This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
La Trobe University, Bendigo
It is widely reported that humorous ads are better liked and therefore more effective than are non-humorous ones. This study examines whether the liking advantage associated with ads containing incongruity-resolution humor depends on sensation seeking. Higher sensation seekers are assumed to enjoy arousal induction because they are lower in base arousal level. From this it can be predicted that ads containing incongruity-resolution humor will not be liked better by such people than will equivalently arousing non-humorous ads. However, the higher base arousal assumed to characterize lower sensation seekers is claimed to be associated with a preference for reduction of induced arousal. Incongruity-resolution humor provides a mechanism for reduction of the arousal occasioned by the incongruity. As a result, it is expected that lower sensation seekers will like ads containing such humor more than non-humorous ads matched in arousal to the humorous ones. The results support those suggestions. The relevance of the findings for advertising is discussed, and requirements for further research are indicated. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 26(9): 779–792 (September 2009) Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/mar.20299 779
extraversion/introversion (Chang. Martin. 1996a. Weinberger et al. 2007). Eisend. 2006).. 1995). Such a connection is significant practically given that a commercial’s success can be influenced by how much it is liked (Holbrook & Batra. & Neijens. Hehl and Ruch (1985) indicate that only one humor content dimension. 2002). 2001. Gunter. Lorch et al. 2000. 1992). attitude toward the product advertised (Weinberger & Gulas. 1991). 1990). 2006. moderates the effects of incongruity-resolution humor on ad liking. Unger. 2004. and self-monitoring (DeBono. 1997. cultural background (Villegas & Shah. Yelkur. 2000. Furthermore. 2002. & Wentzel. Tomkovick. 2006a). Krishnan & Chakravarti. attitude toward the product category (Arias-Bolzmann.. Humor characterized by incongruity resolution has been extensively used in advertising (Alden. Kellaris and Cline (2007) point out that as much as 30% of the billions of dollars spent on advertising in national media each year is used for the placement of humorous ads. need for cognition (Geuens & Pelsmacker. memory for ads (Berg & Lippman. 2008). 2000).Humor is widely used in advertising (Elpers. sex of the consumer (Fugate. and ad liking (Cline & Kellaris. 2005). Alden. nonsense. 1997). Speck. 2007). sensation seeking. 1996b). 1995). Ruvio. underlies humor appreciation—the other dimensions being the structural 780 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. Perry et al. 2001. need to evaluate (Fennis & Bakker. & Kellaris. Mukherje. 2003. Chakraborty. Some individual difference moderators of the effects of humor in advertising have also been identified. Weinberger. Kellaris & Cline. One theme that appears promising for further examination concerns whether individual difference variables moderate those effects. Mukherjee. In contrast. 1996). Park. Everett & Palmgreen. As indicated above. 1991). 1996a). prior brand evaluation (Chattopadhyay & Basu. 2001). 1984. Smit. 2005). Cline. 2003. and self-monitoring (Lammers. Spotts. & Kellaris. 1999. sex role (Conway & Dube. & Hoyer. & Hoyer. 1992). Altsech. 1999. Incongruity resolution is a structural feature of humor characterized by the introduction of an incongruity which can be completely resolved. 1993. Zhang. introduces an incongruity which is left unresolved. 2007. the reasons for humor’s effects in advertising are not well comprehended (Kellaris & Cline. 2006). it is widely reported that humorous ads are better liked than are non-humorous ones. 2003. or only partially resolved. & Christians. Weinberger & Gulas. However. 2008). ad persuasiveness (Geuens & Pelsmacker. 2007. & Lee. These include: “need for humor” (Cline. Leone & D’Arienzo. Humor is claimed to influence positively such things as: attention to. Lennon. 1987. Potential moderators examined include: consumer desire for uniqueness/unique products (Lynn & Harris. mood (Lee & Sternthal. 1997). Jin. Zhang.1002/mar . 2008. Cline & Kellaris. The present study investigates whether another individual difference variable. & Parsons. sexual content. 2008). & Mowen. & Stoel. Fiore. 2007. Hoyer. Malhotra. 2002. Moderation has already been productively investigated in regard to other determinants of consumer behavior. Van Meurs. 2004). affect intensity (Moore & Harris. 1995. Altsech. Enhanced understanding of this issue could facilitate the effective design and use of humorous ads. 2005. 1996. For instance. 1998. Furnham.. Cline & Kellaris. 1998. 1994. cultural orientation (Lee & Lim. sensation seeking/optimal stimulation level (D’Silva & Palmgreen. ads (Norris & Colman. Gotlieb. & Walsh. Sherrard. or new absurdities are created in attempts to resolve the incongruity (Ruch & Hehl. the other kind of structural feature of humor. Lee & Schumann. need for cognition (Brennan & Bahn. & Kim. and comprehension of. & Bolton. 2000).
activation. Post-study debriefing of the participants indicated that they had not seen the ads before. lower sensation seekers are assumed to be higher in base arousal. as well as scores on two sub-scales—Novelty seeking and Intensity seeking HUMOR AND AD LIKING Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. Incongruity-resolution humor enables arousal associated with the incongruity to be reduced. arousal. Steenkamp & Baumgartner. and Materials The materials used to test the above-mentioned predictions were chosen from the 54 taped television advertisements comprising the UK entries in the London International Advertising Awards 1999. (1998) and Patrician (2004) for arguments in support of the use of single-item measures of constructs. The AISS comprises 20 items that provide a total score. as cited in Wyer & Collins. METHOD Participants. range ϭ 18–49). Arousal can be defined in physiological terms as energization. SD ϭ 8.features incongruity and incongruity resolution. Leone & D’Arienzo. inner tension. and liking by a convenience sample of 42 undergraduates (9 males and 33 females. and Park (2002). For them. Ads containing such humor should thus be better liked by lower sensation seekers than are non-humorous ads matched in arousal to the humorous ones. Arousal induction brought about by the incongruity component of humor should therefore raise their arousal to a more optimal level. and equivalently arousing non-humorous ads. At the end of block 2. increased understanding of the basis for the effects of incongruity-resolution humor has broad relevance to advertising. 5 ϭ very high). see Gardner et al. 1994. these contentions are examined empirically and the implications for advertising of the results observed are considered. MacInnis. the relationship between the arousal occasioned by humor and enjoyment of the humor can be described in terms of an inverted U function. Higher sensation seekers are supposed to be characterized by lower base arousal. Procedure. which took about 10 minutes. There are several reasons to suspect that sensation seeking might affect whether ads containing incongruity-resolution humor are better liked than are non-humorous ads. 2000. On the other hand. participants completed the Arnett (1994) Inventory of Sensation Seeking (AISS). then. In what follows. or in psychological terms as wakefulness or action preparation—see Shapiro. That source was used in an attempt to reduce the likelihood that the ads were familiar to the people tested. increases in arousal are likely to be experienced as unpleasant (on these points. each of the 54 ads was rated for funniness. Those participants were tested in two groups comprising approximately equal numbers. It can be suggested. Approximately 50 minutes was required to complete each block. mean age ϭ 23. Initially. An enjoyable level of arousal should also be occasioned for such people by arousing non-humorous ads. 1992).2. Specifically. see Arnett. 1992).1002/mar 781 . will be liked equally well by higher sensation seekers. Given this. 1971. arousal theories of humor propose that the arousal brought about by humor is an important determinant of its appreciation. that ads containing incongruity-resolution humor. using a 5-point scale (1 ϭ very low. or alertness. The ads were shown in two blocks of 27. a 10-minute rest break separating the sessions. According to one arousal theory of humor (Berlyne 1969.5.
3. 3. Those items are briefly described in Table 1. The whole procedure took around 40 minutes. on the basis of the ratings and the experimenter’s judgement. but the ball lands on a bus and. 45 females. 4. range ϭ 18–70) rated the reduced set of ads for arousal. Brief Description of Exemplars of Each Ad Category. participants being tested in small groups of up to five. images of soccer action and spectators shouting. A further 70 participants (25 males. Participants also completed the AISS during a break in ad viewing. Cigar ad: A golfer tees off. funniness.Table 1. a duck is shown crash landing on icy ground and skidding into a pond. Four humorous and four non-humorous ads that received similar arousal ratings were identified for further analysis. 78 females). As humor structure. 2. Vodka: Features a colorful shipboard scene. Humorous 1. Car tire: A series of bizarre images is presented with a rock song as background music. 2. mean age ϭ 31. and smokes a cigar throughout all of the events. a runway de-icer is featured. through a very circuitous route. and non-humorous ads). The humorous ads were judged by the experimenter as being characterized by incongruity-resolution humor. and not humor content. 4. (each comprising 10 items). a child is shown who is reluctant to throw the bread to ducks in a pond. clearly belonged to one of the categories required (humorous ads using incongruityresolution structure. is the aspect of humor of interest in this study. with people drinking the beverage. Sports shoe: Rock music playing. The above-mentioned finding reported by Hehl and Ruch (1985) that sexual humor appears to be the only type of humor content that influences humor appreciation was also taken into account in the choice of the humorous ads. the humorous ads chosen did not include any items judged by the experimenter as containing sexual content. SD ϭ 14. Total scale scores were used in all of the analyses reported in this paper. which resulted in a data set comprising responses from 112 participants (34 males. and liking. preferring to eat it himself.* Non-Humorous 1. Bread: A voiceover describes the quality of the bread.* * ϭ The item was excluded from the data set on the basis of the results of the principal components analysis. 3. which occurred mid-way through the presentation. Poppadums: An Indian Elvis impersonator is singing about the product to the tune of an Elvis song. That set comprised ads which. Ratings for the 25 ads from all participants were combined. Baby food: A baby is shown apparently miming a song. ends up going in the hole. In order to investigate the construct validity of the items of interest (the four humorous 782 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. Responses were provided anonymously. The golfer appears relaxed. Petrol company: Ominous music playing.1002/mar .8. RESULTS Analysis was undertaken using SPSS version 14. A reduced set of 25 of the above-mentioned 54 ads was compiled by the experimenter by reference to the above-mentioned ratings.0 for Windows.
79 29. t(110) ϭ 16. The items excluded are indicated in Table 1. 2003.585 0.1002/mar 783 .and four non-humorous ads).634 0. However. SD ϭ 0. 620–621).56). These values indicate that the data satisfy the requirements for performing a good factor analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell.587 0.6 with an actual value of 0. as required. there is no difference in mean arousal for the humorous ads (mean ϭ 2.028 0. p. two of the items loaded above 0. 2001).150 0.52. Tyres 2. and the KMO measure of sampling adequacy exceeded the suggested criterion of 0.258 Total variance explained ϭ 55.55 25. Additionally. Sports shoe 4. 2001. The former effect size is negligible.732 Ϫ0.312 0. which accounted for a total of 50. The correlation between the components is 0.249). Poppadums Cronbach’s alpha Eigenvalues % of variance Component 1 Non-Humorous Ads 0.759. Each of the items identified with a given component loaded above 0. As the correlation between the components is low (0. d ϭ 1. p ϭ 0.0. t(110) ϭ 0. Vodka 3. evidence that the items which loaded on Component 2 are exemplars of incongruity-resolution humor is provided by examination of the correlation between mean funniness ratings of those items and sensation seeking scores. Bartlett’s test is significant.177 0.03).90.55% HUMOR AND AD LIKING Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. 622).657 0. All of the non-humorous items loaded on Component 1. and the latter is very large (Aron & Aron.50 1.4 on it. 2001.612 0. loadings ranging from “fair” to “excellent” as indexes of the component (Tabachnick & Fidell.67. and Bartlett’s test is significant.4 on both components.796 0. Varimax Rotated Component Matrix.771.664.476 0. SD ϭ 0. As also required.30.4. p ϭ 0.55% of the variance. The scree plot again indicated a two-component solution is most suitable. In addition. Repeated measures t-tests indicated that.177 0.80% Component 2 Humorous Ads Ϫ0. The KMO for the second analysis is 0.764 0. p.92. p. 2001. Baby food 5. The results of the second principal components analysis are reported in Table 2.75% Communalities 0. the mean funniness rating for the humorous ads (mean ϭ 2.70) is higher than the mean funniness rating for the non-humorous ads (mean ϭ 1. and each of the humorous ones loaded on Component 2.182 0. Examination of the correlation matrix indicated numerous correlations in excess of 0. SD ϭ 0. SD ϭ 1. which accounted for 55.70 1. a principal components analysis of the liking ratings for each of them was undertaken.762 0.80) and the non-humorous ones (mean ϭ 2. Ads 1. Cigars 6.000. pp. so once again a varimax rotation was used. The correlations reported in this paper used Spearman rho (r) because the sensation seeking scores and the mean funniness ratings were not Table 2. 625).761 0.201. Cohen’s d measure of effect size ϭ 0. 323). Those items were excluded from the data set.292. a varimax rotation was used (Tabachnick & Fidell.87. Examination of the scree plot revealed that a two-factor solution was most appropriate (see Tabachnick & Fidell.5% of the variance. and another principal components analysis was run.
and for the non-humorous ones it is 0.04%]. effect size ϭ 0. and the between-subjects factor is sensation seeking (higher vs.70. In addition. Participants who scored in approximately the top or the bottom 25% of AISS total scale scores were classified as higher or lower sensation seekers. 1979) were not significantly correlated with rated funniness of their incongruity-resolution humor items.008.251.0 years. 8 males. p ϭ 0. lower). Furthermore. SD ϭ 16. range ϭ 18–69). and it is 0.50 or greater are sufficient for research involving comparison of groups. and the higher sensation seeker category contained 32 participants (20 females. SD ϭ 9. the predicted relationships between sensation seeking and the relative liking of humorous compared to non-humorous ads were obtained. Aron & Aron. it enabled identification of an expected positive relationship between the AISS total scale score and mean liking of the non-humorous ads [r (110) ϭ 0. 1978). p ϭ 0. 784 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. There is also evidence that the single-item measure of arousal used here did provide a valid index of that construct.50. Effect sizes for the correlations were calculated by squaring the correlation coefficient (see Hinkle. as described below. 316). Additionally.2.3 years. Specifically.22. 2003. In fact. The funniness ratings for the ad stimuli support the former requirement. Such a relationship is expected. and recommend values in the range 0. The effect size for the significant correlation can be characterized as medium (Aron & Aron. The latter group comprised 31 participants (23 females. non-humorous). mean age ϭ 24. Given those considerations.832.1002/mar . 1998.5. & Jurs. p.70 for the non-humorous ads. It is generally suggested that alpha values of 0. Hehl and Ruch (1985) observed that total scores on the SSS-1V measure of sensation seeking (Zuckerman.50 (p. mean age ϭ 35. respectively. 607) claim that alphas of 0. p.5 may be useful if it has other desirable properties. Cortina (1993) indicates that coefficient alpha is restricted in its ability to establish scale unidimensionality. the Cronbach alpha measure of the reliability of items comprising the humorous ads is 0. Schmitt (1996) suggests that even a scale with an alpha as low as around 0.normally distributed. 122).15–0.70 or more are acceptable (Nunnally. Lienert and Raatz (1994) indicate that alpha values of 0. However. 2003. given that the non-humorous ads were matched in rated arousal to the humorous ones. The average inter-item correlation for liking ratings of the humorous ads in this study is 0.3%]. others (for instance. The principal components analysis indicates that unidimensionality is the case for the items examined in the present study. A 2 ϫ 2 mixed factorial design was used to test the abovementioned predictions. Clark and Watson (1995) suggest that the average inter-item correlation is better than coefficient alpha as an indicator of a scale’s internal consistency.40. The within-subjects factor is ad type (humorous vs. effect size ϭ 6. the total scale scores on the AISS used in this study were not significantly related to the rated funniness of the ads characterized here as containing incongruity-resolution humor [r (110) ϭ Ϫ0. As indicated in Table 2.020.60 or greater are satisfactory. Wiersma. These include meaningful content with respect to the domain covered and reasonable unidimensionality. and so should be exemplars of more arousing stimuli of the sort preferred by higher sensation seekers. p. as was undertaken in the present investigation.5 was not viewed as posing difficulties regarding their usefulness. Similarly. 12 males. 111). the fact that the members of one of the categories of interest are associated with an alpha value of 0. The Cronbach alpha observed in this study for the total scale of the Arnett Inventory of Sensation Seeking is 0.
04) was significant [t(30) ϭ 3. DISCUSSION In this study.60 Lower Sensation Seekers Nonhumorous ads Humor Type Humorous ads Figure 1.001. SD ϭ 0. Liking of humorous and non-humorous ads by level of sensation seeking. for the higher sensation seekers. This effect size can be characterized as large (Aron & Aron.00 2. 435).61) ϭ 10. the difference in liking ratings between the humorous ads (mean ϭ 3.52.002.04.291.9%. SD ϭ 0. A significant interaction was observed [F (1. a liking advantage for lower but not for higher sensation seekers was observed for humorous ads characterized by incongruity-resolution structure HUMOR AND AD LIKING Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. 2003. d ϭ 0. p. The above-mentioned predictions concern the interaction with respect to ad liking between sensation seeking and humor type.773. Post hoc repeated measures t-tests indicated that. see Aron & Aron. 2003). which is a negligible effect size].69) compared to the non-humorous ones (mean ϭ 2.82. the difference in liking ratings for the humorous ads (mean ϭ 3. range ϭ 18–58).08.80 2. p ϭ 0. Results were analysed using two-way mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA).85) was not significant [t(31) ϭ Ϫ0. p ϭ 0.04. which is a large effect size]. SD ϭ 1. effect size ϭ 14. p ϭ 0.68) and the non-humorous ads (mean ϭ 3.26.Liking of Humorous and Nonhumorous Ads by Level of Sensation Seeking 3.1002/mar 785 . as indicated by partial eta-square). For the lower sensation seekers. SD ϭ 0. d ϭ 0.71. A graphical representation of the interaction is presented in Figure 1.64.20 Higher Sensation Seekers Ad Liking Ratings 3.
the liking of ads characterized by incongruity-resolution humor should increase as the ease with which the incongruity can be resolved increases. & Kellaris. This result is consistent with the above-mentioned theory-based suggestions that such humor’s effects on ad liking for lower sensation seekers stem from reduction of induced arousal. 2001. Consistent with this suggestion. However. whereas both kinds of humor structure should. 2003). This in turn should result in lower sensation seekers showing better comprehension and memory for ads characterized by incongruity-resolution humor. Accordingly.. Stephenson et al. Ads associated with incongruity-resolution humor should therefore be more persuasive than ads characterized by nonsense humor for lower sensation seekers. Galloway and Chirico (2008) have demonstrated that higher neuroticism scorers (who. 1994. 1999. whereas the latter are more persuaded by less arousing messages (Everett & Palmgreen. as is also the case for lower sensation seekers. be persuasive for higher sensation seekers. or are non-humorous. In such cases. 1992). for a discussion of possible mechanisms for such effects). incongruity-resolution humor. Lorch et al. Additionally.. 1995. The present results also have implications regarding how to maximize the effectiveness of ads for which the use of humor is inappropriate (see Weinberger & Gulas. Such people should be more likely to attend to and therefore to show better comprehension and memory of higher compared to lower arousal ads.. for lower sensation seekers. equivalently arousing ads. 1999). and arousal induction for higher sensation seekers.1002/mar . Palmgreen et al. should have similar effects on brand liking (see Galloway & Cropley. whether they contain nonsense humor. for higher sensation seekers. irrespective of whether they are non-humorous or use incongruity-resolution humor or nonsense humor. incongruity-resolution humor structure can be expected to be most effective for enhancing brand liking for lower sensation seekers. means should be provided in more 786 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. The influence of sensation seeking on ad liking is also relevant to the question of how humor might affect liking of the brand advertised. if highly arousing. more or less arousing non-humorous ads should optimize the above-mentioned reactions to them for higher and for lower sensation seekers. respectively.compared to equivalently arousing non-humorous ads. On the other hand. can be characterized as having higher base levels of arousal) prefer incongruity-resolution humor to nonsense humor. higher sensation seekers prefer higher sensation value messages (Everett & Palmgreen. higher sensation seekers should show similar enjoyment of equivalently arousing nonsense humor and incongruity-resolution humor. the latter is influenced by attitudes to the ad (Cline. Higher sensation value advertising messages are also known to be more persuasive for higher compared to lower sensation seekers. However. Specifically. Altsech. For instance. In addition. 1995). it can be suggested that ads characterized by incongruityresolution humor will be better liked by lower sensation seekers than will those containing nonsense humor (which introduces an incongruity that is not resolved or that is only partially resolved). The greater preference of lower compared to higher sensation seekers for resolving incongruity should also make it more likely that the former will devote more attention to ads containing incongruity-resolution humor compared to ones using nonsense humor or to arousing non-humorous ads. These results have potential implications for the effective design and use of humor in advertising that should be investigated in further research on this topic.
2003). & Kellaris. Holbrook. 1999. 2006. scorers on that variable respond more positively to humorous ads compared to non-humorous ones (Cline. 1993. and “need for cognition” (NFC). 1993. Harrington et al. Saad & Gill. Singh & Hitchon. 1998. & Hoyer. LaTour & Rotfield. program content and valence. 1979. Crowley & Hoyer. 1998. Alden. & Akhter. & Hoyer. 1989. Arthur & Quester. 1999. Altsech. 1997. Lee & Mason. & Fitzsimons. 1996a. NFH refers to a person’s motivation to attend to and process humorous stimuli. 1996. Bushman. 2007. & Walsh. for instance. D’Silva & Palmgreen. Durvasula. Altsech. 2005. 2004. 2000) can productively be extended by incorporating reference to the effects of sensation seeking. 1998. & Akhter. 2003. 2000. 2004. 1997. Given the findings of the present study. 1989.highly arousing ads to reduce the arousal induced in an attempt to increase their appeal to lower sensation seekers. In short. p. Nevertheless. Arthur & Quester. those results. 2006b. Norris & Colman. & Nyer. Such variables include involvement with the program. LaTour & Zahra. 16). Alden. However. Higher. Gopinath. Although the ads examined in this study were rated in a different context from that in which ads are normally viewed. 1989. Furnham. Lang et al. Another issue related to the context in which the ads were rated in this study concerns the fact that participants were required to process the humor content of the ads presented. In contrast. Lang et al. Furnham. 2000. Such analysis can also inform the development of a comprehensive model of the determinants of people’s reactions to ads in general (Alden & Hoyer. Tavassoli. 2003. NFC concerns the motivation of individuals to engage in effortful cognitive processing of information presented to them. 2005. Moorman. Durvasula. 1988. 1990. Mowen & Voss. Duncan. 1990. Saad & Gill. Singh & Hitchon. & Nataraajan. 1998. Gunter. Neijens. LaTour. Mattenklott. These should be taken into account in any comprehensive examination of the effects of humor in advertising. 2003). but not lower. NFH and NFC interact as determinants of the influence of humor on responses to ads (Cline. & Pappa. Aylesworth & MacKenzie. Henthorne. there are grounds to suggest that the processing of such content under different circumstances might depend on the moderating influence of the variables “need for humor” (NFH). Unger. Gunter. several variables associated with the broader program context in which ads are normally embedded have been found to affect reactions to the ads. and the additional effects predicted from them. 2008. Accordingly. LaTour & Rotfield. Schmidt. Bagozzi. Shultz. 1995). the results obtained were as predicted. Havlena. the effects observed in this study for higher and for lower sensation seekers of incongruity-resolution humor structure on ad liking have potentially broad implications for the use of humor in advertising. those variables might be useful for identifying individuals who will be influenced by the use of humor in “real-life” advertising. Mukherjee. & Smit. Not surprisingly.. it can be suggested that existing attempts to model the determinants of people’s reactions to humorous as well as non-humorous incongruity in advertising (see. However. The present results suggest which kinds of humor structure are likely to appeal to higher and to lower sensation seeker members of that cohort. 1994.. higher NFC scorers are more likely to be persuaded by argument strength and not humor (Zhang. 1994. & Lehmann.. 1995). People who score lower on that variable are more likely to process and be influenced by peripheral cues such as humor in ads. Mukherjee. Andrews. should be replicated in “real-life” 787 HUMOR AND AD LIKING Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. & Kellaris. 2000. Chang.1002/mar . and effects of other ads (Andrews.
Effects of television violence on memory for commercial messages. (1998). S. 466–476. 289–296. Humor in advertising: The moderating role of prior brand evaluation.. & Kellaris. 4. D. J. (2006b).. NJ: Prentice Hall. (2004). 29. & Lippman. (2006a). A... J. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. P. Aylesworth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Journal of Communication. J.ad viewing situations examined with respect to the above-mentioned situational and individual difference variables.. 27. 64–75. 32. (1990). Journal of Advertisng. 17–31. Humor in persuasion on threatening topics: Effectiveness is a function of audience sex role orientation. & Hoyer. J. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 35–49. Arthur. The role of emotions in marketing. & Quester. Literal versus extended symbolic messages and advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of need for cognition. 184–-206. 19. Journal of Advertising. Alden. Beating the news blues: Mood repair through exposure to advertising. Clark. Journal of Marketing Research. 194–205. D. L. (2007).1002/mar . Psychology & Marketing. & Akhter. Chang. 27–40. & MacKenzie. The joint impact of humor and argument strength in a print advertising context: A case for weaker arguments. A framework for conceptualizing and measuring the involvement construct in advertising research.. (2002). 863–873. 3rd ed.. & Kellaris. Psychological Assessment. An examination of cognitive factors related to humorousness in television advertising.. 28.. S. Mukherjee. T. Chattopadhyay. Psychology & Marketing. 69–86. 29–37. Journal of Advertising. 757–782. (1995). A. & Watson. When does humor enhance or inhibit ad responses? The moderating role of the need for humor. M. Arias-Bolzmann. Arnett. 36. J. 671–696. W. Gopinath. 23. I.. & Lee. & Basu.. C. REFERENCES Alden. M. Effects of absurdity in advertising: The moderating role of product category attitude and the mediating role of cognitive responses.. & Hoyer. (2001).. & Nyer. Who’s afraid of that ad? Applying segmentation to the protection motivation model. Conway. R.. Cline. 128. Durvasula. L. 27.. The influence of humor strength and humor-message relatedness on ad memorability. Altsech. W. W. 56.. 31–45. 7. Context is key: The effect of program-induced mood on thoughts about the ad. Upper Saddle River. (2003). (2000). Alden. 788 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10.. 55–67. 29. Psychology & Marketing. (1993). & Aron. Identifying global and culture-specific dimensions of humor in advertising: A multinational analysis. 16. Psychology & Marketing. S. Andrews. E. 23. J. 1–15.. Brennan. surprise and positive moderators of perceived humor in television advertising. T. The effects of incongruity. (1994). Sensation seeking: A new conceptualization and a new scale. (1998). L. D. (2003). & Kellaris. K. Journal of Advertising. & Bahn. & Dube. Journal of Advertising. K. Journal of Marketing. 291–307. C. Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. 273–295. C.. Berg. Chang. Cline. L. (1993). 198–217. Does humor in radio advertising affect recognition of novel product brand names? Journal of General Psychology. (2006). A. E. 22.. D. Context-induced and ad-induced affect: Individual differences as moderators. Statistics for psychology. 16. (1999).. C. 21. B. P. (2000).. Journal of Advertising. Journal of Advertising. T. Hoyer. 309–319. Bushman. & Mowen. (1999). A. Chakraborty. M. G. 27. D. Bagozzi.. (1990). Personality and Individual Differences. Aron. Cline. 57.
& Kim. DeBono. D. Crowley. ( 2002).. 21. 97–112. Wiersma. D. and program context on effectiveness of anticocaine public service announcements. P. Geuens. Journal of Applied Psychology. A.. 8. Benefits of humor for mental health: Empirical findings and directions for further research. L.. A meta-analysis of humor in advertising. Assessing the validity of emotional typologies.. P. B. M. J. R. 12. (1993). 6. 30. Advances in Consumer Research. J.. 592–-598. http://www. Gunter. 129–142. and appropriateness of humor? Journal of Professional Services Marketing.. Galloway. 22. & Pappa. R. Fugate.. 65–71.. (2008). Fiore. Effects of television violence on memory for violent and nonviolent advertising.. B. A. Health Communication.. 7. Journal of Advertising.. Journal of Consumer Research. message sensation value. W. D. W. 703–715... 225–248. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. 98–104. (1985).. M. A. M. K. Holbrook. Influences of sensation seeking. 35. 4th ed. D. 561–574. M. Fennis. D..1002/mar 789 . A. & Jurs. E. Effects of programme context on memory of humorous television commercials. LaTour. G. D. F. Hehl. (2006). (2000). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. A. & Palmgreen. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. 22. (1998). (1987). Applied Cognitive Psychology. G. (1979). 29. (2001). Psychology & Marketing. 555–567. (2005). R.. J. R. “Stay tuned—we will be back right after these messages”: Need to evaluate moderates the transfer of irritation in advertising. Gardner. 669–694. 20. 301–314. H. Gunter. Self-monitoring and consumer psychology. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Eisend. & Palmgreen. Hinkle. Personality and humor appreciation: Evidence of an association between trait neuroticism and preferences for structural features of humor. 74. Donohew. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. 285–306. Humor in advertising: A behavioral perspective. Furnham. Personality and Individual Differences. (2007).. & Pierce. Holbrook. Jin. (2004). Havlena . (2006). 15–25. An integrative framework for understanding two-sided persuasion. J. An extension of the activation model of information exposure: The addition of a cognitive variable to a model of attention. Cummings. & Chirico. 31. 58.. (1989). P. (1998). 50–56. (1999).. Mukherje. M. M. Single-item versus multipleitem measurement scales: An empirical comparison.. A. Gotlieb. Fear appeals in print advertising: An analysis of arousal and ad response. Media Psychology. A.. Henthorne. Dunham. 139–164. W. J. 6. W. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. B. Harrington. Individual differences and context: Factors mediating recall of anti-drug public service announcements. Educational and Psychological Measurement. M.Cortina. & Bolton. D. For fun and profit: Hedonic value from image interactivity and responses toward an online store. & Lehmann. HUMOR AND AD LIKING Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. & Walsh. & Cropley. 21.. & Hoyer. Psychology & Marketing. & Pelsmacker. 59–69. (2005).. D’Silva. Humorous services advertising: What are the roles of sex. D. Elpers.. & Nataraajan. W. Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. Academy of Marketing Science Journal. L.. 715–738. 14.. & Bakker. 7. (1995).com/content/78388v3h124645l1/ Everett. Health Communication. (1993). Humor in television advertising: A momentto-moment analysis. 21. & Batra. C. Journal of Consumer Research. The role of humor in the persuasion of individuals varying in need for cognition. Lane. & Hoyer. Furnham. 1680–1697. Journal of Advertising. 404–420. Journal of Consumer Research. appreciation of humor. 898–915. 9–22. & Ruch. (1994). S. Duncan. & Zimmerman. N.. Galloway. T... Journal of Personality. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.springerlink.. 12.. 78. (1998). (2008). The location of sense of humor within comprehensive personality spaces: An exploratory study.
& Schumann. & Stephenson. B. (2007). On building better construct measures: Implications of a general hierarchical model. J. B.. 1. (2003). B. 91. (2001). & Raatz. 230–245. L.. Psychology & Marketing. Sherrard. (2000).. What’s funny and what’s not. Reichert & J. sensation seeking. Journal of Advertising. J. Journal of Social Psychology. J. (1997). 473–486. & Harris. K. Journal of Consumer Research. L. Psychology & Marketing. Test construction and test analysis. (1997). & Colman. (2004). G. Malhotra. 13. H. (1988).. (1999). Fear appeals as advertising strategy: Should they be used? Journal of Services Marketing. D. 59–90. S. 156–169. Television campaigns and adolescent marijuana use: Tests of sensation seeking targeting. & Smit. S. Journal of Social Psychology. Lang. D. relevancy. & Voss. 24.. Sex in advertising: Perspectives on the erotic appeal (pp. 485–505. M. (2003).Kellaris. In T. (1999). & Cai. (1996). Context effects of radio programming on cognitive processing of embedded advertisements. Donohew. Mahwah. (1996).. 2nd ed. Information and sensory overload. Journal of Advertising. (2008). Baer. Lorch. Y. (1994). The desire for unique consumer products: A new individual differences scale. The effects of program responses on the processing of commercials placed at various positions in the program and the block.. (1991). Lennon. 5th ed. Journal of Advertising. 115–127. Psychology & Marketing. The role of sensation seeking and need for cognition on Web-site evaluations: A resource marching perspective. D. (1984). 5–14.. & Lim. Krishnan. and purchase intention. & Wentzel. & Zahra. and humor. & Harris. D. Psychology & Marketing. & Mason. Mattenklott. & Stoel. Lee. cognitive. 26. Marketing Theory. M. Lee. 20. C. Lee. Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union. 131. A. Helm..1002/mar . relevancy. perceived risk. and attitudinal responses for product and alcohol billboard advertising. Psychometric theory. 9–21... Lynn. and attention to televised anti-drug public service announcements... Lambiase (Eds. A process analysis of the effects of humorous advertising executions on brand claims memory. Lee. 57–69. 710–720. (2005). Y. E.. W. Applied Cognitive Psychology. P. Psychology & Marketing. (2005). Norris.. A. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Psychology & Marketing. 175–193.. S. 22. C. Martin. (2005). S. (1978). 71–84. 25.. T. The effects of sexual appeals on physiological. M.). 292–296. LaTour.. & D’Arienzo. Mowen. Nunnally. M.. Neijens. J. and need for humor. 49–59. Moderating influence of self-monitoring and gender on responses to humorous advertising. 29. Donohew. 22. & Cline. 26. Lee. Zeitschrift fur Socialpsychologie. Palmgreen. 497–509. M. P. (1994). 25. & Chakravarti. S.. P.. (2008). A. 109–126.. E. E.. H. 107–132). 4. J. Humor and ad memorability: On the contributions of humor expectancy. Commercial effectiveness in the context of TV programs: Program induced activation and mood. C. New York: McGraw Hill. 390–412. Journal of Consumer Psychology. emotional. 140. Responses to information incongruency in advertising: The role of expectancy. Lienert. 2. 601–616.. Moore. 26. & Sternthal... R. 14. Lorch. K. LaTour. C. E. 37–50. L. A. American Journal of Public Health. Sensation seeking and differentially arousing television commercials. Wise.. N. Park. & D’Silva. M. 695–719. Program context. Lammers. Journal of Consumer Research. M. J.. Journal of Advertising Research. (1998). & Rotfield. There are threats and (maybe) fear-caused arousal: Theory and confusions of appeals to fear and fear arousal itself. The effects of positive mood on memory.. Explaining the special case of incongruity in advertising: Combining classic theoretical approaches. Human Communication Research. Leone. U. 45–59. 45. Moorman. Hoyle. 10. Palmgreen. 37. Affect intensity and the consumer’s attitude toward high impact emotional advertising appeals. D. On-line product presentation: Effects on mood. E.. H. 790 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10.. X..
Journal of Marketing Communications. & Parsons. J. Martin (Eds. 44–56. 39–51. The humorous message taxonomy: A framework for the study of humorous ads. Yi.. Y. Jenzowsky.). M.. The impact of humor in advertising: A review. Tomkovick.. London: Allyn and Bacon. (2002). Program involvement: Are moderate levels best for ad memory and attitude toward the ad? Journal of Advertising Research. Spotts. Effects of advertising likeability: A 10-year perspective. Unique like everybody else? The dual role of consumers’ need for uniqueness. & Neijens. HUMOR AND AD LIKING Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. 26. Psychological Review. L. W. Ruch. G. 53. 20. H. Shapiro. (2001). (1989). Short-term effects of an anti-marijuana campaign targeting high sensation seeking adolescents. Psychological Assessment. (1997). J. 350–353.. Journal of Advertising Research. The price of laughter: Differences between Hispanic groups’ responses to the use of humor in financial services advertising. & Gulas. Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Wyer. Journal of Advertising Research. 47. & Collins. L. (1991). (2000). Leigh & C. J. Singh. & Fidell. Steenkamp. 35. Weinberger.. A two-mode model of humor appreciation: Its relation to aesthetic appreciation and simplicity-complexity of personality. The USA’s biggest marketing event keeps getting bigger: An in-depth look at Super Bowl advertising in the 1990s.. 31. (1995). 1–44. J. (2008). C.. Van Meurs. Effects of humor on sentence memory.Patrician. Psychology & Marketing. C. Smit. (1992). 35. S. Journal of Applied Communication Research.. Palmgreen. 73–83. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal. N.). Villegas. R. Journal of Advertising. 6. In W. H.. (2008). The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic (pp. Weinberger. S. 15–26. The role of optimum stimulation level in exploratory consumer behavior. Understanding program-induced mood effects: Decoupling arousal from valence. R. H. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Single-item graphic representational scales. (2004). 19. N. Journal of Advertising. Journal of Advertising. Ruvio. Stephenson. 7. Perry. 175–195.... 434–448. 15–32. 347–352. Memory and Cognition. E. P. L. Zhang. 25. T. Journal of Advertising. 27. Psychology & Marketing. M. Using humorous programs as a vehicle for humorous commercials. P. Hoyle. & Donohew. M. S.. Responses to humorous advertising: The moderating effect of need for cognition. C. Assessing the use and impact of humor on advertising effectiveness: A contingency approach. 109–142). 35–59.. 663–688. & Gill. 13. (1995). Tavassoli. A theory of humor elicitation. (2001). Journal of Consumer Research. (1996). P.. The use of humor in different advertising media. & Baumgartner. (1998). Schmitt. F.. (2006). 25.1002/mar 791 . Campbell. (1999). Spotts. 8. Journal of Advertising Research. Journal of Communication. Observations—A cross-cultural study on the affect-based model of humor in advertising. Tabachnick. L. (1995). 61–72. Nursing Research.. 17. 35. In J. 66–71.. 20–39. & Shah. (1997). (1994). 444–464. A... D. Shultz. Hester. Using multivariate statistics. & Hitchon. P. 46. J.. Weinberger. 17–32. L. C.. & Park.. B. Current issues and research in advertising. Ruch (Ed.. (1992). Yelkur. & Gartenschlaeger. 99. 1–31. Psychology & Marketing. Speck.. L. B. & Christians. 89–108. A. H. The intensity effects of exciting television programs on the reception of subsequent commercials. A.. R. & Parsons. S.. Applications of evolutionary psychology in marketing. M. A. 21. 953–967. Saad.. J. S. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. (1996a). & Fitzsimons. 1005–1034. 37.. C. Schmidt. 4th ed. & Hehl. King. MacInnis. (1992). Unger. G.
Bendigo Campus.edu. 792 GALLOWAY Psychology & Marketing DOI: 10. Bendigo. Box 199.galloway@latrobe. Australia (g. Psychology & Marketing. 13.au). Victoria. M. Zuckerman.1002/mar . (1979). Graeme Galloway.O. The effect of humor in advertising: An individual-difference perspective. New York: Wiley. School of Psychological Science.Zhang. P. (1996b). Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to: Dr. La Trobe University. Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimal level of arousal. 3552. Y. 531–545.