~ •• i •• h •••• 0_0 •• •• ••••••••• Variables . ••••••••••••• ••••••••••.. •••••••• . . ••• ~•••••••••••••••••••••••••• ... _ ••••••• 1 ••• ' .' •..(1981) Conceptual analysis A meta-analysis of studies examining whether men and women differ in how easily they are influenced Women were more persuadable than men and women were more conforming than men in group pressure Situations.•.l91) Empirical print advertising study without advertising exposure . ••••••••••• . ••••• " ••••••••• . •••••••• " ••••••••••••••••.. (2) majority female. _-••••• ' •••• to measure self-image.. particularly when surveillance by an influencing agent is involved. .....•••••••••••• J •••••••• ..... . •••••••••••••••• ~•• . •• " ••••••••••••••••• .. ••••••••••••••. ! •••••••••••••••• .... ~•••••• .. .. ! •••••••••••••••••••• ..' •• '••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1' Swan and Wyer(1997) Empirical print ad!/.. .•••••• " •••••••••••••••••• . females cared more than males about the various message appeals used to persuade them. ••••••••••••• . ' -.. ••••••• ..• .•••••••• "" ••• .... ••••••• Ournli] and Erdem (1997) Empirical "other" advert/sing study without advertising exposure r ••••• '·'.. . ••• .." ..•••••• " •••••• '"••••• ! •• '" ••••••••• Eagly and Carll ..•••••..•••.GENDEHISSUES TABLES (cont'd) Study (Empirical Analyses) .. .." ••••••••• · ••• • Manipulated Subjects 1.. ••• . ••••••••••••••• ... ••••••••••••••••••• ' •• .... .... •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• a negative percep- tion toward female role portrayal in I ••••••••••••• . . •••••• I •• '" •••. 52 students Music tapes Music: (1) tempo and (2) loudness Females reacted adversely to louder music and there were no tempo effects... .. ••••• to_ ••••••••••••••••••• Findings ..... ..O •• " " II ••••••••. • ~••••••••••••••• i "•••.. ••• ~ ••• 150 upscale adult females Survey on attitude toward role portrayal. desired image...•..."' •••••••.••••••••••• ~ •••••••• . the difference in gender influenceability was found to be small..' ••••••••••••••••••••••• ... ~ " .. and demographics _..... •• '" ••••••••••••• 103 students Paragraph describing ambiguous enactments of several stereotypically masculine and feminine traits Three groups: (:1) majority male. and (3) equal " •••••••• " ••••••••••••• F< •••••••••••••••••• 80tn men and women judged themselves to be more masculine when they were in the minority than in the majority. ••••••••••• " •.· ••• .....•• "••~~"""._H".. this is not true.. •• ! •••••••• . ...• ~ .." ••••••• "..." Source .. •••••••••••••••••••••••• ....•••• ~" .••. but for more medern women. l..........••.'.••••• ..~ ••• .. •••• .. 1... ••• 1..• .....· •••• ··.. ..." . ••••• . ••••••••••••••••• .....740 phone interviews Phone Interviews N/A In the past. company image.•.' •• f ••••••••••••••••••••••• j •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• "~"H'" ••••••....••••••••••••••••••• ... and Brannich (1992) Empirical "other" advertising study without advertising exposure . •• i •••••••• ..' •••••••••••••••••••••••• " ••••• ~ ••••••••••••••••• .. women still have advertisements.•• ~... • • I ••••••••••••••••••• ... ". . " •••••••••••• .•...• " ..... ....••••. " •••••• I ••••••• ."..•••..... •••••••••••• March 2003 JOUAnAl or ROUERTISInG RESEARGH 123 . However. ••••••••• .h ••• ......••••••••••••••••......... and Lundstrom (1!..•••••••••• . Study (Conceptual Eagly (1978) Conceptual analysis Analyses) Subject An examination of the hypothesis that women are more influenceable than men Findings Little empirical support for the hypothesis: the fi'ndlngs are paradoxical in relation to the popular notion of social psychology indicating that women are more easily influenced than men .•.... •••• ... Meenaghan. ... ••••••••••••••• . ••••••••• + ••••••••••••••••••••••••• .. r.•• ··.. .J QUinn.. •• ~ •• I ••• ..·.••• . 1 •••••••••••••••••••••• •.... 225 students Questionnaire designed to measure impact of fear appeals N/ A Females have a higher degree of fear than males.•• ~ •• i •••••••• Widgery and McGaugh (1993) Empirical "other" advertising study without advertising exposure Kellaris and Rice (1993) Empirioal "ether" advertising study without advertising exposure •••••••••• ~.. ..alour. •• . •••. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~•• .. •••• .

Study (Conceptual Analyses) •••••••••••• j Gender of product: (1) masculine and (2) feminine Subject . I.~ ••••• . studies used product-user target markets tising format leaves us with a preliminary understanding of how gender differences can be used in the creation of advertising (Prakash and Flores.eptual Analy. •••••••• . •• ~. Perhaps the conflicting literature findings demonstrate of everyday and more effective in terms of adand purchase in- O'Connor.11S of the centralunexamined issues. what should be called into question is whether fitting the roles of females in. 1985. Purther. u·. p ••• . ••••. •••••••••••••. and Hodgson (1992) Conceptual analysis An attempt to redefine gender positioning of brands The authors plan to identify themes In consumer interpretations of gender representations. TI1US. However. First.••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••. ••• " ••••• "'"I'" ••• ~ . Settle. validity issues. Ruggiero and Weston. Eccles. However. ••••••• . _ ••••• __ ••••••••••••• _ •••••• _ •• ~ •• . Since the mid 19805. A discussion of creating and sustaining gender-based knowledge in marketing research . who is making the TOle portrayal decisions-is it males. •• ' ••••••••••••• ' ••••• . •••••••••• I ••••••••• ..•• n •••• .•• __ •• _. Men highlight the distinction in gender symbols . many of the studies have been conducted with no specific hypotheses stated (for example. ••••••••••••••••• I •••• . suggesting that women are more task oriented. and advertising development will trengthen the topic's forward movement. in consumer and market behavior in invisible ways.••••••••••••••••••• and increasingly implicated . th identifying gender differences in te11.•• ~ •••••••••••••••••••••• . 124 JOURnRL or nOUERTISInG R£SERnCH March 2003 . Penaloza (1994) Conceptilal analysis . The comprehension of gender issues in advertising has been slightly advanced through empirical studies. and Belch (1982) Empirical study With "other' advertising exposure Subjects 600 adults Source Radio copy in written form for masculine and feminine brands of soap Manipulated Variables Findings Women prefer feminine brands and are accepting of masculine brands. Further. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. limited work has been performed to meet th is challeng . The abovementioned research on psychological differences in relation to adveris inclined results closer to the temporal occurlife would advertising make image. 0" ••• 0 ••• 0 ••• ' •••••••• " Findings " •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. . ••••• . ••••••••••••••••••••••••••. •••••• . advertisements rences advertising gender of the researcher is a variin Eagly and Carli's able in itself and could account for some of the discrepancies (1981) meta-analysis.. _. •••••• Elliott.. ••••••• _ ••••••• •••••••• _. '. attention to reliabilities. tent. of eliminating advertising stereotyping and spokesperson gender effects? Thu . •••••••• . ••• ~ ••••• . realism. by as the sample to 'improve the external and internal validity by way of relating female and male role preference to prod netus r characteristics. it is proposed that the following research questions can be inves tigated. With gender testing. and do not readily accept feminine brands. Green (1996) Conceptual analysis A review on gender responses to' surveys Women are more likely to respond to surveys than men. sample characteristics. . and conceptual pieces. females. This Jack of hypothesis to lead to wee k vertising evaluation. ••••••• . Another explanation could be re earcher bias. adverti ing believability. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Gender is multidimensional .•••••••• '" . biases. •••• " ••• .•••••••••••••. ~ ••••••••••••••• . .GENDER ISSUES TABLE 5 (cont'd) Study (Conc::. and spokesperson effect over time." •••••••••. 1988). •••••••• . or a team approach? Are these people well the need to research a broader question: Wha~ is the relevance TABLE 6 Gender Brand Positioning Study (Empirical Analysis) Alreck. content analyses.u ••••• . the synthesized are not dear in some areas.prefer masculine brands.ses) i• Su~IJJect •• _. 1985). there are conflicting results regarding gender-bias.. Sullivan generation results.

fashicn to appropriate target markets.sensitive than males to this inequity. Through Bern's SeK Role Inventory (BS. several future crosse disciplinary research avenues exist to augment the research in this expanding field man and nOI15e. gendered advertising response difference exist. and Brown. Further. Bern's (1974. the opposite Is theorizedmore effective. directed to males should interpreted in terms of advertising ap- to females with either objective or subjective-advertising vertisements claims whereby the addirected peals to men and worn en. to a particular role (Borker and Maltz. :following the literature pertaining to the selectivity hypotheses and the ge:f.ing marketing strategy •. 1981).Rl).These findings could be tested and in( Research.. Perhaps examining models in other marketing for model disciplines offers areas When expanding building.Atlantic UniversIty." inclUded senior vice 'president higher-risk products should be advertised level' positions wl1l1 major hotel managernen.lJmai ot Advert!. Barnett. The implications should be considered by advertisers. it is likely that marketers would benefit from communicating in a genderizcd.nts exhibit onlyo~jective claims. isk products should be advertised to females r claims Perhaps a demo- graphically representative depiction is not necessary if females-are less. and if advertisements are just fantasies. SU11. firms. ahd Her extens iv. Second. Integra. sex-typed individuals tend to encode and organize information in terms of a gender schema. advertising through sex role 'identity rather than gender may prove useful after all. they just replicating? OT are . WOliN is an asststant professor of nlarl<eti~g at Lynn' University: aornln. addirected at females should as sex typed (masculine . males have been found to have a higher preference for extrinsic job satisfaction rewards such as p<\y and promotion (Schul and Wren. research suggests females are more caring.ing processing differences. Thus. limited work on theoretic models exists .D. providing the necessary awareness to underill effectiveness Is based on its ability to sell products and services.and sales manage- ment. principles. Bern (1981) categorizes individuals 'Of with either . It' is elucidated that marketers would be wise to design advertisements directed toward females differently than those directed toward males. exhibit only objective claims. Singhapakdi.ba_ckground of Advert'islng. 1989). marie indlviduals should be less subject to conforming their mformatlon processing to group stereotypes (Bern. 1999).ter.. For males. theory by Inspecting the literature on gen- at fiI.. higher . SUMMARY to males should Generally. Second.. 1998. first. Sex-typed individuals are mote likely to keep their behavior consistent with their culture's definitions of gender appropriateness cerns past findings and liotab:ly indicates proved realism.stration She recelvedher Ph. Additionally.. feminine) or nonsex typed (androgynous undifferentiated).. stand how to make advertisements different media more effective. designing female-oriented appcals jn a LeES stereofashion appeals smphasizing typical.htema~la(lE!1 Journal Industry. In final.e-rnarketing. using femininity and masculinity as the organizing dimensions. For example. ISSUES aware of what they are creating. and lng Interests IhClw~1.xAsche- typed individuals are more likely to cross the traditional gender boundaries. the 'l. im- nor use Ioud music or competitive-oriented prctorials. the Journal of InlemetResearch.! usiness comrnuotcanons..del" differences iJ. more advertisements vertisements females will also need to be exposed to than males in order to reach the desired behavior. Vittell. Her research has been presented at marketing bonterenoes and publlshed in the JO. for example. Thus.. in business Her teach-.orld'a . What is now called into question is whether advertisers should continue to work toward further decreasing stereotyping.1' advertising response. 'coob sumer behavior . 1992) . It is possible to approach genderized cornmunication as a form. 1981. will g. evaluating gender dlfferenees in.. and gsndered "qvert~s. of communication attached. 1985) gender schema theory. marl<e1.l. Perhaps this review will stimulate additional advertising effectiveness research. more caring!" communal and male-oriented extrinsic benefits. is that gender is increasingly implicated ji1 con- sumer and market behavior: certain roles are inherently genderized.l. communal. Finally. der issues in personal selling and sales management.or 1111soversighasynthesis decreasing advertising of research disstereotyping. with particular emphasis on gender differences.GENDER.1.l11arketlng Q)[mmunlcalioT1S.objective or sU~jective advertising whereby the adverliseme. gender schema research may provide insight into why these differentialfindingsexist Accordingto and if decreasing stereotyping and gender effects are effective. nlarketing rnanagernen]. @ LORI D. attempt to develop a greater under- if ad vertising' s standing of why and how these issues are sapertinent to researchers..endered realism increase sales? The overallfherrs. March 2003 JOURnRL UF ""U[RTlSInG R[SEARCH 125 . and idealistic than males (Bass.. Franke.

R. Science 12. "A ConAdvertisements from on Cender Portrayals in Television Commer- --. iYER. UlIderslOlrdillg ington. EAGLY.5." III Gender alld AI!Urropology." In Gelll~<!" Benaotar. "Gender Processing Dif- Press. University t.LlAMS. 5/6 A Conceptual Nebrnskn and Bmpirical States and the Arab World. 1991. . A. K.GENDER ISSUES REFERENCES ASIDUol)T'fl:V.. arion. Hess and M." of Psychological l-L7. 2 (1974): ] 5S-62.' Jarmrtrl of Advertising Resenrch 31. E. W. P.ilrg 295-319. "Androgyny and Gender Schema Theory: Lntegratlon. logical Perspectives all Gender and Language. A tent Analysis the United S. S. BELeli. "Popular Culture Content f-tlllldbook and and the PorControl. London: Sage." "Who Responds fmmwl Bo. 1 ('1995): 41-56. "Sex Differences in Influence- CANTO!~ BASS. 4 (1984): 93-108.. BEL1. DORAN. Ferree." 2 (1985): 26. and R. 4 (1981): 354-64.I'1ARRIS.!" 50. 19 9. 1::1. RA KlN-WlI. Bln.." Information Analysis.en An Historical/Contemporary and COllSIl!ller A. Career Advertising Wmnen's in 'Iraditional Magazines ~f Arlvtrfisinx and JOl/mal of Advertisiug Resclf1'c!i 25. Portrayals Advertiseof BARTSCH..Tl1." Set Roles (1996): 185-203. "A Lon- Gender Roles in High Tech Product E. 13 RNE'IT. ADAMS. 811d M. and Imagery and M. 2 ("19 6): B!lM. J. NE: K. "AnthropoR. T.XAOU1. and L. and L L. BROWN. "The influence of Spokespersons Image: in Altering a Product's Gender BARRY. 126 JOURnAL or RDUERTlsms R[SERRCH March 2003 . BAl{NETI..i~lg Researc» 12. and M.1 (1978): 86-116.. IlgellJfml' 12.TO . J.!. ALVJlSSON." IUlInl(l/ (1992): 197-2. LEICliTY. "In Com- A. "Gender Posi- Cl'TENG. Lincoln. "Sex of Researchers as Determip$Y- Influence on Ethical Decision Research. R. and Gel/der. E. Morgen. H. S.H. Newbury CA: Sage." of Advertising-A rmliMral Jorlrlll~l of Advertis. of Television Commercials 35. MALTZ. 1972. Television ing Television Study and the Reprod uction of Difference. "Information and Social Relations. A. and CABALLERO." Role Portrayal in ments. Sl. "The 88. Sex"Typed Meta-Analysis Communications Of Pcn. 247-65. T.." Tlldustria/ Mllrkdirrg Mlm- ()f Mr. T. JOllmal of Consulting and Clinical COLTRANE. L. K. "Gender Representation and Up- gitudinal View of Women's Television Advertising. Symposimu em Motivlltiol1: PsychQ/ogy DARLEY. 3 (1991): 72-79." chologica! Bulletin 90. and J. and How?" 2 (1982).RKE. Irnplications lotmllli for Advertising Effective15. and P. and R.NKE:. and G. TONE"R.ENKO. K.ily ALl-AN. 1985. to Gendered Ads." "The trayal of Women: Moral Philosophy of Sales and Its [ourunt Alltl. M. R.. A" T. 2 (1993). 1997. 19505-1980s." iouruolin» Quarterly 70. ed. Dn. BfLl.. and L. Male-Dominant Prod- Bocfoculeural trayal Comparison of Gender-Role PorInter- "The M('ta- uct.2 (1976). and C. Technology J. eds. 2 (1997): 323-47. of Socilll Science --.R.. BBLKAQUl. MiLNm. 1 (1981): 1-20. M.mSKY. 8 (1997): 718-27. of ebraska ed. 1987.. B." "Adverti ing to Women with Different Orientation . E. 9/10 (2000): 735-43. and D. DC: American Anthropological Gender mrd Organizlltions. in Chinese and US Adverfising. Content FRA. C. B. 16. 2 (1983): 145-49. Sonderegger.lrker. and E. Account "Gender Schema Theory: A Cognitive Gender Stereotypes. Effect of Television Day Part AVOI . and G.11.. and Y. date.. 5." Sex RolL's 26. YAN. J.. H. and G.llaly· EM. "Work-:Fam. Sl\'I1TH. and Snles ManagemeNt 18. M. R. 168-72. 25-32.. 5..4 (1986): 12-20.E. "Gender DisplayCommercials: A Comparative in the 19505 Psychology 42.:. BUSBY.. B." Sex Roft. A. ed. M. trial Advertisement . M . SOLOMO ." lour- sis. L "The Measurement Androgyny.IZZr." In ability. M@n~gers Making. A." III of Magazine cial : A Content Analysis. 4 (1997): lcurnal of Advertising 25. G. CARLJ.• and K KARAN DE. Costa. Ierenees in Information Strategies: Model in AlRECK. M. PsydlOlogical Review " CR!\lG." ]ounIlIl of Vocalimllli Balmvi.. and S. 2.. L. "Holding Up Half of th ky? A tioning oJ 11 Traditionally A.~4. "A Compar- Search of Gender Differences munication: in Marketing ative Analysis of the Roles Portrayed by Wom.. and. N . 43. "Women in Indus- in Pri:ntAdvertisements-1958. Zu KERMAN. COLTRANE. 3/4 and 19805." PsycJJO/llgicnl Bulle/in 8.. B. G IU Y.. of Adlll!rtisitlg Advertising Journal oj Adv~rtisirlg Rescarc/I22. R.£ Sex Typing . WashAssociDEREV"EC." Journal of the AmericaJj Soddy for lIljar· in Television Commercials: Updating Academy of Mal'ketillg marion Bcieucc 48. An Empirical Test of UlIO! Selectivity Response..oNai Scllilfg (1998): 1-17.lyzing Gellder-A Park. of Adv£'rtjsitr~ 29. c. nants of Sex Differences in Influenceability: A of Social Influence Studies.G.. 24... 0. F. M.3 (2000): 69-82. --. J. Hal ]970. DILlER. L J. "Feminism and Nontraditional ness..

g 52.vc/fof()gy and Market- L and R. i:ng Rlisel1l'c/r 24.Sl'ANALAI\1j)."W0n. A Comjournal JA(:.B..R." Adu(jllce. an. "Gender.rENHAu~£N. and M. FREl.. M" W. ].. T. Loudness. "Nothing New Under the Sun? A GOULD.AN. porary --.. "Advertis- BVll.CZNIAK. JOURnHL OF RDUERTISmG RESEARCH 127 . N.I1 of Endorser Type and Med. DECKER. Portrayals in. eds. "Advertising Spokesperson Ef- fects: An Examine tiQ.rtd Society 16. 1. HONEYC\ITT. der Repositioning Analysis.7 42-47.nwl Of Per- tures in Fifty Countries and Three Regions. D.CU. K." In G~nriel' Issues :in Colllel. Dziurawiec. A.£- Ad vertisements 38. in 01l' Gender 'and CO/'islI:m. J. J. C. TINKHAM.. and M." Ps. 'iFm~ltl:ty Perceptions of Marketing [ournals. "Early Gen- parison of Television Advertisements. and R. ECCLES. PORD.1/2 elK/! df the Europluw Grunert and D. ke and Cheesecake: Insights for Advertis- (l998): 1065-77. M.MA Task in Advertising: Marketing A Semiotic lypu. and S. 1992.A. ''WOl:nen ill.l (1997).O!vL. Netherlands: Swats and Zeitlinger. and G. KAT. teotypiPlg in Australian Radio Connnercials.n.ND.J<EJN. and A. and Gender of Listener on Responses to Music." 101mrn! pf A. B. KRAlvnm. "Men and Women: Images of Their March 2003. n/12 Some Personal and Theoretical Observations on the Pervasiveness of Bexualiry ill Cendered Consumer Behavior. 3 (1994): 487-507. P: J. "6.rt'. 1991. Context.. E. "Why Confidence In an Ad vertli." Sex Roles 36. Ii t. CfI.65. A. ErtA." In E. E. Oskamp. HIR5Cl'IMAN. \:<1 M. PAl. D. 3 (1979): 3. M.. Fuglede. C. eds. and L.tiOfI5 in Cress-Cultum! Det1egowski.dt!e. LU.!'!'. and G BOI.isii1g19. Costanzo. B. W.ll'- Mail Survey Response. S. 3 (1998): J." fO!ll'Nai. Scrrwxnrz. CASEY.EWIlR.3-46. SfJciety.OFS'I. D. Newbury FLRST.. HOLt. ers. [ourno! of Marketing Education El. PIillGUSON.' Sex Roles 2~. 33-41. GaRST. Comparison of images of Women in Israeli in 1979 and 1994. E 1 (1990): GI. "Dimensions . and R. C.. A. 2 ·(1998): 33-51." ./2 (l997): 103-14.E. Denmark: European Marketing Academy.mil Mllr- --. THOMsoN .7-42. K E. 5. 2 (1999): 33-49. Nlllls.P:E.. LrITQOll. and J. Advertising. Perspective. E. Sex Roles and Sexuality: )oms. M. 1 (1991): 15-28. Professicnal sourceManagement 33-41. R." Sex Roles 40.iI- "orat!!. and L.1Wo Bri tish Radio (1999): 153. sOMI SeUhlg nlTd Snles MflltllgeIrJf!1rI' 8.pedn. TFlOi'vIl'SON. C. J.DE .!i in CQ. K.. W"aJild.1.BOURN'E. 26.. T.rnen.. Park. Port~'lyal ()f Me!') and WomeLliin British Talevision Advertisements. C. p. 37-52. S. r. J-i. H.LU.g in Advertisements Force Study. [. 1 24 (J997): #3-49.." /rllJ'I17n. ed.er Bcnaino«. S. 1-. D. L'\.. M. "Gender Role StereoOJ1. W. GREEN. and R. "ContemR01e "Gender Women's Evaluation of Female po." TOUl'lwl of Advertising 27.J. J. Advertlslng to Wa. "Sex Roles in Ad vertising: Advertising.996): 171-84. "Sociodemogrephic Factors and KtrtLARIS." a." Im. of Tempo. Selling: A Human Re- National CulKrr. C." Annis. G. B. 8. eds. M. G. 28..BASHAW.af 40'-51. Salt Lake City. 3/4 (1993). l1: Marketing 52." Sex Roles J. R.TZ.e12.]. S. SCrGLIMl'A. A PreIirninary Study.lng..rting Cultural Stereotypes." of Markefin." Psyd!(l/ogy rial [if Adl'crfising ResefllTh 3S. LUNDSTRbw.. GIill'FIN. PsychOlogy. K. J. "An Bxploratory Study of on AttiJQur14. RICE. BAKU. p.@ut1la. and C. Gender 011 Two Audiences. CA: Sage.. JA51'1rl~.l~1l in Advertisements: Retrospect and Prospect.. A"." In 'Proceedi(I'gsoflhe CfJl1j'el'el1ce Costa. U1': University J. on the A. 2' (1988): 75-85 .: Women in Adve~t.. 5 (19~3): 43-52..-.ia Matter: Toward a Richer Understanding of Consumers' Relationships with Advertising and Mass Media. 4 (1988): In Proc~edillg" of Mw AJ1m. "TIle SteEebtyped lll. 1 (1993): 15-29. A. S. FURNBAM. "The' Influence lo Female Role Portrayals in Advertising. "Comments 'T."JR "Cender Role Ste-. S'lIAW-GARLOCK.. 5 '(1984):. A Study of Ideologies <mel Discoursesin 11111 of Advertising Japanese Advertising: Content Analy- Utah Printing Press. 297-310. N.jl of the AmdelllY pI MIl)'k~li'l'lg Sdel!CC (198'15):4.1i!r ResCt:rj'c!-' ]. i.lt'!fre kel'ing 10..d N." lou. lng's Effectson Men's Gender Role Attitudes. GELS.BS. 1. Role Stereotyping tudes Toward Magazine Advertisements. and D. 1 (1998'): 113-24. A. HODGSON.0£ FUGATE. and D. ).f1s~W. and B..].sex Roles 36. DOllJ.. 2 (1. S. and M. 'SC~JWARTZ.STll. R.1 Of Ari'UOI' tiS"i1'/g '27." j. the Effect of Sex.ll. L.sillg S.. "The and S. 1983." "Gen- --.mlll! of AttI~ei'H~- KERIN. Knnsuzt.GENDER ISSUES ELLIon. 1-111 S. and W. Advertising lnthe US and India: ExMedia.. 9/10 (1997): 551-72. Btations." Marketing Jouriial Clf CC!n~r!mer "Gender Differencesin Information Processing 8. K.C>[Dur- sis." ing 13." KLAS~l!:N. --. "Di:f£etimg Reactions 'jO. KEM. "In the Pages of JlJIs.993." [eurna] of Adv8rtising (1997):43-60. der Development. VISWANATH.ml ConferACl1I:iemy. L "Conder Role Portrayals A Magazine of Ever Entangling Web.

HId Gender Effects ill. and Ad Response: An ExperimentalInvestigation. l'EIIl." vertising 19.r.. and K. "A Study of --. 7. and J. 1 (2000). A. IcffiNTIlORNE. Arousal. "Sex Role PortrayAn Context" Jour- als 111Turkish Television Advertisements: Examination 11111 in anInternational QUJ:NN. Portuguese Television Advertisements.l). "Gender Differences ill the Perception of 'Women in Magazine 39. --. and D. J." naliOl1l1/ Global m. E. 4 (1998): 365-403. Sex RQI~s 29. --. B. 4 (1990). 1989." international Jo!!mai of .." PS!lcJlO1ogJj anriMfltla.Td MHlti- 12 (198S): 231-37.: 67-'79.fing 15. (199'1): 71-83. of Gender to AdL'<'rUSi!lg..(1998)." Sex Roles 40. L. "Sex-Role Portrayals Co." Consumer Response to Ambush Marketing. "111e Implications of Recency . J. N." PsycilO/ogy of Women QW71r- --. Wll. 9110 ('1985):. and M. PNAKASR. KNUVPIill. Toua. McBllIDli. 3/4 (1996): 220-28. T. COLLLNS." [ournol ojMl1rk~Hng Research 28." .QUS. J. L.AMS. COVllLL "The Impact of OUMIJL and ERUEM. in the Use of Message Cues and judgments. L. E. S. BRANl'llCK. M." ferences ill Males' and Bemalss' Precessing Strategies_" Journal 0fCol1su11Ier 63-70. CogtliP. "[5 Industrial Advertising 'Still Sexist.. 959'-"66. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum LEl'!'AItQ. New York. "Crossing L aries and Their impact search.. "Racial and Gen- der Biases in Magazine Advertising: A Content Analytical Study.." Industrial Marketing Management . S. Is the Way of Euro-Marketil.g Format. Isn't Keeping Up with the Energizer Bunny: Stereotyping of Animated Spokes-Characters The Medium and the Message:' 128 JDURnAL OF ADUERTlSlnO RES[ARCH March 2003 . 4 Lines. es. "Consumer Adver- and Ad Response. 3 (1992): "Gender Stereotyping in Medical Advertising: Mud] Ado about Something?" 11/12 (1993): 829-38. McDA~.Respollses Lexington. rnents of SexualAppeals Jaurual of Advertising in Print Adverhsiug. and T. and J.L. in WOll1ell'S Magazines: Sex Role. Re- Praclice 37. S.CE. WALLEN. "The Influence of Sex Roles on I"I>NA:LOZA. 3. ill Advertislng.: [OilfIta7 of A~ii1l!rti5j1'Jg Research 33.. and D. R~c:mN'5." IOlln'u!/ of Consumer Research 14. A L~)Qk at the Nature of Gender BOllI1d- Theory into (1988): 522-30. J. Gender DIfferences: Applica- "Female Nudity. "Sex Roles and Adverusing ()f Preferenc- ." jouma! of Adllet'tishlg 29. Pro- Mnrketing 11. 9 110 (19~'7): 573-83. "Aunt Jemima RUGGUlRO." J01Jnml MILNER. . N·!lPT'UN'E. and M.U." Boundaries/Drawi:ne: on Marketing nology cations Advertisements for Ed ucational judgment. MEENAGHAN." Roles Ross!" S. COII- [oumu! of Ad- A Call for Research. SNool(-LunlER."ln 'lioe ami Affective . and A. "Self-Concept by Gender: (1997). Akron Busirws~ and Eam01J'lic Review Ij~. 1994." Images of AdV'er('i5ing:" of Magazine F. Associates._50.2 (1983). Lexington. and the (1992): 355-66.3 (1977): 72-79. 65-81. C. Gender of Nations. "Fear Appeals: SegmentatIon to LUNDSl'ROM.I:ld~'ertisil'!g 11. I (19. C. Englis." Sex Roles 12.91): Pl. C FWRES. 11/12 (1999). "WorK Options Ior Women 5/6 (]9$5): 535-47. M. 4 (1997): 627-44. VOlINC. Psychological MILNUN. ' Women in Advertisements ward Women:' on Aftitudes To- A focus on Male-Female Consumers. in Consumer Re.. 45. V. "Gender Stereotypes Sl'X.. 5. S. Ad"erti5ing Rt'Saarch 32... eels. 1 (1990). WCSTON. 1/2 (1998):153-64." Sex r?oles 36. Ross). R. N. L . W.lD33-39.1g and --. 4 Role Portrayals in Advertising. "Pemale tising: All Analysis Arousal Nudity in Ni:nt AdverDifferences in "Cender Differences in Information." [ourna! oflntematiOllill --. and L PINTO. --. a. cessing: A Se:!edivitylnterprel:ation.[arc/J 18. "Multinational Gender Positioning: In tions for Advertisin. "Gender DiVisions Across Techand the WWW: ImpliEquity" _tvlEYERS-LEVY.27. . R. "Female and Male Portrayals in Advertisements: A Re-Examination. STI. 1 (1998): 54-63. i\1AUE5WARAN. "Gender Differences terly 21. 18. 3 (1994): 81-90: Research. Advertising. 51-62. "Ethica. KrNN'I!¥.MA: tising In Ccnnany and the United States: A Consumer MIII'- Ming 7. 1 (1991): 84-96. K. international Journal of Research in --. SClGUMI'Ar.GENDER ISSUES Relationships in Magazine Advertisements.RNT!-[AL. PITTS. Advertis. MACKAY.1 [udg- --. "Exploring Dif- kefJ1!g 8.ing. Idealized NETO. 4 (1994): 359-79." S'If111(lr Reselltch AdllanCI!5 in. 'and L. ed.2 (1993}: 30-39. 12. and D. 247-55.Journal of lVlaJ'ketil1g 41. L. and 8. "Social Cempanson and JVUfnlli the LYONSKI.nd T. and R. OGLE!TREE. 23.. Study of Sexual Explicitness and Cross-Gender Contact. and L. S. j.UA. V_. R. "Sex --. and E. 43-52." Psychology QndMar- Cafferata and A Tybout.w. PIRON. 1 (1998): 1-13. and D.

zine Advertisements. "A Magazine Advertisements. 5. Salt Lake City." Journal of Markrrti'llg 43. TJ EI(NtUN I).. cia Is.:N·KATP.. SOSANTE. D." lou mal of Ad- K. SEXTON." In Pl'CJc'1edil1g~ ·of "Women in diating Effects of Perceived Moral Intensity and Personal Moral Philosophies. E. and A. CARS. 1980-1995. "Trends in S x Roles in Televisi n Commer- Activati 11. 3 (1985}: 4-17. 1959-71.K. "The B. of AduertisilJg 19. SHANr.. R. and J. SZYBILLO. "Factors Affecting Cognitive R·' isCOJJSLl7Iler tance to Advertising. nnd G.1II11 A. S. the Conference on Gander IIl'1d CClIIsumel' B£lmt1iol'. V. "Female 'Sells: Mapping the Evolution of Gender Advertising Research Across 'three Decades. Lasco. and L. BARICH-SCHNEIDER. Re- 'lfllri01rnllotlmnJ 11. c. March 2003 JUURnRL OF ROllERTlSInO R[SEHACH 1. c.at Stu. of £llro-MaJ'kelillg of Mnrketin " Science 24. MCCALL. Role Portrayals in Advertising and Communication Effectiveness: A Review. An Overview JOII. SCElNEID61(. FRANKE. D." ojAdoertieing 26. "Gender Repre3.. vertisiJ1g 7..yc." [ournal LYONS!{r. "Vehicle Mes- Role of Women in Industrial Selling: A Decade of Change.BRMAN." P . Consequences." International (1988): 20-30. "A Comparison of Gender R le Portrayals in Swe- [ournai of Ballk Marketil1g 6.' tile 19-36. B. WYlli~.13ELCH..29 .Advartisillg Research SULliVAN. Academy of MllrketiHg 5cil!11ce 27." 3 (19 6): 46'-64.. W.997): 255-71. (If Adv~~tisins Researci133. mid Me(if New Parndigin in Marketing Thought: The Contributions of l~ell. E.." !ourrlnl q( Aa- /l'n. W. and. P L. S. 3/4. S 'VER '.ni:n J. lege Students. "Gender Portrayal 11111of Asiall Blds. WllliN. and G. 2 (1978): 5-12. SCHUL. "WomWIUGHT. of ." JOllr12.. sage Appeals and fhe New Generation Woman. . M.." Jal/rlUff 41. (1988): 181-88. C. B"ROWN. HABERMAN. PQ. 5 (1993). Effects of Sexual and Non-Sexual Adverti ing Appeals and Information Level on Cognitive Processing and Communication Effectiveness.KY. G. 4 (1997): 21-38. "Plea antness.1. ti ing: A Comparison of 1964 and ]9 4 Magaand S. and A. O'CON OR. . and Sex Differences in Adverti Reports 8] (1997): 355-67. and P. K..iIl)logiclii A. and J. 1991." 18. M. CO)II- and Singapore Television Adv: rti semenrs.GENDER ISSUES RUTlEDCE-S~UELDS. R and Summary of Research." jO!l1'lla/.. 2 Replication and Extension of Gender and Prod- PersollfJlit!l and Socia! Psychology Bulletin.J.ness in Hong Kong WHIP'i>L1!. TERN. Psychcgraphic Analysis of Generation Y Col- ing Researoli H. E. den and the USA. and R. "Sex in AdverWHTSSELL.u Ing Sports Iarketing: A luter- en's Role Portrayals in Magazine Advertising: 1958-1983. M. J. US Open. and M. J.m. 11 (1995): 3849.. 1(1999).. SWAN. P." [ouma! of search 2. 3 (1992): Wives: Their General 'Ielevision Viewing and Magazine Readership Behavior.. ed. (1996): 257-62." [ournal lif Marketing.." European lournal (}f Market- ing 29. 12 sentations: The Case of Greek Magazine Advertisement (1(94): 27-47."SAN. "Ccnder StereoSocial Identity: How 'Being in the SrMPSON. (1997): 1265-76. B." 10U1'1I(l1 of the ACildemy A Modified Minority Affects J udgmenrs of Sel f and Others. 4 (1992): 377-92.. "Sell Me Some Prestige! The Portrayal J. and B." Sex 'R1)/d5 of the Adverl. J. W. 4 (1974). T. :. "Toward a Antecedents." lourual of Advertising J. and S. LONG.5 (1975): 49-54. Jlm. and M. MCGAUGI·1. CA: Sage. 23.." 'Joumn) of Populill' Culture 30. P. and P. "Wome. STOVER. 5. tJel'tising 14." [aurna! of Advel'tis- of Women in Business-Related Ads. CoURT> EY. 1 (1990): 14-22. M. and M. L.. VITrnLL. UT: University Research 15. T." In Oaks. K. 38-54. Jtl. G. "Courting Women Content Analysis of . C. J.isiltS HORTON. Thousand SoUY. E. c. ed. i\. J. A .l'11111 VE. of Utah Printing Press. and G. "Wor\dng WIDGERY. SAN DUR.2 Magazine Advertising: The Netherlands. Costa.iC11'tirJII Yearbook. and Z C. [ourrm! of Advertising 15.. K RZBARD.3 (1996): 47-64. "Selling the Se' Th. 1 (1975): 2-9·. M.• C. TRWl'. ing. 4 (1979): 79-84. 5 (2001): 33-5'2. BELQ1.41-46. R Burleson." [olImnf en es: Retailing Strategies for Bank Marketers. LAMOR. D. M. Y. M.~llXistTheory. "Media Us and Gender Differ- WILES. 4 (1. C. 1997. typesand "Male Nudity in Advertisements: uct Effect . A." ZOTOS. "The Emerging 56. 36-42. VILWOLBURG. Magazine Ads.!qn~'w Zy $'1(1. and M. R WILES. "Services Advertising: SlNGIIAI'AKDI. STEP:t-lENSO .

Copyright © 2003 E BSCO Publishing .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful