Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Journal of Advertising

Assessing the Use and Impact of Humor on Advertising Effectiveness: A Contingency
Approach
Author(s): Harlan E. Spotts, Marc G. Weinberger and Amy L. Parsons
Source: Journal of Advertising, Vol. 26, No. 3 (Autumn, 1997), pp. 17-32
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4189039
Accessed: 02-12-2019 07:42 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Advertising
This content downloaded from 14.139.236.44 on Mon, 02 Dec 2019 07:42:02 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Assessing the Use and Impact of Humor on
Advertising Effectiveness: A Contingency Approach
Harlan E. Spotts, Marc G. Weinberger, and Amy L. Parsons
Every year billions of dollars are spent on advertising that uses humor to sell products. How is that spending
decision made? Despite much research examining humor effects in advertising, many advertisers make the
decision on faith. Many past studies lack a clear conceptual focus to guide the investigation of humor effects
in advertising. The authors examine humor effectiveness by using a conceptual framework adapted from
Speck along with a product-contingent focus. The resulting approach affords a clearer understanding of the
appropriate use of humor through the examination of (I) the humor mechanisms employed, (2) the intentional
relatedness of humor to the ad or product, and (3) the type of product advertised. The descriptive results of
the study indicate that current practice for many advertisers is to employ incongruity-based humor in a
humor-dominant context. That practice is contrasted with others to examine the influence of humor on the
effectiveness of print advertisements for different product groups. Study results indicate that current adver-
tising practices may not be the most effective in terms of advertisement performance.
Harlan E. Spotts is Associate More than $150 billion is spent on advertising in national media
Professor of Marketing at the
University of Wisconsin-Parkside. annual basis, with between 10% and 30% of that amount going for
Marc G. Weinberger is Professor of placement of ads that are intended to be humorous (Weinberger et al. 19
Marketing at the University of Despite the large allocation of resources to humorous advertising, a r
Massachusetts-Amherst.
review of the literature revealed that though the pace of humor researc
Amy L. Parsons is Assistant increased, relatively few of the studies have had a systematic conce
Professor of Marketing at Kings
College. framework (Weinberger and Gulas 1992).
We used two conceptual frameworks to examine humor, (1) a typolo
categorize humor mechanisms and humor relatedness (Speck 1991) a
a variant of the product grids introduced in the marketing literatur
the past 15 years (Rossiter, Percy, and Donovan 1991; Vaughn 1980,
Wells 1988). Our goal was a conceptually based examination of adver
performance that accounts for the humor mechanism and humor relate
in the context of the product/decision-making situation. The overal
addressed in our study was whether advertisers' use of humor is justifie
the influence of the humor on advertising performance. Specifically, by
content analysis of ads and the grouping of products in a classification
to form the independent variables, and using Starch magazine reade
scores as the dependent variables, we examined four questions:
1. Does the use of humor in advertising vary across product groups?
2. Does the effectiveness of humor in advertising vary across product
groups?
3. Does the type of humor mechanism influence ad effectiveness, and
does the effect vary across product groups?
4. Does the intentional relatedness (humor dominance, message domi-
nance) of humor influence ad effectiveness differentially across
product groups?
Journal of Advertising,
Volume XXVI, Number 3
Fall 1997
18 The Journal of Advertising
Background agement (Cantor and Zillman 1973) and sympathy as

interpersonal factors that can help evoke humor.
Although the use of humor in advertising repre- Cognitive mechanisms are related to the structure
sents billions of dollars a year in spending, the effi- of the message. Incongruity and rhetorical irony
cacy of humor as a communication device remains (Stern 1990) are characteristic cognitive devices. The
uncertain. Sternthal and Craig (1973) first reviewed cognitive focus is dominated by incongruity theory,
the humor literature related to advertising and which is exemplified in the writings of Kant and
reached some tentative conclusions based on the work
Schopenhauer (Morreall 1983). The simplest cogni-
conducted up to that time. Several dozen studies ontive view is that mere surprise or inconsistency is
humor in advertising have been conducted over the sufficient to achieve humor. Other views, embodied
past 25 years, but understanding the impact of hu- in incongruity-resolution and cognitive mastery
mor has been difficult. Because of the many influ- theory, suggest that the need to process and resolve
ences from the humorous message, the nature of the discrepant information results in humor. Alden,
product, audience factors, communication goals, hu-Hoyer, and Lee (1993) found that one particular type
mor relatedness, humor style, and humor placement, of incongruity (expected/unexpected), perhaps related
generalizations about the effects of humor have been to surprise, was particularly effective in influencing
rare (Weinberger and Gulas 1992). In the most re-perceived effectiveness of print advertising.
cent review of the humor literature, Weinberger and Although there is no unified, generally accepted
Gulas suggested that although no one study can ac-taxonomy for humor (Gr?ner 1991), the affective, so-
count for all the contingencies that affect humor thecial, and cognitive mechanisms together embody what
researchers must begin to incorporate the factors thatis generally believed to drive humor. In contrast to
appear to influence humor if progress is to be made inmore technique-oriented typologies (Kelly and
understanding its effects. We focus on two factors
Solomon 1975), the three mechanisms provide a con-
identified in previous research, humor mechanismsceptual rather than an operational starting point for
and intentional relatedness.
studying humor. Speck (1987, 1991) recognized the
value of the more theoretical approach and encom-
Humor Mechanisms passed the three basic humor mechanisms in his em-
pirical work arousal-safety (affective), incongruity (cog-
As the underlying nature of humor is yet to be
nitive), and disparagement (social) (see Figure 1). We
resolved, it is not surprising that no general adopt
theory
thatof
framework because it is most deeply rooted
humor has emerged, but rather a collection in of
the pro-
humor literature and is representative of the
posed theories. The mechanisms that govern humor
three conceptual variations in humor.
can be grouped into three broad categories: affective,
cognitive and interpersonal (McGhee 1974;Humor Wicker, Relatedness
Barron, and Willis 1980).
Affective mechanisms, closely linked to Freud'sIn addition
re- to the basic humor mechanisms, Spec
outlined
lief theory, involve a release of energy, a safety valvea broader typology of humor that incorp
for forbidden feelings. As such, humor is rates seentheas relatedness
a of humor in an ad on three
healthy adaptive behavior (Freud 1905:1960). Plea-
levels: (1) intentional, (2) structural, and (3) thematic.
sure from the violation of uniform social standards is
All three types of relatedness are part of the frame-
work in Figure 1. Speck's treatment of relatedness is
also suggested by the "freedom theorists" (Kline 1907;
Mindess 1971). Tension-release theory (Rapp 1947) rooted in literary theory and semiotics, and is the
and arousal theory (Berlyne 1972) posit initial ten-most comprehensive in the advertising literature. Our
sion or arousal followed by a release, both of which study pertains to the first of the constructs, inten-
are pleasurable. tional relatedness or dominance of humor in the mes-
The interpersonal mechanism of humor is related sage.
to the social context in which humor occurs. Superi-Intentional relatedness refers to how the humor is
ority theory is perhaps the earliest theory of humorrelated to message type and message processing.
Speck classifies intentional relatedness in terms of
and laughter. In that view, originated by Plato, laugh-
ter is the result of feeling superior to others, and humor dominance or message dominance. In humor
dominant ads, the humor process is superordinate to
jokes, puns, and so on are used to evoke such a feeling
(LaFave 1972). Other scholars have looked at dispar-
the message; hence, if the humorous elements are
Fall 1997 19
Figure 1
A Framework for Examining Magazine Advertising Humor
Products classified here as: Impact on

Product Response
White-high risk/fiinctional tools Measures
Category Red ? high risk/expressive toys
Blue - low risk/functional tools
Yellow ? low risk/expressive toys
Ads Intended to
be Humorous
For Humor to occur requires one or

a combination of:
^ Humor Mechanisms "\

Incongruity?involves juxtaposition of
discrepancies that require an ability
Incongruity (cognitive) toj reconcile.
lArousal-Safety (affective)!
Arousal-safety-tension arousal released
with a positive "feel good" resolution.
^Disparagement (socialW
Disparagement-an interpersonal attack
often couched in playfulness.
/?lumor Dominant /i?lessage Dominant^

(Humor Superordinate? (Humor Subordinate-humor
ad relies on humor to in ad has secondary role)
Intentional Humor is:
make sense)
Relatedness Image-focused?may be visual
and/or verbally driven
or
Information-focused-more
semantically driven with
message arguements
Relatedness of Syntactic Relatedness

Structural
subordinate message of subordinate humor
Relatedness
elements and humor with message
(location of humor)
Thematic Thematic Relatedness

(message content and humor)
removed, the ad addressed

no longer the problem by subdividing
makes our samplesen
dominant ads, however, the
ads into product groups. To accounthumor
for such contin- is
the overall message,
gencies and toand can framework
provide a conceptual be rem to
help guideno
advertisement with strategyloss
planning, Vaughn
in (1980, 1986)
messag
sion. Message dominant ads
and others (Berger 1981) can
at Foote, Cone and be
Belding im
mation-focused. Image-focused
developed what became known as the FCB ads grid. ha
or visual content that reinforces the more elusive Since the introduction of the FCB grid, several other
image or reputation of the product whereas informa- behaviorally oriented product typologies have been
tion-focused ads concentrate explicitly on the more developed to recognize the theoretical underpinnings
of high/low involvement and some aspect of low and
tangible features or price of the product. A key point
is that intentional relatedness is a way to identifyhigh
the hedonic value (Rossiter, Percy, and Donovan
relative level of humor dominance within an ad. 1991; Wells 1988; Weinberger et al. 1995). The frame-
Structural relatedness represents the relationshipworks are represented in a two-dimensional grid that
between the humor and the message parts contained includes a high-low involvement or risk continuum
within the ad. In humor-dominant ads, structuraland a hedonic aspect. The operational definition of
relatedness refers to the integration (or lack of inte-low and high varies, but the types of products classi-
gration) of the subordinate message elements withfied in the upper and lower halves of the matrices are
the humor. In message-dominant ads, structural re-
very consistent. On the second dimension, one half
latedness refers to syntactic relatedness, which Speckhas lower (higher functional) value and the opposing
defines as the placement of the humor within the ad.half has higher hedonic value (labeled either "feel,"
Finally, thematic relatedness is the relationship"emotional," "expressive," or "transformational"). Use
between the humor and the message content. In of such gridding to subdivide products has been sup-
thematically related ads the humor is related to the ported in work by Zaichowsky (1987) and Ratchford
product, its uses, benefits, brand name, or typical(1987), and grids have been applied to examine the
users. Conversely, in thematically unrelated ads, use and effect of advertising (i.e., Weinberger and
humor is not related to the product or any product- Campbell 1991; Weinberger and Spotts 1989, 1993).
related claims. The product grid we used, the product color matrux
In summary, Speck's approach to investigating hu-(PCM) (see Figure 2), closely parallels the FCB grid
mor involves three types of relatedness: intentional,and was first developed for a book examining radio
structural, and thematic. Currently, that typology isadvertising (Weinberger, Campbell, and Brody 1994).
the most comprehensive conceptual framework for Like other similar typologies, the product color ma-
humor in the advertising literature. Because of sometrix is used to highlight differences between products
ambiguities about the various forms of relatedness, that must be considered in developing advertising. It
as well as sample size limitations, intentional relat-
recognizes the underlying processes involved in con-
edness is the sole basis for our research questionssumer decision making, and adds a metaphor of color
and analyses in the remainder of this paper. to highlight the meaning of products. The colors
white, red, blue, and yellow are used as shorthand for
Product Contingencies the exemplar products in each portion of the grid.
Note that the meanings attached to the color labeling
As is well understood in advertising message re-typology of the PCM are inherently bound by the
search, product category interacts with executional culture of the country in which it was developed, the
factors to influence advertising impact (Sewall andUnited States.
Sarei 1986; Stewart and Furse 1986). Humor is just Cell 1 of the product color matrix is white (see
one element of an advertising execution that can af- Figure 2). The white product has high risk that is
fect ad performance. An extensive literature detailsoften, but not always, based on price. Generally, such
the impact of product category on advertising execu- products are "big tools" that fulfill functional needs.
tion and performance. Despite the knowledge that White goods such as refrigerators, washer/dryers, and
product category matters, most prior humor and mes- other such appliances are the prototype examples.
sage research has either ignored product variation or They are durable and expensive, requiring consum-
was unable to cope with such analysis because smallers to shop and compare because of the risk involved
data sets did not allow subdivision of the sample. We in the choice. Other important functional products
Fall 1997 21
Figure 2
The Product Color Matrix (PCM) and Prototype Products
Consumer Objective
Functional Tools Expressive Toys
Celli Cell 2
White Goods Red Goods
"Big Tools" "Big Toys"
Higher Large appliances Fashion Clothing and Accessories

Risk Business Equipment Hair Coloring
Insurance Motorcycle, Sport Car
Auto tires Jewelry
Cell 3 Cell 4
Blue Goods Yellow Goods
''Little Tools" "Little Toys"
Lower
Risk Snack foods
Detergents and Household Cleaners
OTC Remedies Deserts
Motor oil and gas Beer, Alcohol
Most non-desert foods Tobacco products
such as insurance, some automobiles, and many counter drugs are in this group. In contrast to white
nonroutine business products would also be classified goods, blue goods are low risk, implying less con-
in this cell. sumer willingness or need to process information.
Cell 2 of the product color matrix consists of what However, because of the functional or tool aspect of
are labeled red products. Red is chosen because it the products, consumers have some interest in rel-
symbolizes flamboyance and is expressive. Red goods evant information.
are the sports car, motorcycle, party dress, fancy tie, Finally, cell 4 consists of yellow goods. They are the
jewelry, and other conspicuous products that repre- "little treats" considered to be day-to-day rewards.
sent the individual and have high risk. Red goods are Snack chips and beer are color exemplars of yellow
"Big Toys". Whereas white goods satisfy a functional goods, but the cell would include other products such
goal, red goods help satisfy self-expression goals and as gum, candy, soft drinks, wine coolers, and ciga-
are more likely to be consumed for sensory gratifica- rettes. Such products are routine purchases, low in
tion than for simple functional performance. financial risk, that help make us feel a little better.
Cell 3 of the product color matrix is blue, represent- They are not as important as red goods, which also
ing the low risk and functional decision-making char- satisfy wants and are expressive.
acteristic of routine purchases. The products are "little The PCM in combination with Speck's typology pro-
tools" that are consumable and help accomplish small vides a unique examination of humor effects in ad-
tasks such as cleaning, cooking, and personal hy- vertising. The humor typology developed by Speck
giene. Examples of blue products are toilet bowl provides a theoretical foundation for a systematic in-
cleaner, laundry detergent, and mouthwash that are vestigation of effects. The PCM takes into account
habitual purchases. Many products that are not physi- the important product-related effects on advertising
cally blue share the same characteristics. Staple food performance established in prior research. Further,
items, many health and beauty aids, and over-the- the PCM allows product analysis in terms of con-
tionality necessitates a greater

sumer decision-making message dominance
processes, t
stronger basis than
in the humor traditional
used for white, red and blue goods. desc
classification schemes (staples,
Further, we expected message dominance to beimpu
more
information-focused
goods, durable goods, etc.). among the Wefunction-oriented
used t
matrix approachwhite to and blue goods and imaged-focused
group products among the
understand the effects of
more expressive, though humor
higher risk, red goods. in a
Research Questions 2. Does the effectiveness of humor in

advertising vary across product
On a practical level, the issue is whether the use of
humor by advertisers is warranted by the impact groups?
of
humorous executions on advertising performance as
Madden and Weinberger (1982) explicitly studied
measured by Starch scores. On a more conceptualthe impact of humor on magazine ad performance by
level, a primary contribution of content analytic stud-
studying Starch readership scores. They concluded
ies is to "embellish, augment, accumulate and de-
that humor worked for the alcohol ads they studied,
scribe information" (Kolbe and Burnett 1991). We
its effects being strongest for white men. Their ads
sought to make such a contribution by addressingemployed only nonsensical humor. The concept of
several research questions. As a starting point in nonsensical humor is derived from Freud's division of
augmenting prior empirical work on humor and ad-
humor as being either tendentious or nontendentious.
vertising, Speck (1991) called for an expansion of hu-
In terms of Specks' categories, nontendentious hu-
mor research by use of his conceptual framework to
mor could be either incongruity- or arousal-safety-
learn about the usage frequency of different humor based and tendentious humor would be disparage-
mechanisms and associated characteristics. Our first
ment-based. Although the study was unique in the
research question addresses that issue.
use of performance data to measure the impact of
magazine ad humor, the products and the type of
1. Does the use of humor in advertising humor studied were too restrictive to allow any broad
vary across product groups? conclusions. The study reported here examined a
wider domain of products and humor mechanisms to
Weinberger and Spotts (1989) showed that the use
build on the results of Madden and Weinberger (1982).
of humor in TV ads varies systematically across the
Advertising agency executives surveyed about the use
cells of the FCB matrix. We examined whether the
use of different humor mechanisms and different lev-
of humor suggested that humor should work best to
gain attention. Hence, we expected humor to have its
els of intentional relatedness varied across product
greatest effect in enhancing initial attention as mea-
groupings in magazine ads selected for study.
sured by the Starch noted score. Further, ad agency
Our general expectation was that in magazine ad-
executives indicated that humor was most appropri-
vertising, where the executional options are more lim-
ate when used with products in the yellow group of
ited than in radio or TV, that the incongruity humor
the PCM (Madden and Weinberger 1984).
mechanism would dominate. The Arousal-safety- and
disparagement-based humor mechanisms often re-
quire subtle cues that may be communicated more 3. Does the type of humor mechanism
effectively through sight, motion, and sound. Fur- influence ad effectiveness, and does the
ther, yellow goods ads were expected to be more hu- effect vary across product groups?
mor dominant than those of other three product
groups. As such products tend to be purchased as low The humor mechanisms of incongruity, arousal-
risk treats, consumers may require very little infor- safety, and disparagement depend on different psy-
mation when making a purchase decision. In fact, chological mechanisms, but whether risk and func-
Weinberger and Spotts (1989) found that television tionality of the product differentially influence the
advertisements for yellow goods contained less infor- effects of humor is unclear. Theory and evidence are
mation content than advertisements in the other prod- not developed enough to speculate about the interac-
uct categories. Perhaps higher risk or greater fune- tion of humor mechanisms with product type.
Fall 1997 23
4. Does intentional relatedness (humor Despite the controversy about the use of recogni-
dominance, message dominance) tion data, several of studies support the validity of
the Starch testing method and scores. Finn (1988)
influence ad effectiveness differentially concluded that the systematic and random errors as-
across product groups? sociated with Starch recognition data are largely ac-
counted for, and are outweighed by the diagnostic
Our expectation was that the impact of intentional
value of the scores. After reviewing the many studies
relatedness would vary across the product grid. In-
conducted on Starch data, Finn found the most com-
tentional relatedness is either humor or message domi-
mon factors affecting scores to be ad size, location,
nant. Humor-dominant ads, Speck (1987) argued,
use of color, size of illustration, and use of photos. We
can vary in their impact depending on the degree to
used those factors as covariates in our analysis.
which the humor is integrated into the advertise-
ment and whether attention, arousal, or later recall In collecting the data for our study, we sought ads
for products and brands that were prototypical of the
(from greater rehearsal) is the goal. For message
four individual PCM classifications. We first identi-
dominant ads the analysis is more complex because
fied products and brands that could be clearly classi-
the ads differ in terms of information- or Image-focus.
fied into the white, red, blue, and yellow cells of the
Information-focused ads are likely to rely on central
PCM. Any products whose exact location in the PCM
route processing (Speck 1987). For those ads the
was questionable were excluded from the study. The
impact of humor on attention and arousal is likely to
nature of the brand was considered in classifying
be low to moderate, and the impact on rehearsal of
products into the appropriate PCM groups. For ex-
message elements (for recall is likely to be moderate
ample, an underwear brand clearly positioned as an
to high according to Speck). In contrast, message
expressive fashion product would be considered a red
dominant ads that are image-focused may rely more
on peripheral processing; the humor does not domi- good, but an underwear brand positioned as a
nate the ad but can enhance attention and arousal nonfashion and nonsport product would be a low risk,
(moderate to high chance), according to Speck.functional blue good. Consideration of brand is con-
sistent with the philosophy expressed by Rossiter,
Percy, and Donovan (1991) in their advertising plan-
Method ning grid.
The products and brands selected were not intended
Starch/INRA/Hooper was the source of the adver-
as a random sample of all products, but rather as
tising performance data used in our study. Starch
characteristic of their respective PCM groupings.
uses an aided-recall technique to establish the amount
Magazine ads were collected by three co-researchers
of attention readers remember giving to a particular
who sequentially searched the targeted product cat-
ad. The three most common overall Starch scores
egory files of Starch/INRA/Hooper containing five
are:
years of measured magazine ads. Ads from the se-
Noted?Measures the gross size of the audience
lected product categories were included in the study
that remembers seeing the advertisement. only if they were making an attempt at humor as
At a minimum initial attention to the ad is judged by the three researchers. Specific criteria
measured, with debate about whether ad were established to judge humorous intent. Conver-
memory is also measured (Bagozzi and Silk gent validity among the three researchers was re-
1983; Lucas 1960). quired to establish humorous intent, which was the
Seen-associated?Measures the audience that advertiser's use of a humor mechanism in the execu-
looks at an advertisement long enough to tion regardless of whether or not the humor was per-
learn what product is advertised. Probably
ceived as funny. Assessments were made indepen-
corresponds best to traditional aided brand
dently. If questions arose about a particular ad, the
recall measures. three judges decided jointly whether to include the ad
Read-Most?Indicates whether the attention in the sample.
gained was strong enough to pull the reader For each ad, product category, brand name, and
through the rest of the text. In some re- Starch noted, associated, and read most scores were
spects, it is a measure of ad involvement. recorded in an initial log sheet. We then photographed
We label it "held attention" in our research. the selected ads, with their Starch stickers, using a
copy board so that 1.detailed

Incongruity-based: All ads that used
coding coulonly
off site. The work at Starch yielded 47
incongruity.
Starch does not 2. Arousal-Safety-based:
survey all Allmagazines,
ads that used
obtained included ads from 40 different consumer arousal-safety, with or without incongruity.
3. Disparagement-based: All ads that used
magazines. To the best of our knowledge, it is the
most diverse and representative archive of tested disparagement, with or without incongruity
magazine advertisements using humorous executions. and/or arousal-safety.
As part of its readership service, Starch also com-
Speck identified five different humor types based
piles an ad norms book each year containing scoreson combinations of the three overall classifications:
that represent the average performance of all ads comic
for wit (HT1), sentimental humor (HT2), satire
a particular product category, audience group, adver-
(HT3), sentimental wit (HT4), and full comedy (HT5).
tising format, size, and magazine. These ad norms Because of the small sample sizes associated with the
provide a baseline of ad performance that can be used
finer classifications, we were able to test humor ef-
to adjust the effect of any individual Starch score.fects only at the overall process level.
Thus, a relative performance score can be derivedIntentional relatedness. This characteristic specifi-
and potential pooling problems can be mitigatedcally by reflects whether or not the humor is related to
applying the appropriate ad norms to normalizethe themessage or the product. The following three cat-
individual recall scores. We accomplished the nor- egories identified by Speck were used:
malization of ads by subtracting the appropriate norm 1. Humor dominant: Product messages are pre-
score from the raw noted, seen-associated, and read- sented within a humorous context that
most scores. Hence, X*ijk =Xijk - Xij, where X*ijk isshapes the overall experience of the ad. If
the normalized score for the ith magazine for the jlh the humor is removed, the ad does not make
score on the k1* advertisement; Xijk is the raw score sense.
for the ilh magazine for the jlh score on the klh adver-
2. Message dominant:
tisement; and Xij is the advertisement norm for the a. Information-focused: Humor in the ad is
ith magazine for the jlh score, I=(1,2,...,N), j=(l,2,3),semantic, contains message arguments and
andk=(l,2...,457). The algebraic sign and magnitude requires a different processing style than that
of the normalized score (X*ijk) reflect the ad's rela-in humor dominant ads. If the humor is
tive performance. In addition to adjusting the raw removed, the ad still makes sense.
scores for the variations of product, audience, ad size, b. Image-focused: Humor in the ad is visual
format, and magazine, the norm helps adjust for the and closely related to the product and/or user.
critical product interest factor that Bagozzi and SilkHowever, if the humor is removed, the ad
(1983) cited when examining Starch data. still makes sense.
Structural and thematic relatedness could not be
Ads Coding studied fully because of sample-size limitations.
Hence, the shaded constructs in Figure 1 were not
Only ads judged as making an attempt at humor
examined.
were selected from the Starch files for further study.
Speck (1987) used judges to code television ads ac-
A goal of 100 to 150 ads per PCM group was set as a
cording to his humor typology. Although not all
realistic target number that would be large enough to
intercoder percentages are reported, the 60% agree-
allow statistical testing and provide a breadth of prod-
ment for humor dominance and 70%; agreement for
uct and brand representation. Because of the rela-
humor somehow related to the product suggested that
tively low incidence of humor in magazine advertis-
his coding system would need refinement. Speck's
ing (10% of ads according to past research), it was
coders judged ads they thought were intended to be
necessary to look at thousands of advertisements to
humorous, whereas the judges in our study were not
obtain a target sample of 400 to 600 ads. The selected
required to assess whether or not the ads were in-
ads were coded off site by two graduate students
trained to isolate the characteristics of interest. tended to be humorous. A two-stage coding process
was used in our study.
Coding was done off site from color slides made of
Humor Mechanism
each ad selected from the Starch ad files. Two coders
conducted
The overall classifications for humor processes cor-the initial ad coding using a codebook de-
responded to those identified by Speck. fining the constructs of interest. Not unexpectedly,
Fall 1997 25
reliability levels at this stage were similar to score

thosenormalization
of process. The inclusion of
covariates and Starch ad norms in the analysis
Speck (1987). Reliability, as measured by percentage
agreement, for the various humor categories accounted
was: 53%jfor all major factors uncovered in prior
for arousal-safety, 78% for incongruity, and print readership studies of magazine advertising
83% for
disparagement; 45% for humor-dominant, performance.
54%; for
message-dominant, image-focused, and 77% forThe a priori issue of interest across all analyses
mes-
sage-dominant, information-focused. Perreault and
was whether the average Starch score (noted, associ-
Leigh (1989) recommend correcting percentage ated and read-most) for ads intending to be humor-
agree-
ment by the formula [((Fo/N)-l/k)(k/(k-l))]r>, ous where
was better or poorer than the Starch norm as
Fo=observed frequency, N=sample size, and indicated by "normed difference scores" statistically
k=number of groups. As some reliability levels could greater than or less than zero, respectively. Data
analysis involved a two-step procedure. First, analy-
not be calculated because of inability to adhere to the
sis of covariance was used to determine whether the
constraint Fo/N>l/k, percentage agreement is reported
to maintain consistency. Additional analysis of the
covariates did, in fact, have a statistically significant
discrepant codings was conducted and construct defi-
effect on the Starch scores. If so, the respective means
nitions were refined further. An additional pairand of standard deviations were corrected for the
covariate effects. Across all analyses, the covariate
judges (two of the authors) then coded the discrepant
cases independently. Reliability exceeded 85% for had a significant impact on the noted and associate
both the humor mechanisms and intentional related- scores. No significant covariate effects were found fo
ness measures. As a consistency check of the coding the read-most score.
process, the second set of judges randomly examined The information derived from the ANCOVA was
the nondiscrepant codings of the first two judges. No used in the second step of the analysis to test the
further disagreements were found. comparisons of interest related to our research ques-
tions. All data in the tables represent the average
Analysis "difference scores" for particular cells, that is, whether
the ads performed better or worse than Starch ad
A total of 470 ads judged to be making an attempt norms.
at humor were selected with a balance across the
PCM to allow for adequate product representation. Results
Forty-four observations were eliminated from the
analysis because of missing information (lack Variations
of ei- in the Use of Humor in
ther page numbers or Starch ad norm scores).
Advertising across Product Groups
Research has consistently identified three covariates
The information in Table 1 provides an overall
influencing ad effectiveness as measured by the Starch
noted, associated, and read-most scores (Finn 1988):
scription of how advertisers are using humor in m
zine advertising. Although the sample selected w
size of illustration, number of pictures, and magazine
page location. We included those covariates in notall drawn randomly from the population of all m
analyses to control for their effects. We calculated
zines, it is a good representation of magazines
page location as a proportion, dividing the page num-
lected and evaluated by Starch during a five-y
ber on which the ad appeared by the total number period.
of
pages in the magazine in which the ad appeared.Examination
The of Table 1 reveals that incongruity-
scores are commonly transformed (Finn 1988) tobasednor-humor is the mechanism of choice for the maga-
malize the distributions. Comparing the zine ads studied. At least 75%. of magazine ads, re-
nontransformed and transformed data for improve- gardless of PCM cell, used that type of humor (82%; of
ment in normality showed extremely minor differ- all ads in the sample). However, fewer advertise-
ences between the two distributions. We therefore ments for blue goods than for products in the other
decided to use the nontransformed data in further PCM cells appeared to use incongruity. Data at the
analysis. underlying process level were not available, but per-
In combination with the covariate adjustments, we centage representation of the five humor types (HT)
controlled for other factors uncovered by Finn as re- defined by Speck (1987) was as follows: comic wit
lated to ad size and color, as well as product type and 82%;, sentimental humor 2% , satire 8% , sentimental
magazine, through the use of Starch ad norms in the wit 7% , and full comedy 1%;.
Table 1
Descriptive Analysis
White Goods Red Goods Blue Goods Yellow Goods
Number of Advertisements 103 117 98 108
Type of Humor*
Incongruity-based 85% 85% 75% 84%
Arousal-safety-based 12 3 15 6
Disparagement-based 3 12 10 10
Intentional Relatedness"
Humor-dominant 23% 62% 64% 71%
Message-dominant, information-focused 59 5 16 1
Message-dominant, image-focused 18 33 20 28
Humor-Dominant (n) 24 72 63 77
Message-Dominant, Information-Focused (n) 61 6 16 1

Message-Dominant, Image-Focused (n) 18 39 19 30

Significant difference, ?2= 16.234, d.f. 6, p<05.

Significant difference, ?2= 147.524, d.f. 6, p<001.
Ads for white and blue goods were most likely to ment and empirical investigation, it is often helpful
employ arousal-safety-based humor (12 and 15%, re- to examine the results in light of what is already
spectively). The overall use of both arousal-safety- known from past studies. Results in isolation have
and disparagement-based humor (9 and 8%;, respec- little value if they cannot be fit into a context of
tively) was quite low in comparison to the use of empirical investigation. Trying to conduct statistical
incongruity-based humor. Advertisements for white tests and draw definitive conclusions would be inap-
goods had the lowest percentage usage of arousal- propriate when comparing the results of different stud-
safety and disparagement. Interestingly, a higher ies taken at different times by different data collec-
percentage of ads for red and yellow goods used dis- tion methods.
paragement than used arousal-safety-based humor. The second major factor of the Speck typology that
Those results deviate somewhat from Speck's (1987). we examined was intentional relatedness, the degree
In his study, 34% of television ads used incongruity, to which humor dominates the advertisement. The
36% used arousal-safety, and 30% used disparage- descriptive results are reported in Table 1. Overall,
ment. Note that an inherent weakness is associated
55%; of the ads in the sample were humor dominant,
20% were information-focused, and 25% were image-
with cross-study comparisons. However, when work-
focused. Those results closely mimic Speck's, as he
ing in areas that lack extensive theoretical develop-
Fall 1997 27
found 65% of television ads to be humor dominant, Variations in the Effectiveness of

14% information-focused, and 21%; to be image-fo- Humor in Advertising across Product
cused.
Groups
As expected, fewer advertisements for white goods
than for the other product categories of the PCM We examined the effectiveness of incongruity-based
were likely to use a humor-dominant strategy. For humorous advertising executions when evaluating
white goods, a majority of ad executions were mes- advertisement performance using Starch scores. As
sage-dominant, information-focused. White good ad shown in Table 2, such humor appears in general to
executions were least likely to be message-dominant, be effective in capturing initial attention (as mea-
image-focused. For red goods, in contrast, the ad sured by the Starch noted score) for both white and
executions were primarily humor-dominant. For yel- yellow goods as indicated by the statistically signifi-
low goods, ad executions were primarily humor-domi- cant normed difference scores (+2.00 and -1-2.24, re-
nant and image-focused. Humor strategy for blue spectively). Interestingly, incongruity-based humor
goods was similar to that for red and yellow goods; does not appear to increase initial attention (Starch
the percentage of ad executions using information- noted score) to ads for blue goods and has no substan-
focused strategy was larger for blue goods than for tive effect on ad performance for red goods.
the other two categories. Of the four product catego- In terms of increasing aided brand recall (as mea-
ries, white and blue goods were least likely to have sured by the Starch associated score) above the Starch
image-focused ad executions. ad norm, incongruity-based humorous executions were
We also examined humor mechanism usage across effective only for yellow goods (+2.49). That type of
the four product categories within each intentional humor had no impact on advertisement effectiveness
relatedness strategy. None of the relationships were for white goods, and humor actually lowered the starch
statistically significant, but they provide some de- score performance for both red and blue goods adver-
scriptive results that support the overall findings. tisements (-3.45 and -2.78 points below the norm,
Regardless of intentional relatedness strategy, incon- respectively).
gruity-based humor was the mechanism of choice. Incongruity-based humor had an increasingly posi-
Arousal-safety-based humor was used more often in tive impact on Starch score performance for held at-
ads for white and blue goods than in ads for red and tention of yellow goods advertisements (as measured
yellow goods. Under humor-dominant and informa- by the Starch read-most score, +3.40). In fact, that
tion-focused strategies, disparagement-based humor type of humor had its greatest influence on increas-
was used in a higher percentage of ads for red and ing Starch score performance for held attention. In-
blue goods than ads for white and yellow goods. Yel- congruity-based humor did not have any noticeable
low goods had the highest percentage of ads with effect on held attention for any of the other product
disparagement-based humor when image-focused in- categories.
tentional relatedness was present. Recall that incongruity is the humor mechanism
The small number of ads using arousal-safety- and used most frequently by advertisers (see Table 1). Its
disparagement-based humor severely limits our abil- heavy usage appears well justified for yellow and
ity to examine humor process effects of those mecha- perhaps white goods, but ill advised for red or blue
nisms. Results would be speculative at best. With- goods.
out strongly significant results, analysis investigat-
ing the effects of those humor mechanisms would add Influence of Humor Mechanism on Ad
unnecessary complexity to the results. Hence, our
Effectiveness and Its Variation across
analysis for the remaining research questions per-
tain only to ads using incongruity-based humor (82%;
Product Groups
of the sample). Exclusion of the other ads precludes Given the results in Table 2 and the fact that maga-
complete analysis of humor mechanism effects, but zine advertisements in the sample appear to use in-
not the statistical analysis of intentional relatedness congruity to a greater degree than the other humor
effects on humorous ad performance. mechanisms, can the effects just described be attrib-
Table 2
Overall Ad Performance in Comparison with Ad Norms for Incongruity-Based Humor?
Product Color Matrix
Starch Scores White Goods Red Goods Blue Goods Yellow Goods
Noted
Meanb 2.00 -.50 -1.61 2.24
Facilitates/inhibits0 + + 0 + +
Associated
Mean .51 -3.45 -2.78 2.49
Facilitates/inhibits + +
Read-Most
Mean .98 -.05 1.27 3.40
Facilitates/inhibits 0 0 + + +
Effective advertisements are ones that scored more than two percentage points above the Starch
ineffective ads are ones that scored two percentage points below the Starch norm The numbers
of advertisements in each PCM cell that were classified as either effective or ineffective
Cell means tested against the hypothesized normed difference score of zero. Difference score = X'ijk = Xijk - Xij Means
for Starch noted and associated scores adjusted for the effects of the statistically significant covariates of illustration
size, page location, and number of photos.
Notation indicating whether the average difference score was above, equal to, or below the ad norm for the respective
Starch measure. A plus sign indicates that humor enhanced ad performance, a minus sign indicates that humor inhibited ad
performance. The number of symbols below each mean indicates the level of statistical significance
+/ - significant t-value at ? < . 10
+ +/ - - significant t-value at ? < .05
+++/ ? significant t-value at ? < .01
uted to a general humor effect? Or should they becused classifications indicate that the humor is pre-
attributed to the use of incongruity-based humor?dominantly integrated into the body copy and/or head-
Unfortunately, the low usage of the other humorline of the advertisement, whereas image-focused clas-
mechanisms in practice precludes further analysis. sifications indicate that humor is integrated into the
visual/illustration elements of the advertisement.
Placement of the humor is potentially critical because
Differential Influence of Intentional the relative importance of the copy and visual aspects
Relatedness (Humor/Message of advertisements differs among product categories.
Dominance) on Ad Effectiveness across For example, compare the execution of a perfume or
Product Groups liquor ad with that of a computer or home appliance
ad.
Intentional Relatedness represents humor's degree Humor dominance was used frequently (62 to 71%)
of integration within a particular advertisement. by advertisers for red, blue, and yellow goods. How-
Humor dominance reflects the use of humor as an ever, in examining the Starch performance for red
and blue goods ads that were classified as humor-
integral part of the advertisement, inseparable from
the ad itself. Message dominance, however, reflectsdominant, we see that incongruity-based humor ap-
pears
how humor is integrated into two specific aspects of to have very little effect (see Table 3). No
the advertisement, copy and visual. Information-fo-effects (in terms of increasing or decreasing scores
Fall 1997 29
from the Starch ad norm) were observed for initial the consumer decision-making process. Rossiter,
and held attention (noted and read-most scores) onlyPercy, and Donovan (1991) indicate that consumers'
negative effects were observed for aided brand recall
white goods purchases are based on negative pur-
chase motivations; in other words, such products are
for both red and blue goods.
Information-focused ads were used heavily by ad- purchased to solve problems. They are also high
vertisers (59%) of white goods. Few effects, eitherinvolvement products, and information is needed in
positive or negative, were observed. Information- addition of humor to sell them. Hence, humor may be
focused humor did appear to enhance Starch score an effective means of cutting through clutter, but the
performance for white goods advertisements on ini-other elements of the ad must make an impact be-
cause humor alone cannot maintain reader attention.
tial attention (noted score) and for blue goods on held
attention. Yellow goods, in contrast are consumed for self-grati-
fication, a positive purchase motivation. Because they
Of the three intentional relatedness strategies, mes-
sage dominant, image-focused humor appeared to have are low involvement products, consumers would spend
the most influence on increasing advertisement effec- little time seeking information and concentrating on
tiveness above the Starch ad norms. For white goods advertising about them. Their advertisements could
be simple and humor could be effective in capturing
the overall effect of image-focusedness on Starch scores
was positive. It enhanced ad performance on initialand maintaining attention.
and held attention, as well as aided brand recall, to aThe use of humor may be detrimental in ads for red
relatively high magnitude. Image-focused humorand blue goods. Perhaps because red goods are high
tended to cause ads for red goods to score below Starch
involvement products and are assumed to have a re-
ad norms on aided brand recall and held attention. lationship to a consumer's personality, making fun of
For blue goods, such humor reduced Starch scores such for products may be considered threatening. For
initial attention and aided brand recall to a substan- blue goods, which are low involvement products, hu-
mor could interfere with attention and recall. Be-
tial degree. Image-focused humor appeared to work
best for yellow goods. Hence, the image-focused hu- cause consumers are not highly involved, the adver-
tisement must quickly provide information on how
mor, although used relatively infrequently (see Table
the product solves consumer problems or the page
3), was most likely to boost ad performance above the
Starch ad norm for white and yellow goods. will be turned and the impact lost. The 11.9%; usage
of humor with blue goods (Weinberger and Spotts
Discussion 1993) may be too high given the negative outcomes
we found.
Effects of humor on advertising performance At a moreare
detailed level of analysis, the same ques-
complex. We unravel some ofthat complexity tion can be asked: Does advertising practice match
through
the examination of humor effects in the context of advertising impact? Clearly, incongruity-based hu-
product category and Speck's humor typology. mor is the dominant mechanism used in magazine
Previous humor research in print advertising indi- advertising for all products. It provides a good heu-
cates that humor is used most often for yellow goods ristic for advertisers of yellow goods, uniformly sig-
(18.1%) and least often for red goods (5.5%) nificant and positive effects on Starch scores. We
(Weinberger and Spotts 1993). At an overall level, found some evidence that incongruity is helpful for
white goods, as it increased Starch scores. The same
those findings are supported by our study results.
Humor appears to be very effective in enhancing ini-
cannot be said for the use of incongruity with red and
tial attention, aided brand recall and held attention
blue goods, as we found some significant but negative
for yellow goods, and somewhat effective for whiteeffects.
goods. It seems to have a negative impact on adThe low usage of arousal-safety- and disparage-
performance for blue and red goods. Hence, the ment-based
low humor precludes conclusions about the
usage of humor with red goods and the high usage
effectiveness of those mechanisms. The difficulty,
with yellow goods are appropriate according to the
however, is collecting enough ads for study. The two
Starch effectiveness measures. Advertisers do not mechanisms constituted only 18%, of our study sample.
use humor very often with white goods (7.9%), but The percentage is even smaller if ads having a hybrid
some positive gains are associated with such ads. of arousal-safety or disparagement and incongruity
Those effects are interesting and could be rooted in
humor are removed. Our sample was collected by
the relationship between the product category and examining thousands of tested magazine advertise-
Table 3
Ad Performance in Comparison with Ad Norms for Incongruity-Based Humor and Intentiona
Product Color Matrix
White Goods Red Goods Blue Goods Yellow Goods
Mean* Humor Mean Humor Mean Humor Mean Humor

Difference Fadlitates- Difference Fadlitates-
Difference Facilitates-
Difference Faalitates-
Soore Inhibits6 Score Inhibits Score Inhibits Score Inhibits
Humor-Dominant
Noted .61 0 .23 -2.24 2.02 + +
Associated -.94 0 -2.81 -3.56 1.63 0

Read Most -1.23 0 1.18 1.44 2.79 + +
Message-Dominant,
Information-Focused
Noted 1.24 + 2.07 0 3.05 0 -4.13 0

Associated - .99 0 -2.41 0 1.38 0 -19.63 0
Read Most - .28 0 .78 0 1.78 + -10.75 0
Message-Dominant,
Image-Focused
Noted 7.32 + + -1.84 -3.30 3.79 + +
Associated 5.98 + + -5.31 -4.77 5.44 + + +
Read Most 4.91 + -1.87 .78 6.51 + + +
Cell means tested against the hypothesized normed difference score of zero Difference score =
and associated scores adjusted for the effects of the statistically significant covariates illustration
tos.
Notation indicating whether the average difference score was above, equal to, or below the ad no
plus sign indicates that humor enhanced ad performance; a minus sign indicates that humor inhi
symbols next to each mean indicates the level of statistical significance
+/- significant t-value at ? < 10
+ ?/- - significant t-value at ? < .05
+++/? significant t-value at ? < .01
ments. Hence, although their effectiveness cannot be more uniformly positive impact on all three Starch
examined, the two humor mechanisms apparentlyscores when image-focused humor was present. That
have been avoided in advertising practice. approach is little-used with white goods, but seems to
An examination of the intentional relatedness of work well for them.
the humor again reveals that in some cases advertis-For each of the other three product groups, adver-
ers may be missing the mark. Here the question tisers
is: used humor-dominant relatedness most often.
To what extent should humor be integrated into the strategy did not help to increase Starch scores
That
magazine advertisement? for two of the three products and in some cases was
For white goods, information-focused humor is detrimental
used to ad performance. Humor dominance
did
most often (59%) and image-focused humor least of- have a positive effect on Starch scores for yellow
goods,
ten (18%). Although the Starch noted scores increased but it was not as strong as the effect of image-
with information-focused ads, we actually found a focused humor. For yellow goods the use of image-
Fall 1997 31
focused humor (in just 28% of ads) had the most humor effects. However, we may be able to pinp
uniformly positive impact on ad performance for all when humor has a better or poorer chance of succe
Starch measures. For blue goods the little-used in- On the basis of our findings, we can make the fo
formation-focused humor (16%) had the only positive lowing preliminary statements.
effect.
? In general, magazine advertisers are using
humor most often for the yellow goods prod-
Limitations uct groups where the likelihood of success is
the greatest.
Our study had limitations that influence our ability
? Although advertisers consider using humor-
to generalize the results to magazine advertising
ousinmagazine advertising executions for all
total. The sampling methods employed were judg- products, the practice of using humor should
mental. However, judgmental sampling methods becan
limited to white and yellow goods. Incon-
yield valid information if care is taken to construct
gruity-based humor did not increase Starch
the sample to include population elements that are performance above the ad norm for red
score
particularly influential. We were rigorous in adver-
goods.
tisement selection, making sure to collect advertise-
? Our results should lead advertisers to use
ments from a broad array of product categories and
incongruity-based humor with confidence. Be-
magazines. Our sample comprised almost 500 ads cause of the low incidence of arousal-safety-
from 40 different magazines collected over a five-year
and disparagement-based humor in the
period with broad product/brand representation. sample,
Al- no conclusions can be drawn as to
though magazine selection was limited to those evalu-
whether or when such humor types would
ated by Starch, including ads from other magazines work in magazine advertisements.
would have been impossible as there would have been
? Finally, humor should not be the main focal
no performance effectiveness measures.
point of a magazine advertisement for any
Other limitations of our study include the difficulty
product (humor dominance). At best, mes-
of applying the Speck humor typology in content analy-
sage-dominant humor should be used in maga-
sis and the lack of ads using arousal-safety- and dis-
zine ads because it appears to work best at
paragement-based humor. The typology is large and
capturing attention and, in select instances,
necessitates large sample sizes; and definitions need
maintaining that attention. For white goods
refinement to improve content analysis reliability.
it can be either information- or image-focused
Sample size precluded the examination of certain re-
humor; for yellow goods it should be only im-
lationships. Although our sample of ads was one of
age-focused.
the largest in any study to date investigating humor
Through
effects, size is still a problem in application of com-a product-group-level analysis, we have
provided evidence that some of the humor execution
plex humor typologies. Nonetheless, the study pro-
vides some insight into how incongruity-basedstrategies
humor being used by magazine advertisers are
is used and when it may be effective.
valid, whereas others linked to humor relatedness
should be questioned. In particular, advertisers of
Conclusion yellow goods, who commonly use humor, should ques-
tion their heavy use of humor-dominant messages.
Advertisers of red and blue goods should carefully
Research into the effects of humor on advertising
performance is relatively sparse. Our study consider whether
was humor should be used at all. With-
unique in its application of an established out
humor
our focused examination, many of the contingent
typology together with a product-level groupeffectsanaly-
of humor usage would not have emerged. How-
sis. Of the approximately two dozen humor ever,studies
many questions remain unanswered. For maga-
reported in the marketing literature, fewzineshave andspe-
other media, larger samples need to be
cifically examined humor's impact on ad performance
drawn to allow for the full investigation of the frame-
with industry standard measures of effectiveness.
work outlined in Figure 1. The humorousness of the
Hence, a certain mystery remains as to how, when also should be assessed. Finally, other
ads themselves
and why humor may or may not work. Given measuresthe of humors impact, including message re-
dependent measures used in our study, it is call, brand image, and liking should be examined to
difficult,
beyond conjecture, to ascertain the how and provide
whya complete
of picture.
References Rapp, ?. (1947), "Toward an Eclectic and Multilateral Theory of

Laughter and Humor," Journal of General Psychology, 36,
217-219.
Alden, Dana L., Wayne D. Hoyer, and Choi Lee (1993), "Identifying
Global and Culture-Specific Dimensions of Humor Rossiter, John R., Larry Percy, and Robert J. Donovan (1991), "A
in Adver-
tising: A Multinational Analysis," Journal of MarketingBetter, Advertising
57 Planning Grid," Journal of Advertising
(2), 64-75. Research, 31 (October/November), 11-21.
Bagozzi, Richard P. and Alvin J. Silk (1983), "Recall,Sewall, Murphy C. and Dan Sarei (1986),"Characteristies of Radio
Recognition,
and the Measurement of Memory for Pri nt Advertising," Commercials
Mar- and Their Recall Effectiveness," Journal of Mar-
keting Science, 9 (March), 449-450. keting, 50 (January), 52-60.
Berlyne, Daniel E. (1972), "Laughter, Humor and Play,"Speck, Paul Surgi (1987), "On Humor and Humor in Advertising,"
Handbook
of Social Psychology, 3, 795-852. unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University.
- (1991),
Berger, David (1981), "Retrospective: FCB Recall Study," "The Humorous Message Taxonomy: A
Adver-
tising Age (October 26), 36-38. Framework for the Study of Humorous Ads," in Curre
Cantor, Raymond B. and D. Zillman (1973), "Resentment Issues Research and Advertising, Vol. 13, James H. Leigh
Toward
Victimized Protagonists and Severity of Misfortunes Claude R.Martin, Jr. eds., Ann Arbor: Division of Researc
They
Suffer as Factors in Humor Appreciation," Journal of Experi- Business School, University of Michigan, 1-44.
Michigan
mental Research, 6, 321-329. Stern, Barbara (1990), "Pleasure and Persuasion in Advertising
Rhetorical
Finn, Adam (1988), "Print Ad Recognition Readership Scores: An Image as a Humor Technique," in Current Iss
and Research in Advertising, Vol. 12, Nos. 1 and 2, James
Information Processing Perspective," Journal of Marketing
Research, 26 (May), 168-177. Leigh and Claude R. Martin Jr., eds, Ann Arbor: Division
Freud, Sigmund (1960), Jokes and Their Relation to the Research,
Uncon-Michigan Business School, University of Michig
25-42.
scious, New York: Norton (First German Edition 1905).
Gr?ner, Charles R. (1991), "On the Impossibility of Sternthal,
Having a Brian
Tax- and Samuel Craig (1973), "Humor in Advertis-
ing," Journal o/'Marketing, 37 (4), 12-18.
onomy of Humor," paper presented at Ninth International
Stewart, David
Conference on Humor and Laughter, Brock University, St. M. and David H. Furse (1986), Effective Television
Catarines, Ontario, Canada. Advertising, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Kelly, J. Patrick and Paul J. Solomon (1975), "HumorVaughn, Richard (1980), "How Advertising Works: A Planning
in Televi-
Model," Journal of Advertising Research, 20 (5), 27-33.
sion Advertising," Journal of Advertising, 4 (3) 31-35.
Kline, L.W. (1907), "The Psychology of Humor," American - (1986), "How Advertising Works: A Planning Model
Journal
of Psychology, 18,421-441. Revisited," Journal of Advertising Research, 26 (1), 57-66.
Weinberger, Marc G. and Leland Campbell (1991), "The Use and
Kolbe, Richard and Melissa S. Burnett (1991), "Content-Analysis
Research: An Examination of Applications with Directives Impact of Humor in Radio Advertising," Journal of Advertis-
for Improving Research Reliability and Objectivity,"ing Research, 31 (December/January), 44-52.
Journal
of Consumer Research, 18 (September), 243-250. - ,-and Beth Brody (1994), Effective Ra-
LaFave, L. (1972), "Humor Judgments as a Function of Reference dio Advertising, New York: Lexington Books.
Group and Identification Classes," in Psychology of Humor,and Charles S. Gulas ( 1992), "The Impact
J.H. Goldstein and P.E. McGhee, eds., New York: Academic in Advertising: A Review," Journal of Advertisi
Press. 59.
Lucas, Darrcll B. (1960), "The ABC's of ARF's PARM," Journal of and Harlan E. Spotts ( 1989), "Humor in U.S. Versus
Marketing, 25 (July), 9-20. U.K. TV Advertising," Journal of Advertising, 18 (2), 39-44.
Madden, Thomas and Marc G. Weinberger (1982), "The Effects of and-(1993), "Differences in British and
Humor on Attention in Magazine Advertising," Journal of American Television and Magazine Advertising: Myth
Advertising, 11 (3), 8-14. Reality? in European Advances in Consumer Research, V
- and-(1984), "Humor in Advertising: A W.F. Van Raaij and G.J. Bamossy, eds., Provo, UT: As
tion for Consumer Research.
Practitioner View," Journal of Advertising Research, 24 (4),
23-29. -, Leland Campbell, and Amy L. Par-
McGhee, Paul E. (1974), "Cognitive Mastery and Children's Hu- sons (1995), "The Use of Humor in Different Advertising Me-
mor," Psychological Bulletin, 81 (10), 721-730. dia," Journal of Advertising Research, 35 (May/June), 44-56.
Wells, William D. (1988), "Lectures and Dramas and Measure-
Mindness, H. (1971), Laughter and Libera Hon., Los Angeles: Nash.
Morreall, John (1983), Taking Laughter Seriously, Albany, NY: ment Challenges," presented at Marketing Science Institute
State University of New York Press. Conference, Wellesley, MA (June).
Wicker, Frank W., William L. Barron, and Amy C. Willis (1980),
Perreault, William D. and Laurence E. Leigh (1989), "Reliability of
Nominal Data Based on Qualitative Judgments," Journal of "Disparagement Humor: Dispositions and Resolutions," Jour-
Marketing Research, 24 (May), 135-148. nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (4), 701-709.
Ratchford, Brian T. (1987), "New Insights About the FCB Grid," Zaichowsky, Judith Lynn (1987), "Emotional Aspects of Product
Journal of Advertising Research, 27 (4), 24-38. Involvement," in Advances in Consumer Research, M.
Wallcndorf and P.E. Anderson, eds., Ann Arbor, MI: Associa-
tion for Consumer Research.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Journal of Advertising

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Journal of Advertising

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessing the Use and Impact of Humor on Advertising Effectiveness: A Contingency

Background agement (Cantor and Zillman 1973) and sympathy as

Products classified here as: Impact on

For Humor to occur requires one or

^ Humor Mechanisms "\

/?lumor Dominant /i?lessage Dominant^

Relatedness of Syntactic Relatedness

Thematic Thematic Relatedness

removed, the ad addressed

Functional Tools Expressive Toys

Higher Large appliances Fashion Clothing and Accessories

tionality necessitates a greater

Research Questions 2. Does the effectiveness of humor in

copy board so that 1.detailed

reliability levels at this stage were similar to score

White Goods Red Goods Blue Goods Yellow Goods

Number of Advertisements 103 117 98 108

Message-Dominant, Information-Focused (n) 61 6 16 1

Message-Dominant, Image-Focused (n) 18 39 19 30

Significant difference, ?2= 16.234, d.f. 6, p<05.

found 65% of television ads to be humor dominant, Variations in the Effectiveness of

Product Color Matrix

Product Color Matrix

White Goods Red Goods Blue Goods Yellow Goods

Mean* Humor Mean Humor Mean Humor Mean Humor

Noted .61 0 .23 -2.24 2.02 + +

Associated -.94 0 -2.81 -3.56 1.63 0

Noted 1.24 + 2.07 0 3.05 0 -4.13 0

Associated 5.98 + + -5.31 -4.77 5.44 + + +

Read Most 4.91 + -1.87 .78 6.51 + + +

References Rapp, ?. (1947), "Toward an Eclectic and Multilateral Theory of

You might also like