Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in

Pictures and Words

Author(s): Edward F. McQuarrie and Barbara J. Phillips
Source: Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Summer, 2005), pp. 7-20
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4189294
Accessed: 16-03-2018 15:31 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
http://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 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 INDIRECT PERSUASION IN ADVERTISING

How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words

Edward F. McQuarrie and Barbara J. Phillips

ABSTRACT: Indirect persuasion attempts are common in magazine advertisements. Although the use o
claim presumably oners some advantage to an advertiser, as yet, little is known about how consumers proc
types of indirect claims. We develop the proposition that when consumers are presented with an indirec
claim, they become more receptive to multiple positive inferences about the advertised brand. In addit
indirect metaphorical claim takes the form of a picture, consumers are more likely to spontaneously genera
inferences at the time of ad exposure. These ideas are supported in an experiment using response latenc
many of the inferences examined in this study could be considered misleading if claimed directly, the p
with a discussion of the public policy implications of the findings.

appear to
In current advertising practice, it is rare to find magazine be imperative to use simple direct claims
ads
that lead off with a direct verbal claim such as "Tide
"Tide gets
gets clothes clean," accompanied by realistic p
of expected
clothes clean." Instead of straightforward claims that a brand product benefits. Instead, indirect persuasi
tempts
possesses some attribute or delivers some benefit, one in words, and especially in pictures, grow ever
encoun-
predominant.
ters pictures of dress shirts stacked in the freezer (Cheer), de- Why?
We shall argue that indirect claims, such as those
tergent bottles wearing miner s helmets (Purex), or measuring
cups fiali of blue sky (Tide; see Figure 1). If themetaphor,
picture ismay be advantageous because they render th
sumer with
straightforward, then the headline may be metaphorical, more receptive to multiple, distinct, positiv
ences
an offer of "complete love for your clothes" (Cheer), about the advertised brand. In addition, an i
or clothes
"fresh and clean as sunshine" (Gain). This trend metaphorical
away from claim presented in a picture enjoys a f
direct claims has been in place for decades. By advantage
the 1990s,
because such inferences are more likely to be
Leigh (1994) found that 74% of magazine ads used rhetorical
erated spontaneously at the time of ad exposure. Bo
figures in their headlines. Similarly, Phillips andcesses
McQuarrie
can be explained using the idea of weak imp
(2003) report that the incidence of figurative pictures in ads
drawn from the branch of linguistics known as pra
approximately doubled during the time period from 1954 to and Wilson 1986). Thus, the intended contr
(Sperber
1999. of the present study is (1) to develop a theoretical e
Clearly, advertisers have come to believe that making
tion for in-
why indirect claims may be advantageous, (2)
direct claims can confer some advantage over making direct
how this explanation allows different types of indirect
claims. However, the nature of this advantage is bytono means
be distinguished in terms of the processes underlyin
obvious (Kardes 1993). On the contrary, copywriting
sumertexts
response, and (3) to demonstrate that pictor
are replete with maxims to "be direct," and harp on theclaims
rect im- may be particularly advantageous. The e
portance of clarity and simplicity (e.g., Burton this
and demonstration
Purvis is to provide empirical confirma
1996). The rationale is that the consumer of magazine
the adver-
concerns often expressed about the misleading p
tising is busy and distracted, with little capacity
ofto processclaims in general and pictures in particular
indirect
advertising messages. Under such circumstances, it would a final contribution of this paper is to present the publ
implications of the findings.
Edward F. McQuarrie (Ph.D., University of Cincinnati) is a pro-
fessor of marketing in the Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara
INDIRECT CLAIMS IN ADVERTISING
University.

Barbara J. Phillips (Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin) is a pro- Indirect claims elicit beliefs for which no explicit statem
fessor of marketing in the Department of Management and Market- have been made (Smith 1991); instead, consumers are i
ing, University of Saskatchewan. to construct multilayered meanings that are not actually

Journal of Advertising, vol. 34, no. 2 (Summer 2005), pp. 7-

? 2005 American Academy of Advertising. All righe? reserv
ISSN 0091-3367 / 2005 $9.50 + 0.00.

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
8 The Journal of Advertising

FIGURE 1 The rhetorical figure of metaphor, specifically, inv

Example of an Indirect Metaphorical comparison of two objects by suggesting that one ob
Claim Presented Visually like another, even though they come from different do
:?*$,* ^ *??>-?-??- .- "?**??'/ -??? ?:?% (Stern 1990; Ward and Gaidis 1990). To resolve an adv
V ing metaphor, consumers must draw inferences that find
larities between the two objects. In the case of the Tide
Figure 1, consumers have to infer how liquid laundry de
gent is like the sky. The content of these inferences
from the "fuzzy set" of attributes that the two objects sh
the consumer s mind (MacCormac 1985). Consumers will
search for a simple inference that associates the two obj
no simple inference can be found, consumers will ent
multiple alternatives (Sawyer and Howard 1991). For exam
in response to the Tide ad, consumers might think that
makes clothes as fresh as the breeze, as white as the clou
as bright as the sky. It is this openness to multiple alter
interpretations, or weak implicatures (Sperber and W
1986), that may confer a persuasive advantage on ind
claims presented through metaphor.

PICTURES AS AN INDIRECT CLAIM

The use of indirect persuasion attempts in ad pictur

increased even more rapidly than their use in ad words (P
in a text (Dick, Chakravarti, and Biehal 1990; Stern 1992). and McQuarrie 2003). Moreover, Pollay (1985) docum
Indirect persuasion attempts thus rely on consumer inference, that during the course of the 20th century, pictures ca
in the sense of going beyond what is explicitly stated in an ad occupy an ever-increasing portion of magazine ads, e
(Johar 1995). Although researchers have argued that the way the number of words steadily decreased. Thus, any attem
a claim is presented can heavily influence "bottom-line per- explain advertisers' increased reliance on indirect per
suasion results," such as brand beliefs (MacKenzie and Lutz needs to address the delivery of indirect claims through
1989, p. 63), the process by which persuasion occurs for indi- tures as well as through words. In fact, the ubiquity of
rect claims has not been well articulated. In addition, few at- rial claims suggests that visually presented indirect
tempts have been made to differentiate the category of indirect may enjoy some kind of extra or distinct advantage bas
persuasion attempts, or to specify the process whereby differ- a difference in how they are processed by consumers.
ent kinds of indirect claims achieve their effect (Kardes 1993). Unfortunately, to date, consumer research focused on
sual elements in advertising has been the exception r
METAPHOR AS AN INDIRECT CLAIM than the rule. Moreover, the research that has been pub
has not focused on the inference process for pictures as
Metaphors represent a type of indirect claim because pared with words. It is well established that pictori
they make
claims in a figurative way rather than in a literal way?the
ments in ads, such as color and layout, can influence a v
advertising message is not stated outright but only
of implied
advertising outcomes (e.g., Finn 1988; Rossiter and
(Mothersbaugh, Huhmann, and Franke 2002). Rhetorical
1983): fig-
For instance, it has been shown that a picture
ures are artful deviations?incongruities that both require
used to convey a specific belief (Miniard et al. 1991; Mit
resolution and point the way to resolution (McQuarrie and 1981), and that small alterations to a pictu
and Olson
Mick 1996; Toncar and Munch 2001). For example, when
have a material impact on the favorability of consumer
consumers view the Tide ad in Figure 1, they perceive a de-
(e.g., Meyers-Levy and Peracchio 1992; Peracchio and Me
viation from expectation: a measuring cup filled Levy
with 1994).
blue It is even the case that, in some situation
sky. Because consumers encounter rhetorical figures allinthe
tures ads can be more memorable than words (e.g., Ch
time (Gibbs 1994; Pollio, Smith, and Pollio 1990),and
theyHouston
do 1984). However, none of these studies h
not treat the Tide picture as an incomprehensible amined how pictures compare with words in terms o
error. In-
sumers'
stead, they realize that the advertiser has invited them receptivity to, or spontaneous generation of, m
to elabo-
rate on how the incongruity can be resolved (Phillips inferences.
1997).

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Summer 2005 9

In fact, one of the seminal studies of advertising pictures FIGURE 2

used an extensive set of pretests to eliminate any candidate Example of an Indirect Metaphorical
pictures that conveyed multiple messages (Edell and Staelin Claim Presented Verbally and Visually
1983, p. 49) and to eliminate any candidate picture-word
pairs that differed in believability (p. 50), thus forestalling a
test of the central ideas underlying this paper. Notably, given
these constraints, Edell and Staelin found unframed pictures
to be less persuasive than words or words combined with pic-
tures?a kind of picture inferiority effect. Thus, the present
BliX
study attempts to close a gap in the literature by comparing STUN REMOVER

specific indirect claims presented alternatively in words and

pictures, and demonstrating that the pictorial presentation of
such indirect claims may be particularly advantageous.

VERBAL AND PICTORIAL METAPHOR

The requirement to explain advertisers' use of indirect claims

in both words and pictures was a driving factor in the selec-
tion of metaphor as the specific kind of indirect claim to be
B.
examined in this study. A benefit of focusing on metaphorical
BliX
claims is that both visual and verbal metaphors have been
STUN GRENADE
acknowledged and extensively discussed in the literature
(Phillips 2003). Use of the same underlying metaphor affords
the opportunity to compare pictorial versus verbal means for
delivering an indirect claim. Moreover, there is a lively con-
troversy about whether any substantive difference exists be-
tween visual or verbal metaphors. Thus, some researchers have
hypothesized that metaphor does not occur at the surface level
of representation (i.e., pictures versus words), but rather
In light of theseat
perspectives, it appears that indirect claims
the level of cognitive thought (Forceville 1996; Hitchon 1997).pictures may differ in important ways from
presented through
If the modality of presentation of a metaphor those
is irrelevant,
presented through words, especially in their ability to
mislead process
then there should be no difference in how consumers consumers. Misleading advertising can be defined as
an indirect metaphorical claim presented in pictures versus
a "discrepancy between the factual performance of a product
words (see Figure 2 for an example). In support ofand the consumers
this line ofbeliefs generated by the advertisement"
reasoning, Smith (1991) found that consumers (Gaeth
drewandsimilar
Heath 1987, p. 43). If pictures are, indeed, more
inferences from (nonmetaphorical) visual and verbal claims.
open to spontaneous positive brand inferences, then the pro-
In contrast, other researchers, especially semioticians, sug- between indirect claims presented in pic-
cessing differences
gest that ad messages presented in pictures are tures
more and words
"open"have implications beyond academic theory;
to multiple interpretations than similar messages
they presented
touch on public policy and regulation. As noted above,
in words because the visual message is entirely however,
implicitas yet (Eco
there exists no empirical evidence for the spon-
1976; Marchand 1985). Several researchers contend
taneousthat the
generation of multiple inferences from pictures. The
openness or ambiguity of pictures in advertising isexperiment described subsequently was designed to address
what makes
them so persuasive. Messaris (1997) states thatthis issue.
associating
two unrelated objects through pictures, such as healthy young
adults and cigarettes, or automobiles with mountain scenery, PROCESSING OF INDIRECT CLAIMS
CONSUMER
causes viewers to take the association for granted without
In Kardes s (1993) formulation, indirect persuasion at
question. In addition, Tanaka (1994) suggests that advertisers
can be advantageous
turn to pictures when they don't want to take responsibility for because consumers must self-ge
the covert content of their advertising messages; inthe implicitly
fact, several stated claim. Such self-generated claim
researchers have speculated that advertisers purposefully
known touse
be more accessible and less subject to counter
images to imply messages that cannot be legally verbalized
(Lee and Olshavsky 1995). The difficulty with this fo
(Pollay 1991; Rossiter and Percy 1983; White 1981).
tion is the restriction that indirect persuasion attempt

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
10 The Journal of Advertising
enjoy this advantage when consumers are more rather than
less involved with the advertising message (Kardes 1988),
because only involved consumers will bother to self-generate
inferences. If this precise formulation is correct, then the grow-
ing prevalence of indirect claims in magazine ads would imply
that ordinary consumers have grown more and more involved
with ad messages over the years?a dubious proposition.
We test a different explanation of how metaphorical indi-
rect claims are processed by consumers. According to the lin-
guists Sperber and Wilson (1986), there are two basic kinds
of inferences that can be drawn in response to a message: (1)
strong implicatures, and (2) weak implicatures. For some
messages, one inference is likely to be chosen as most relevant
by most members of the language community most of the
time. In such cases, we speak of strong implicature?the
implicature chosen as most relevant tends to vary little across
listeners ("strong" in this usage is analogous to "strong sig-
nal"). In the case of other messages, a wider and more varied
range of inferences is possible. These sorts of utterance place
fewer constraints on the inference process, and it is this relax-
ation of constraints that invests these utterances with a mul-
tiplicity of weak implicatures.
Consider the ad in Figure 2 (part B) for Blix cleaner, which
presents an indirect claim in the form of a verbal metaphor:
"Blix: Stain Grenade." These types of metaphors are among
those cited by Sperber and Wilson as prototypical messages
that are likely to give rise to weak implicatures. The presence
of weak implicatures does not mean that a statement is incur-
ably ambiguous (i.e., lacks a strong implicature altogether);
it seems reasonable to expect that many North American con-
sumers would choose "especially powerful stain remover" as a
relevant implicature of "Stain Grenade" presented in the con-
text of a household cleaner. The point of Sperber and Wilson's
analysis is that alternative inferences are nonetheless more
likely than if the claim of extra power had been stated di-
rectly. Moreover, these alternatives will be couched differently
by different listeners. For one consumer, it will be that Blix
has explosive cleaning power, for another, that it will allow
her to attack stains. Some of the inferences generated could
be considered misleading if stated without substantiation:
"Blix is a more powerful cleaner than other brands." More-
over, the consumer need not settle on any of these inferences
as the exclusive interpretation of the advertiser s intent; all
may be maintained as possibilities. Consequently, an indirect
claim open to weak-implicature processing may be said to
give rise to a vector of inferences.
Weak implicatures are best thought of as inferences gener-
ated as part of an attempt to comprehend advertiser intent.
This description of how implicatures operate has several con-
sequences. First, although fallible, a weak implicature is al-
ways an attempt to guess what the advertiser is trying to say.
As such, weak implicatures generated by a consumer familiar
This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
with the genre of advertising will typically take the form of
favorable claims about the brand, or more exactly, hypotheses
about the specific favorable claim the advertiser intended
(Tanaka 1996). Second, because weak implicatures are good-
faith attempts to guess advertiser intent, they are less likely
to function as distracting thoughts (cf. Edell and Staelin 1983),
relative to inferences generally. Third, because a vector of dif-
ferent weak implicatures is generated, persuasiveness of the
ad may be enhanced due to diminished counterarguing, inas-
much as a consumer s limited capacity for counterarguing must
now be spread across multiple inferred claims, increasing the
odds that at least one claim will escape scrutiny. Finally, con-
sumers who are exposed to related but distinct attribute claims
(e.g., air bags, antilock brakes, traction control) for a product
are more likely to rate a general claim (e.g., automobile safety)
as true than consumers who are exposed to one attribute claim
repeatedly (Hawkins, Hoch, and Meyers-Levy 2001). In sum,
once indirect claims are conceptualized as a means of increas-
ing the probability that a consumer will be receptive to, or
even spontaneously generate, a vector of weak implicatures,
it becomes evident why an advertiser might wish to bear the
risks of making an indirect rather than a direct claim.
Considered as a theory, the explanation of indirect-claims
processing in terms of weak implicature has two additional
advantages. First, it offers a genuine alternative to Kardes s
initial formulation of how indirect claims in advertising con-
fer an advantage. Kardes showed that a single inference (the
conclusion to a syllogism) could be self-generated and would
gain persuasive power thereby; however, this effect was lim-
ited to consumers who were more involved with an advertise-
ment. By contrast, Sperber and Wilson describe how some
kinds of indirect claims can lead to the generation of mul-
tiple inferences via a relatively undemanding process akin to
that used to comprehend messages in everyday encounters. Thus,
the weak-implicature formulation does not specify a high level
of message involvement as a prerequisite. Of course, the two
formulations are not mutually exclusive. They may be recon-
ciled by acknowledging that "indirect persuasion" is not a ho-
mogeneous category, so that different kinds of indirect
persuasion can be explained by invoking different processes.
The second advantage associated with a weak-implicature
formulation stems from the fact that, as a theoretical category,
"indirect persuasion" is intolerably vague. There are clearly
many different alternatives to making a direct claim in adver-
tising, so that the catchall category of "indirect" claims is in
need of differentiation. An explanation couched in terms of
weak implicature provides one avenue toward obtaining such
differentiation. Since it is the lack of constraints on inference
that produces weak implicature, the indirectness of a claim
can be said to vary directly with the degree to which such
constraints are absent. In turn, this makes pictures unanchored
by words an important kind of indirect claim to examine, on
 Summer 2005 11

the semiotic assumption that in the absence of the many in-

believe response latencies hold great promise with respect to
terpretive aids built into the structure of verbal language, clarifying
the the cognitive processes that underlie consumer re-
interpretation of pictures will be particularly unconstrained.
sponse to advertising.
Pictorial claims thus allow a test of the effects of very weak
implicature on consumer processing. It seems reasonable to METHOD
suppose that quite different processes may govern consumer
response once constraints on interpretation drop below some
Stimulus Development
threshold.

To construct the experimental stimuli, we examin

RESEARCH QUESTIONS recent issues of popular magazines to locate visual me
suitable for experimental manipulation. Working
The two propositions to be examined empirically are: (1) that initial set of 12 ads, a professional artist extracted th
consumers are more receptive to multiple positive inferences carrying the visual metaphor and discarded everythin
concerning the advertised brand after exposure to an indirect the source ads. Next, fictitious brand names, with ne
claim, whether pictorial or verbal, as compared with a direct vaguely positive connotations, were devised for each
claim; and (2) that consumers are more likely to generate products and combined with a product category identi
multiple positive inferences spontaneously, at the time of ex- "Plus Dishwasher Detergent"). To construct the dire
posure, in the case of a pictorial indirect claim as compared claim version (henceforth called "verbal literal"), a lar
with a verbal indirect claim. The first proposition could be of the product package was placed in the center
tested using a conventional measurement approach. Follow- above the brand name, and then a direct claim, de
ing ad exposure, consumers would be asked to agree or dis- capture the claim implicit in the root visual metap
agree with a set of possible inferences about the brand, with
placed at the top to serve as a headline (e.g., "Cle
the expectation that agreement proportions would be higher tough stains"). The verbal metaphor version was
in the specified treatment condition. However, such a para- except for a change to the wording to create the m
digm cannot determine whether consumers spontaneously gen- (e.g., u Bulldozes tough stains"). For the visual metaph
erated such inferences at the time of ad exposure or only formed sion, the brand name was again placed at the bottom
these inferences when prompted by the researcher s questions and the image carrying the visual metaphor (in this e
(Johar 1995; Kardes 1988). Consequently, we use a measure a photo of earth-moving equipment clearing a dish) w
of response latency to provide an indication of whether con-to fill the center of the page; no other text appear
sumers spontaneously generated inferences at the time of ad visual metaphor version (see Figure 3).
exposure. These 12 initial sets of ad stimuli were pretested to
Pioneered by Kardes (1988, 1993) in consumer research similarity of meaning across the three ad versions w
and building on work by Fazio and others in social psychol- and to screen out dead or inapt metaphors. Under
ogy (Bargh and Chartrand 2000; Fazio 1990), response laten- students (n = 99) first rated the extent to which t
cies to statements presented following ad exposure have been and verbal metaphor ad versions and the verbal lit
used to test hypotheses concerning how an ad was processed lines expressed the same basic idea; this shared me
by consumers. The basic principle underlying such use of re- formulated into a strong-implicature statement (e.g.,
sponse latencies is that the results of a judgment already made dishwasher ad, "Cleans difficult stains from dishe
can be recalled more quickly than a novel judgment can be for a rhetorical figure to be present, an expression m
constructed; in other words, retrieval is quicker than compu- hibit artful deviation (McQuarrie and Mick 1996). Dea
tation. Thus, in response latency studies, short response times phors?metaphors that have entered conventional
indicate statements that correspond to inferences made at the not deviations and fail this test. Likewise, metaphors
time of ad exposure that are retrieved at the time of question-
judged inapt?dumb or wrong?fail to meet the ar
ing, whereas longer response times indicate inferences that test. To identify dead metaphors, participants rated
had to be constructed at the time of questioning. This prop- bal headline on a five-point scale as to whether it wa
erty of response latencies has made them a central variable clever" or "plain, matter-of-fact" (McQuarrie and Mic
in contemporary cognitive psychology (Van Zandt 2002), For the visual metaphor ads, inapt metaphors were id
leading to an extensive literature on the best approaches to by asking participants to rate the picture on a five-p
collecting and analyzing latency data (e.g., Fazio 1990; anchored by "creative, imaginative" or "silly, stupid.
Ratcliff 1993; Ulrich and Miller 1994). Although as yet of ad versions survived this screening.
little used in advertising and consumer research (see, e.g., To identify specific weak implicatures associated w
Jewell and Unnava 2003; Johar 1995; Kardes 1988), we metaphor ads, students (n = 17) examined the six visu

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
12 The Journal of Advertising

phor versions and were asked to list the attributes claimed

? ."^Showing Visual Metaphor, and messages delivered for the brand. A different group of
Example of Ad
Verbal Metaphor, and*??^*?^
Verpai ** Conditions students (n = 12) examined the six verbal metaphor versions
and answered the same question. Meanwhile, the authors in-
dependently conducted a semiotic analysis of each ad to iden-
tify potential meanings. This procedure produced seven to
eight candidate statements intended to represent weak
implicatures for each of the six ad sets. Wherever possible, we
crafted these statements such that they would be misleading
in the absence of substantiation. These included claims that
A.
probably could not be substantiated (for the dishwasher de-
tergent, "Protects dishes from scratching"), or that were far-
fetched (for the fabric softener, "Causes sharp fibers to curl
back on themselves").
Plus Next, a substantial pretest was conducted to refine the
DtSHVWSHER DETERGENT weak-implicature statements. It is not possible a priori to give
an exhaustive specification of the weak implicatures associ-
ated with a given statement?weak implicatures arise em-
Visual Metaphor
pirically from the confrontation of a specific statement and a
specific language community. In addition, the elicitation pro-
cedure used to identify weak implicatures for the metaphors
could also have produced "generic" product category infer-
ences such as might be produced in response to virtually any
advertisement for the category, whether metaphorical or not.
As a case in point, "cleans the dirtiest pots and pans" was an
initial candidate for weak implicature for the dishwasher de-
?.
tergent ads. A priori, one might assume that the inclusion of
"dirt" would result in a preferential association of this state-
ment with the metaphor versions, given their references to
earth-moving equipment. However, this claim appears to have
Plus become generic within the dishwasher detergent category,
DISHWASHER DETERGENT inasmuch as respondents exposed to the verbal literal version
were equally likely to accept it as an inference.
Undergraduates at a large North American university
Verbal Metaphor
(n = 147) saw two instances of each type of ad version (verbal
literal, verbal metaphor, visual metaphor) for a total of six
ads, one from each of the six version sets. Different subgroups
(n - 3) saw different ads, so that all 18 stimuli were rated.
Following each ad, participants rated the strong- and weak-
implicature statements on a five-point scale anchored by "Al-
most everyone/no reasonable person would draw this
conclusion from the ad." Analysis of the pretest data showed
that four ad sets met the criteria (1) that there be a strong
implicature shared across all versions, and (2) that there be
multiple weak-implicature statements preferentially associ-
ated with the metaphor versions.
In a final pretest, we examined whether consumers valued
Plus
the attributes claimed in the surviving weak implicatures.
DISHWASHER DETERGENT
Recall that for indirect claims to be useful to advertisers, they
must lead to the generation of multiple positive inferences.
Verbal Literal For this purpose, undergraduate students (n = 46) rated each
weak implicature on a five-point scale anchored by "a great

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Summer 2005 13

practice session and responses to it were not analy

deal of added value/no added value." Specifically, they were
given the product category and asked to assume that a prod- participants saw a filler ad followed by several state
uct in that category could deliver the attribute claimed in thesented one at a time, the four test ads each followed
strong implicature (e.g., a dishwasher detergent that "cleansments, and then another filler ad followed by state
difficult stains from dishes"). They then rated the incremen-the participants saw one filler ad first, half the
filler ads and associated statements enabled us to
tal value if that product also delivered the attribute claimed
in a weak-implicature statement (e.g., if it was also "an in- separately from the test stimuli, a covariate meas
dustrial-strength cleaner"). Based on this pretest, we selected fast or slow each individual participant tended t
three weak implicatures for each of four ad sets that were
sponding based on their latencies in response to the
judged as providing incremental value. We take these to be a ad statements. The two filler ads were similar to the verbal
sample of the set of all possible weak implicatures that mightliteral ads (picture plus direct claim), whereas the practice
arise in connection with the metaphorical claims incorporatedsession ad was similar to the visual metaphor ads (metaphori-
into the ads. cal picture, no headline).

Participants and Procedure Measures

For the main study, participants were undergraduate studentsFor each test ad, participants responded to a mix of filler a
(? ? 183) at a different North American university who par- test statements. Test statements consisted of three weak
implicatures and one strong implicature. As an additional
ticipated in a subject pool to fulfill a course requirement. A
debriefing questionnaire after the study led to the elimina-
protection against yea-saying bias, filler statements included
tion of six participants who either had come close to guessingstatements that pretesting had shown were very likely to be
the hypotheses (3), or failed to follow instructions (3), leaving
rejected as inferences from the ads. Order of statement pre-
177 participants for analysis. sentation was randomized by the program, with the excep-
The study was conducted in a small computer lab withtion that the first statement presented was always a filler. This
four workstations running the Empirisoft DirectRT data col-procedure was intended to protect against the possibility that
respondents might be able to use a visual representation of
lection program. Participants were seated at a computer and
read initial instructions on the screen as the experimenter also
the ad in short-term working memory to answer the initial
read them aloud. The first ad stimulus was presented on-screenstatement, a distinct process that might unduly favor visual
when the participant pressed a key signaling a readiness to
stimuli. The phrase "The ad was designed to make you think:"
begin; after that point, participants moved at their own paceappeared at the top of each screen that contained a statement.
through the ads and statements, and then finally completed One statement appeared at a time, and each statement began
the debriefing questionnaire off-line. Workstations were po- with the brand name advertised. The program recorded
whether the participant answered "yes" or "no," and the la-
sitioned such that participants could not see the stimuli shown
to others. tency of this response in milliseconds.
In the initial instructions, participants were told that ad-
vertisers strive to combine pictures and words in ads to create
Design and Analysis
a variety of positive meanings. They were told that advertis-
The test ad stimuli consisted of four sets of four ad versions?
ers also strive to control the meanings suggested by their ads,
the three versions pretested during stimulus development
because unintended meanings might not be consistent with
the advertiser s plan for that brand. Next, they were told that(unanchored visual metaphor, a verbal metaphor, and verbal
the only way to be sure that an ad conveyed multiple positiveliteral), and a fourth version, termed an anchored visual meta-
meanings while not conveying undesired and unintendedphor (discussed below). These four ad versions were created
meanings was to pretest ads with consumers. Therefore, theirfor each of four product categories (see descriptions in Table
task today would be to look at rough versions of ads and to 1). As discussed under stimulus development, each of the first
judge whether specific meanings had been intended by the three ad versions within a set had been pretested to ensure
that it conveyed a particular implicature ("cleans difficult
advertiser or not. The purpose of these instructions was to cue
stains from dishes" in the dishwasher detergent set). The ver-
participants to examine both the pictures and words in each
ad, to expect an ad to have multiple meanings, and to legiti- bal literal ad in each set was designed to convey few if any
mize "no" as well as "yes" responses in the case of specificother weak implicatures beyond the shared implicature (in-
statements. dividual participants, of course, may or may not infer any
Participants saw a total of seven ads and responded numbertoof other implicatures). This was achieved by includ-
mul-
tiple statements for each ad. The first ad shown served
ing only as a picture and a direct statement of the shared
a package

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
14 The Journal of Advertising

TABLE I

Description of Ad Stimuli and Implicature Statements

Product

Plus dishwasher Onezip

detergent slider bags Able fabric softener Mills window cleaner

Visual metaphor stimulus Miniature construction A chain door lock Two pots of cacti A spray bottle composed
equipment cleaning off a attached to a plastic bag juxtaposed with two of purple berries
dirty dish filled with grapes similarly shaped socks

Verbal metaphor stimulus "Bulldozes tough stains" "Puts a padlock on "Removes the cactus feel "Bring home a fresh fruit
freshness" from your clothing" orchard"

Verbal literal stimulus "Clears away tough "Seals in the freshness" "Removes the scratchy "Bring home a fresh fruit
stains" feel from your clothing" scent"

Strong-implicature Cleans difficult stains from Has a tight closure to Makes clothing feel more Has a fruity smell
statements dishes keep food fresh comfortable

Weak-implicature Is an industrial-strength Gives a tighter seal than Works on the most Uses all-natural
statements cleaner other slider bags rugged outdoor clothing ingredients

Protects dishes from Holds more food than Causes sharp fibers to Is environmentally safe
being scratched other bags the same size curl back on themselves

Leaves no detergent Stays shut even when Makes clothing fit better Is easier to use than other
residue dropped window cleaners

Noie: For each product, the anchored visual metaphor stimulus was created by combining the picture described in the visual metaphor row with
headline given in the verbal literal row.

stop processing the ad and cease drawing inferences (Santa-

implicature in the verbal literal ad (e.g., "clears away tough
stains"). The verbal metaphor ad was identical to the verbalmaria, Garcia-Madruga, and Carretero 1996). Hence, inclu-
sion of a headline making a direct claim may act to reduce the
literal ad except that the headline was altered to create a ver-
bal metaphor (e.g., "bulldozes tough stains"). Pretesting
openness of the accompanying visual metaphor (Phillips 2000)
and cause fewer weak implicatures to be generated. Inclusion
showed that verbal metaphor ads were likely to convey addi-
tional implicatures beyond the shared implicature. In the of the anchored visual metaphor condition thus allows a test
unanchored visual metaphor ad, there was no headline, and of the basic contention that it is the lack of constraints on
the package picture was replaced by an image containinginterpretation
a that fuels the vector of weak implicatures gen-
visual metaphor (see Figure 3). Pretesting showed that the erated in response to an indirect pictorial claim. If so, the
anchored visual metaphor will not cause respondents to pro-
visual metaphor versions also conveyed additional implicatures
beyond the shared implicature. duce as many spontaneous weak implicatures as the
unanchored visual metaphor.
The fourth ad version within each ad set, the anchored vi-
sual metaphor, was created by combining the picture fromOrder of presentation of the four test ads seen by each par-
ticipant was randomized by the Empirisoft program. Ad ver-
the visual metaphor version and the headline from the direct
sions were assigned to products in accordance with a latin
literal version (e.g., for the dishwasher detergent, the picture
square. Two latin squares were used, resulting in eight dis-
in Figure 3 showing construction equipment clearing a dish
tinct combinations of products and ad versions across the
was combined with the headline "Clears away tough stains").
sample as a whole (see Table 2). The basic design analyzed is a
This condition is called the anchored visual metaphor condi-
2 (visual metaphor present or absent) X 2 (literal headline
tion because the direct headline anchors the meaning of the
present or absent) factorial design. Loglinear analysis was used
picture. Previous research has shown that consumers who are
presented with a tentative conclusion for an ad message mayto apply this design to the analysis of "yes" and "no" responses,

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Summer 2005 15

TABLE 2
Conceptual Representation of the Latin Square Designs Used in the Experiment

Participants in Group I Unanchored visual metaphor Anchored visual Verbal metaphor for Verbal literal for
might see: for dishwasher detergent metaphor for slider bag window cleaner fabric softener

Participants in Group 2 Unanchored visual Anchored visual metaphor Verbal metaphor for Verbal literal for
might see: metaphor for slider bag for window cleaner fabric softener dishwasher detergent

Participants in Group 3 Unanchored visual Anchored visual metaphor Verbal metaphor for Verbal literal for
might see: metaphor for window cleaner for fabric softener dishwasher detergent slider bag

Participants in Group 4 Unanchored visual Anchored visual metaphor Verbal metaphor for Verbal literal for
might see: metaphor for fabric softener for dishwasher detergent slider bag window cleaner

Note: Order of presentation of the four test ads was randomized for each participant. Only 8 of 24 possible pairings of the four treatments with the four
products were administered.

and the Linear Mixed Models (LMM) procedure in SPSS 11.5 domized by the program so that they would be unlikely to
was used to apply this design to the response latencies. The systematically bias comparisons of the test stimuli, the pro-
LMM procedure is a recently developed extension of the more cedure did not produce exactly equal cell sizes. In any case, it
familiar GLM (generalized linear models), MANOVA (mul- is desirable to explicitly model the effect of these variables in
tivariate analysis of variance), and AN ACOVA (analysis of an analysis of covariance inasmuch as it tends to promote a
covar iance) procedures (McCulloch and Sear les 2001; Wallace smaller error term and greater statistical power (Kirk 1995).
and Green 2002) that can accommodate the multilevel As an additional control, the amount of time spent viewing
covariates used in the analysis of the response latencies, aseach ad was entered as a covariate. Finally, participants varied
described below. dramatically in their overall slowness or speed of response, so
we entered their latency of response to the eight filler-ad state-
Data Transformation and Adjustment ments as a covariate. These four covariates operate variously
for Covariates at the level of the participant, the ad, and the individual state-
ment, and the LMM procedure was developed in part to handle
Response latencies are notorious for their departures from multilevel data of this sort. With the LMM procedure, we
normality, with a long right tail typically seen in distribu-
were also able to include product as a blocking variable in the
tions. In the present study, test statement latencies ranged
analysis. Because not all possible latin squares were used, it is
from 537 milliseconds (ms) to 12,632 ms, with a mean of desirable to block on product as a means of extracting vari-
2,224 ms and a standard deviation of 1,277 ms. Because la- ance extraneous to the hypotheses (Kirk 1995).
tency data have become so central to process investigations in
cognitive psychology (Van Zandt 2002), a variety of proce-
Manipulation Check: Strong Implicature
dures for dealing with distribution problems have been ex-
plored. Among the notable conclusions of recent work is thatIf the metaphor ads cannot convey the shared strong
the use of cutoff values to eliminate outliers is difficult to implicature, then overall persuasiveness may be compromised,
justify in most circumstances (Ulrich and Miller 1994). None- no matter how many weak implicatures are elicited. A test of
theless, Van Zandt (2002, pp. 469?470) offers a compelling the strong implicatures across ad conditions using the loglinear
demonstration that the presence of even a single outlier canprocedure confirmed that there were no significant differences
severely bias the mean and the variance for an experimentalin the degree to which the four ad versions conveyed the strong-
condition. Current thinking indicates that the best solutionimplicature statements (all ^f2 < 1); in other words, each ap-
to this dilemma is to retain all the data, but to invert the peared to be equally effective in conveying the ad's main
values (Ratcliff 1993; Van Zandt 2002), and that is the pro- message. This allows us to interpret the results for the weak
cedure we used. implicatures in terms of the conveyance of additional infer-
Analyses of responses to filler ads indicated the presence of ences, and not just the conveyance of different inferences.
a marked practice effect, with responses to the last filler ad
almost 50% faster than responses to the first. Hence, test ad Treatment Effects: Agreement Proportions
sequence was entered as a covariate. Similarly, we found a sig- for Weak Implicatures
nificant correlation between statement sequence and speed of
response, so statement sequence was also entered as a covariate.A loglinear analysis of the proportion of "yes" responses to
Although both statement sequence and ad sequence were ran- the weak-implicature statements showed a significant posi-

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
16 The Journal of Advertising

TABLE 3 FIGURE 4
Agreement Proportions for Weak Implicatures Response Latencies for Weak-implicature
for Each Treatment Condition Statements in Study 2

Literal headline

Visual metaphor Present (%) Absent (%)

Absent 21.1?* 28.2

(Verbal literal) (Verbal metaphor)

Present 34.5 40.9

(Anchored visual metaphor) (Visual metaphor)

a Numbers shown represent the proportion of occasions (? = 531,

representing 177 participants responding to 3 weak-implicature
Response
statements) where a participant, when exposed to the indicated stimulus
? visual metaphor (unanchored) -O -verbal metaphor
condition and confronted with a weak-implicature statement, responded
- ? - verbal literal ? ? -visual metaphor & verbal literal
"yes" to the prompt "The ad was designed to make you think that."

b All adjacent pairwise comparisons (verbal literal versus verbal metaphor,

verbal metaphor versus anchored visual metaphor, anchored visual dition, a complete factorial design with three factors was speci-
metaphor versus unanchored visual metaphor) are significant at p < .05. fied: whether the response was "yes" or "no," along with the
visual metaphor and the literal headline factors. The latter
two factors were specified as repeated measures in the LMM,
tive impact for the presence of a visual metaphor (?2 = 42.26, along with an index variable distinguishing the three weak-
p < .001) and a significant positive impact for the absence of implicature statements per product. A significant interaction
a literal headline {?2 = 16.62, p < .001). The interaction be- involving the three factors in the design was found, F(l,
tween the two factors is not significant {?2 < 1). As can be 1942) = 6.53,^ ^ .01. As can be seen in Figure 4 and Table
seen from Table 3, the likelihood that a participant will af- 4, the unanchored visual metaphor is the only stimulus type
firm that an ad was designed to convey a weak implicature for which "yes" responses are significantly faster than "no"
increases steadily as one moves from the literal headline-only responses. This is the key comparison from the standpoint of
condition, to the verbal metaphor, to the visual metaphor the research tradition on response latencies. Differences in "yes"
anchored with a literal headline, to the unanchored visual latencies or "no" latencies across stimulus types are not readily
metaphor (all pairwise comparisons were significant at interpretable because they confound differences in the pro-
p < .05). The pattern of results indicates that an indirect cessing of the stimuli themselves with differences in the re-
metaphorical claim, regardless of the modality in which it is sponse process (Fazio 1990).
presented, is susceptible to a greater number of potential inter- The significantly faster "yes" latency for unanchored vi-
pretations. Expressing the metaphor in a picture accentuates sual metaphors is consistent with the idea that consumers
this effect. However, when a visual metaphor is present but spontaneously generate a vector of weak implicatures at the
also anchored by a literal statement, participants appear to be time of exposure to a visual metaphor. When subsequently
somewhat less susceptible to constructing multiple inferences, asked whether the advertiser intended a specific weak
presumably because they can rely, in part, on the strong implicature, many participants will answer "yes" because they
implicature of the literal headline to surmise advertiser in- are able to retrieve from memory a corresponding inference
tent. This is consistent with the idea that it is the relative generated earlier. Because retrieval is a relatively fast process,
response latencies for such affirmative replies are small. Con-
lack of constraints to the interpretation of pictures that makes
possible a larger vector of inferences; once such a constraintversely,
is participants answering "no" cannot do so until they
added, in the form of a literal headline, the pictorial effect have
is finished retrieving the vector of inferences formed at
reduced. exposure and find no matches. Put another way, because the
meaning of a visual metaphor is more open, a larger number

Treatment Effects: Response Latencies of weak implicatures tends to be generated at the time of
exposure, which facilitates subsequent "yes" responses in the
for Weak Implicatures
case of any specific implicature; in turn, the need to complete
An LMM was tested with product category as a blocking vari- a search of this same vector entails extra processing time be-
able and four covariates: participant s average speed of response, fore a subsequent "no" response can be given.
ad position, ad viewing time, and statement position. In ad- This interpretation is reinforced if we examine both laten-

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Summer 2005 17

TABLE 4
Response Latencies (Milliseconds)? for Weak Implicatures
Literal headline

Present Absent

Visual metaphor Yes No Yes No

Absent 2,I30C 2,065 2,l6lb 2.009bd

(Verbal literal) (Verbal metaphor)

Present 2,296c 2,153 2,073b 2,232w

(Anchored visual metaphor) (Visual metaphor)

* Raw latencies were inverted prior to analysis by linear mixed models. Means output by the LMM (Linear Mix
for purposes of display. The LSD (Least Significant Difference) adjustment was applied in conducting pairwi

b Indicates that latencies for "yes" and "no" responses within this stimulus type were significantly different

c Indicates that latencies for "yes" responses across these two stimulus types were significantly different {p <

d Indicates that latencies for "no" responses across these two stimulus types were significantly different (p <

cue
cies and agreement proportions for the verbal stimulates
metaphor and a need to interpret the ad te
anchored visual metaphor conditions. Relative to the literal
unanchored visual metaphors appear able to pro
verbal baseline, verbal metaphors produced higher levels
terpretation of
spontaneously at the time of ad ex
agreement that the advertiser did intend to convey a specific
weak implicature (Table 3). However, response latencies for DISCUSSION
GENERAL
these affirmative responses were not quicker than those for nega-
tive responses; in fact, they are significantlyThe
slower. This find-
experiment reported here offers one explanation f
ing supports the proposition that while verbal metaphors
advertisers may
have increasingly chosen to use indirect
invite elaborative processing (McQuarrie and sion
Mickin 1996), they
magazine ads over time. Specifically, the findin
do not spontaneously elicit weak implicatures at ad
that theexposure.
use of metaphorical claims in ads appears
When the experimental protocol subsequently demands
consumers thatto multiple, distinct, positive infe
receptive
participants in the verbal metaphor conditionabout
decide whether
the a
advertised brand (i.e., weak implicatures
specific weak implicature was intended, some proportion
still conveying theof
main message of the ad (i.e., the
implicature).
respondents appear to be receptive, as demonstrated by the Furthermore,
high metaphors presented in
agreement percentages relative to the literal
formheadline
are able condi-
to elicit these multiple inferences spont
tion. Yet this decision would seem to be the result
at the of a compu-
time of ad exposure. Participants viewing other
tation performed on demand rather than a retrieval of an earlier verbal metaphors or anchored
of metaphor?either
judgment, as evidenced by the fact that for metaphors?appear
verbal metaphor,to generate additional inferences
"yes" latencies are significantly slower than reflection
"no" latencies.
when prompted. This pattern of results is co
Relative to the literal verbal baseline, anchored visual
with the idea meta-
that it is the openness of indirect metap
phors also produced higher levels of agreement thatlack
claims?the the of
ad-
constraints on their interpretat
vertiser did intend to convey a specific weakisimplicature,
the source ofastheir persuasive advantage. The few
reported in Table 3. However, response latencies for these af-
straints, and hence the greatest openness, obtains in th
firmative responses were not quicker than those formetaphorical
indirect negative claims expressed in pictorial f
responses in this condition. This is consistent with thewish
advertisers propo-
consumers to generate multiple positi
sition that consumers tend not to generate spontaneously
ferences, a
to some degree spontaneously, then it is obvio
vector of weak implicatures at the time of exposure to an an-
they might rely more and more on indirect persuasion
chored visual metaphor. There is no needciallyto do so?an ad-
in pictures.
equate inference about the advertiser's intended message
A further is
implication of this study is that verbal r
readily available in the strong implicaturecal
provided
figures inin the
ads may be less effective than visual
direct headline. This corresponds to results recently obtained by M
In summary, verbal metaphors and anchored andvisual meta- who found that verbal rhetorical
Mick (2003),
phors allow multiple interpretations if a subsequent situational
had a weaker impact on attitude toward the ad and

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
18 The Journal of Advertising

than did visual figures. There remains a considerable body Furthermore, in their reanalysis of Starch data (
of evidence that verbal rhetorical figures in ads can be ad- sumably involved ads that were initially processed
vantageous, consistent with the argument advanced in ralistic conditions), Mothersbaugh, Huhmann,
McQuarrie and Mick (1996; cf. Mothersbaugh, Huhmann, (2002) also found positive results for rhetorical f
and Franke 2002; Tom and Eves 1999), to the effect that theless, an important task for future research is t
verbal rhetorical figures invite consumers to elaborate mul- ence formation by consumers occurring outside of
tiple meanings in a way that is pleasurable and memorable. context, under a variety of involvement conditio
Based on the current study, however, it now appears that a purposeful selection of indirect persuasion tool
visual rhetorical figures may be even more advantageous. in the demands they impose on consumer process
An invitation to elaborate may be taken up or not. By con-
trast, visual figures appear to evoke this elaboration at the IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY
time of ad exposure, rendering the positive impacts of such
elaboration more probable. Perhaps the most important implications of this stud
Future research might extend the experimental protocol cern its identification of ways and means whereby a
used here to examine other types of indirect advertising claims. can effectively mislead consumers. We put the matter
For example, if is possible that other rhetorical figures, such stark terms to highlight the darker implications o
as pun, may also encourage the generation of weak implicature, sults. It has been argued since the 1920s that pres
either spontaneously (when presented through pictures) or as claim in pictorial form is particularly useful when th
prompted (when presented through words). It would also be tiser does not wish the consumer to scrutinize a claim
interesting to examine a very different form of indirect claim, closely: "A picture ... can say things that no advertis
not resting on a rhetorical figure per se, such as the pictures say in words and retain his self respect" (Calkins 192
commonly found in fashion ads. Do these types of indirect According to historians of that era, advertisers came
claims also confer some advantage and does the underlying the view that "People lack the ability to arg
process involve the same openness to multiple alternative in- pictures. . . . Arguments invited counterargument
ferences, or something different? If it is true that direct claims sertions might provoke skepticism. But pictures
are becoming the exception rather than the rule in magazine skepticism; they inspired belief" (Marchand 1985,
advertising, then the kinds of indirect claims available to ad- 236). More recently, scholars have gone so far as to c
vertisers are probably numerous, diverse in character, and "nowadays, examples of visual claims that would
evolving over time. Future research is needed to differentiate ceptable in verbal form can be found in most kinds o
between the various sorts of indirect stratagems available and tising" (Messaris 1997, p. 225). In short, it has been s
to link them to specific consumer-processing outcomes. Al- for many years that pictures in ads may be unusuall
though the present study focused on multiplicity of positive persuaders, and that this potency could readily be tu
inferences as a key outcome of the use of indirect metaphori- deceptive purposes.
cal claims, it is possible that other types of indirect claims Pictures are not the only advertising element to ra
may be suitable for achieving other kinds of advantageous concerns. Stern (1992) noted that in light of legal pr
outcomes. the crafty advertiser might well decide to avoid dire
altogether
Finally, the weak-implicature model of indirect and instead focus on figurative statement
persuasion,
like. Hence,
unlike the Kardes (1993) model, does not presuppose a metaphors
high and indirect claims more
might recommend
degree of consumer involvement, instead relying on more themselves to advertisers who
sumers to draw
spontaneous generation of implicatures. Conversely, the logi- certain conclusions, but who dare
such claims
cal inferences used by Kardes may have imposed heavier flat out (cf. McQuarrie and Mick 1999
de-
mands on consumer processing than the moreand McQuarrie
pragmatic 2003).
inferences used here and in Gaeth and Heath The literature
(1987). It mayon deception in advertising thus
an additional
be the case that it is only those weak implicatures thatexplanation
take for the trend away from dir
the form of pragmatic inferences that do notin magazine
requireadvertising.
high That is, a tightening regulat
vironment
levels of involvement. In any case, we cannot claim toover time may have driven advertisers to
have
reproduced conditions of low task involvement direct persuasion
in our experi- attempts to escape the critical sc
both regulators
mental protocol because of its reliance on forced exposure andand consumers. The problem with th
the requirement that participants respond nation
to theisads.
that It
prior
is to the present research, there w
pirical
interesting to note that McQuarrie and Mick evidence
(2003) did con- that indirect persuasion attempts,
struct an incidental exposure context and stillhigh-involvement
achieved posi- context, could achieve advertisers'
sion
tive results for rhetorical figures, especially goals?however
visual figures. much legal immunity these m

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Summer 2005 19

fer. Indeed, suspicion of the misleading potential of pictures Edell, Julie ?., and Richard Staelin (1983), "The Inform
and figurative statements rested on no more than suspicion. Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements," Journ
The present study indicates that pictorial metaphors can cause Consumer Research, 10 (June), 45-61.
Fazio, Russell (1990), "A Practical Guide to the Use of Res
consumers to spontaneously infer multiple positive inferences
Latency in Social Psychological Research," in Research M
about the advertised brand, including misleading claims that
ods in Personality and Social Psychology. Review of Person
could not legally be stated outright in the absence of substan-
and Social Psychology, vol. 11, Clyde Hendrick and Mar
tiation. To the extent that this finding holds in the case of ads
S. Clark, eds., Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 74-97.
where pictorial metaphor is but one component and with re- Finn, Adam (1988), "Print Ad Recognition Readership Sco
spect to buying behavior in the marketplace and not just judg- An Information Processing Perspective," Journal of Ma
ments in the laboratory, then the suspicion historically directed ing Research, 25 (May), 168-177.
onto pictures is given an empirical foundation. Forceville, Charles (1996), Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising
If it is true that consumers are peculiarly vulnerable to York: Routledge.
pictorial metaphors, then legal protections may need to evolve Gaeth, Gary J., and Timothy B. Heath (1987), "The Cogni
beyond a focus on whether a claim made in words is true or Processing of Misleading Advertising in Young and
Adults: Assessment and Training," Journal of Consume
false toward an emphasis on whether a population of typical
search, 14 (1), 43-54.
consumers does or does not spontaneously draw certain infer-
Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. (1994), The Poetics of Mind, Camb
ences from the ad in its entirety, including its pictorial com-
Cambridge University Press.
ponents. The standard could no longer be that of what a Hawkins, Scott ?., Stephen J. Hoch, and Joan Meyers
reasonable man or woman would do, because it is not reason-
(2001), "Low-Involvement Learning: Repetition and
able to infer from a picture of a bottle made of berries that the herence in Familiarity and Belief, "Journal of Consumer
cleaning product contained therein is made of all-natural in- chology, 11(1), 1-11.
gredients. Nonetheless, based on the evidence of this study, it Hitchon, Jacqueline C. (1997), "The Locus of Metaphorical
is an empirical fact that such inferences do spontaneously oc- suasion: An Empirical Test," Journalism and Mass Comm
cur when consumers are exposed to pictorial metaphors. cation Quarterly, lA (1), 55-68.
Whether the legal system can evolve to address the possi- Jewell, Robert D., and H. Rao Unnava (2003), "When
petitive Interference Can Be Beneficial," Jo^rra/ of Cons
bility of misleading pictorial claims remains to be seen. At
Research, 30 (September), 283-291.
the least, this study argues for efforts to educate consumers to
Johar, Gita (1995), "Consumer Involvement and Deception
attend more closely to pictorial claims and to scrutinize them
Implied Advertising Claims," Journal of Marketing Rese
more critically (as Gaeth and Heath [1987] argue for verbal 32 (August), 267-279.
claims). Such efforts, in turn, require a conviction on the partKardes, Frank R. (1988), "Spontaneous Inference Proce
of scholars and educators that pictorial metaphor is sufficiently Advertising: The Effects of Conclusion Omission and
potent to be feared. We hope to have contributed to that per- volvement on Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research
ception by means of the experimental data on response laten- (September), 225-233.
cies reported in this study. -(1993), "Consumer Inference: Determinants, Conse-
quences, and Implications for Advertising," in Advertising
Exposure, Memory, and Choice, Andrew A. Mitchell, ed.,
REFERENCES Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 163-191.
Kirk, Roger E. (1995), Experimental Design: Procedures for Behav-
Bargh, John ?., and Tanya L. Chartrand (2000), "The Mind in the
ioral Sciences, 3rd ed., New York: Wadsworth.
Middle: A Practical Guide to Priming and Automaticity
Lee, Dong Hwan, and Richard W. Olshavsky (1995), "Condi-
Research," in Handbook of Research Methods in Social Psychol-
tions and Consequences of Spontaneous Inference Genera-
ogy, Henry Reis and Charles Judd, eds., New York: Cam-tion: A Concurrent Protocol Approach," Organizational Behavior
bridge University Press, 253-285. and Human Decision Processes, 61 (2), 177?189.
Burton, Phillip, and Scott Purvis (1996), Which Ad Pulled Best
Leigh, ?
James H. (1994), "The Use of Figures of Speech in Print
8th ed., Chicago: NTC Publishing Group. Ad Headlines," Journal of Advertising, 23 (2), 17-33.
Calkins, Earnest (1928), Business the Civiliser, Boston: Little, Brown. Earl R. (1985), A Cognitive Theory of Metaphor, Cam-
MacCormac,
Childers, Terry L., and Michael J. Houston (1984), "Conditions
bridge: MIT Press.
for a Picture Superiority Effect on Consumer Memory," Jour- Scott B., and Richard L. Lutz (1989), "An Empiri-
MacKenzie,
nal of Consumer Research, 11 (September), 643-654. cal Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude
Dick, Alan, Dipankar Chakravarti, and Gabriel Biehal (1990),
Toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context "Jour-
"Memory-Based Inferences During Consumer Choice,"J??t-
nal of Marketing, 53 (April), 48-65.
nal of Consumer Research, 17 (June), 82-93. Marchand, Roland (1985), Adverthing and the American Dream:
Eco, Umberto (1976), A Theory of Semiotics, Bloomington:Making
Indi- Way for Modernity, 1920-1940, Berkeley: Univer-
ana University Press. sity of California Press.

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
20 The Journal of Advertising

McCulloch, Charles E., and Shayle R. Searles (2001), General- Ratcliff, Roger ( 1993), "Methods for Dealing with Reaction Time
ized, Linear, and Mixed Modds, New York: John Wiley. Outliers," Psychological Bulletin, 114 (3), 510-532.
McQuarrie, Edward F., and David G. Mick (1996), "Figures of Rossiter, John R., and Larry Percy (1983), "Visual Communica-
Rhetoric in Advertising Language," Journal of Consumer Re- tion in Advertising," in Information Processing Research in
search, 22 (March), 424-438. Advertising, Richard Jackson Harris, ed., Hillsdale, NJ:
-, and-(1999), "Visual Rhetoric in Advertising: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 83-125.
Text-Interpretive, Experimental, and Reader-Response Santamaria, Carlos, Juan A. Garcia-Madruga, and Mario Carretero
Analyses," Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (June), 37-54. (1996), "Beyond Belief Bias: Reasoning from Conceptual
-, and-(2003), "Visual and Verbal Rhetorical Fig- Structures by Mental Models Manipulation," Memory and
ures Under Directed Processing Versus Incidental Expo- Cognition, 24 (2), 250-261.
sure to Advertising," Journal of Consumer Research, 29
Sawyer, Alan G., and Daniel J. Howard (1991), "Effects of Omit-
(March), 579-587. ting Conclusions in Advertisements to Involved and
Messaris, Paul (1997), Visual Persuasion: The Role of Images in Uninvolved Audiences," Journal of Marketing Research, 28
Advertising, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (November), 467-474.
Smith,
Meyers-Levy, Joan, and Laura A. Peracchio (1992), "Getting an Ruth Ann (199D, "The Effects of Visual and Verbal Ad-
Angle in Advertising: The Effect of Camera Angle on Prod- vertising Information on Consumers' Inferences," Journal
uct Evaluations/'y??fw?/ ofMarketing Research, 29 (Novem- of Advertising, 20 (4), 13-24.
ber), 454-461. Sperber, Dan, and Diedre Wilson (1986), Relevance: Communica-
Miniard, Paul W., Sunil Bhatla, Kenneth R. Lord, Peter R. tion and Cognition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Dickson, and H. Rao Unnava (1991), "Picture-Based Per-
Stern, Barbara (1990), "Beauty and Joy in Metaphorical Adver-
suasion Processes and the Moderating Role of Involvement," tising: The Poetic Dimension," in Advances in Consumer Re-
Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (June), 92-107. search, Marvin E. Goldberg, Gerald Gorn, and Richard W.
Mitchell, Andrew ?., and Jerry C. Olson (1981), "Are Product Pollay, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,
Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects 17, 71-77.
-(1992), "'Crafty Advertisers': Literal Versus Literary
of Brand Attitude?" Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (Au-
gust), 318-332. Deceptiveness," Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 11
Mothersbaugh, David L., Bruce A. Huhmann, and George R. (1), 72-81.
Tanaka, Keiko (1994), Advertising Language: A Pragmatic Ap-
Franke (2002), "Combinatory and Separative Effects of Rhe-
torical Figures on Consumers' Efforts and Focus in Ad Pro- proach to Advertisements in Britain and Japan, London:
cessing,"Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (March), 589-602. Routledge.
Peracchio, Laura ?., and Joan Meyers-Levy (1994), "How Am- Tom, Gail, and Annmarie Eves (1999), "The Use of Rhetorical
biguous Cropped Objects in Ad Photos Affect Product Evalu- Devices in Advertising," Journal of Advertising Research, 39
ations," Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (June), 190-204. (4), 39-43.
Toncar, Mark, and James Munch (2001), "Consumer Response
Phillips, Barbara J. (1997), "Thinking Into It: Consumer Inter-
pretation of Complex Advertising Images," Journal of Ad- to Tropes in Print Advertising," Journal of Advertising, 30
vertising, 26 (2), 77-87. (1), 55-65.
-(2000), "The Impact of Verbal Anchoring on Consumer Ulrich, Rolf, and Jeff Miller (1994), "Effects of Truncation on
Response to Image Ads "Journal of Advertising, 29 (1), 15-24. Reaction Time Analysis" Journal of Experimental Psychology:
-(2003), "Understanding Visual Metaphor in Advertis- General, 123 (D, 34-80.
Van Zandt, Trisha (2002), "Analysis of Response Time Distri-
ing," in Persuasive Imagery: A Consumer Response Perspective,
Linda M. Scott and Rajeev Batra, eds., Mahwah, NJ: butions," in Steven's Handbook of Experimental Psychology,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 297-310. 3rd ed., Hal Pashler and John Wixted, eds., New York:
-, and Edward F. McQuarrie (2003), "The Development, John Wiley.
Wallace,
Change, and Transformation of Rhetorical Style in Maga- Dennis, and Samuel B. Green (2002), "Analysis of Re-
zine Advertisements, 1954-1999," Journal of Advertising, peated Measures Designs with Linear Mixed Models," in
31 (4), 1-13. Modeling Intra-individual Variability with Repeated Measures:
Pollay, Richard W. (1985), "The Subsidizing Sizzle: A Descrip- Methods and Applications, D. S. Moskowitz and Scott L.
tive History of Print Advertising, 1900-1980," Journal of Hershberger, eds., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso-
Marketing, 48 (Summer), 24-37. ciates, 103-134.
_(1991), "Signs and Symbols in American Cigarette Ward, Ad- James, and William Gaidis (1990), "Metaphor in Promo-
vertising," in Marketing and Semiotics: Selected Papers from the tional Communication: A Review of Research on Metaphor
Copenhagen Symposium, Hanne Hartvig Larsen, David Glen Comprehension and Quality," in Advances in Consumer Re-
Mick, and Christian Als ted, eds., Copenhagen: Handelshoj- search, Marvin E. Goldberg, Gerald Gorn, and Richard W.
skolens Forlag. Pollay, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,
Pollio, Howard R., Michael K. Smith, and Marilyn R. Pollio 17, 636-642.
White, Hooper (1981), How to Produce an Effective TV Commer-
(1990), "Figurative Language and Cognitive Psychology,"
Language and Cognitive Processes, 5 (2), 141-167. cial, Chicago: Crain Books.

This content downloaded from 130.235.72.6 on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:31:10 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms