The In uence of Visual Metaphor Advertising Types on ... · Advertising Types on Recall and Attitude According to Congruity-Incongruity KwangSeok Han1 1Dept. of Advertising and Public

The Influence of Visual MetaphorAdvertising Types on Recall and

Attitude According toCongruity-Incongruity

KwangSeok Han1

1Dept. of Advertising and Public Relations,91, Daehakro Seobukgu Cheonan, 3120 Korea

[email protected]

January 27, 2018

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The present study empiri-cally investigated differences in attitude toward advertise-ments and judgments according to visual metaphor (paral-lel metaphor vs. fused metaphor vs. pure metaphor) andexpectation levels (expectation congruity vs. expectationincongruity) and attempted to present possible strategic di-rections

Methods/Statistical analysis: The present study in-vestigated differences in memory and attitude toward adver-tisements through an experiment according to visual meta-phor (parallel metaphor vs. fused metaphor vs. pure meta-phor) and expectation levels (expectation congruity vs. ex-pectation incongruity). Accordingly, a 3 (visual metaphor:parallel metaphor vs. fused metaphor vs. pure metaphor)x 2 (expectation levels: expectation congruity vs. expecta-tion incongruity) between-subject factorial design was cre-ated, and analysis was conducted using two-way MANOVA.Hereupon, 179 subjects were randomly assigned to six ex-perimental advertisements.

1

International Journal of Pure and Applied MathematicsVolume 118 No. 19 2018, 2435-2449ISSN: 1311-8080 (printed version); ISSN: 1314-3395 (on-line version)url: http://www.ijpam.euSpecial Issue ijpam.eu

2435

Findings: First, the difference in memory effect be-tween expectation incongruent advertisements and expecta-tion congruent advertisements was high for visual metaphoradvertisements. Second, high memory effect was found forparallel metaphor under expectation incongruity conditionand for pure metaphor under expectation congruity condi-tion. Third, parallel and pure metaphors remember ’indi-vidual attribute memory information’ more than ’compre-hensive evaluation memory information’ and influence judg-ments when expectation is congruent. Fourth, parallel andfused metaphors remember ’individual attribute memory in-formation’ more than ’comprehensive evaluation memoryinformation’ and influence judgments when expectation isincongruent.

Improvements/Applications: Expectation congruitylevel in the dimension of the three visual metaphors, verbalelements were added to visual rhetoric expressions and in-teractive roles were examined.

Key Words and Phrases:Visual Metaphor, Congruity,Incongruity, Recall, Advertising Types

1 Introduction

The metaphorical expressions of advertisements are known to beeffective for recall and attitude because they draw consumers’ at-tention and interest by alluding the advertised product to otherobjects or situations and induce elaboration to interpret the mean-ing others 1.

Previous studies have consistently reported that visual metaphor-ical advertisements have positive effect on recall and attitude be-cause consumers’ previous experiences of the metaphorical mes-sages of advertisements or unexpected incongruent information in-duces elaborate information processing 2,3,4. Even though visualmetaphorical advertisements are polysemous, they may not be per-suasive because such images can make consumers not only misun-derstand the messages of expectation-incongruent advertisementsthat are connotative, abstract, or unpredictable but also give upelaboration itself.

The advertising effect of visual rhetorical expressions can bemuch higher if verbal expressions that allow inferencing informa-

2

International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

2436

tion on not only expectation incongruity but also visual metaphorsdue to expectation congruity. For these three visual metaphor di-mensions and the level of expectation congruity, the present studyadded verbal elements and attempted to investigate the interactiveroles. In addition, under the expectation incongruity condition,closely examining only the effect of visual rhetorical expressionswithout verbal elements is expected to be meaningful.

The present study empirically investigated differences in at-titude toward advertisements and judgments according to visualmetaphor (parallel metaphor vs. fused metaphor vs. pure metaphor)and expectation levels (expectation congruity vs. expectation in-congruity) and attempted to present possible strategic directions.

2 Theoretical Background and Hypoth-

esis

2.1 Visual Metaphor Advertisements and Types

Metaphor figuratively expresses an object to express through a dif-ferent object and it is the process of making people understandand experience the concept of an object from the perspective of yetanother object 5. Visual metaphors are created through an unex-pected combination of two or more images. That is, consumers inferthe new concept of C through the commonality shared by conceptA and B.

McQuarrie & Mick (1992) contended that because the metaphor-ical expressions presented in advertisements induce various inter-pretations and produce resonances by giving consumers the excite-ment of interpreting information, and positively influence the atti-tude, favorable impression, and recall of the advertisement others 6.The classification of visual metaphor is different among researchers,but all visual metaphors require tenor and vehicle in common. Thetenor becomes the product being advertised and the vehicle is theconcept that explains the product. In the process of connectingtenor and vehicle, elaboration process takes place in consumers.Visual metaphor can increase the level of elaboration and changethe level of understanding of the information about the advertise-ment depending on the distance between tenor A and vehicle B.

3


2437

Lakoff & Johnson (1980) stated that metaphor must have the pri-mary subject, tenor, and the secondary subject, vehicle, and a newmeaning will be assigned as these two images are integrated intoone others 7. The present study classified visual metaphors intopure metaphor, parallel metaphor, and fused metaphor based onthe results of previous studies.

The ’pure metaphor’ presents the vehicle to be metaphorizedwith visual importance while the products, tenor, are visually lessnoticeable. The ’parallel metaphor’ presents the product, tenor,with vehicle at the same time, i.e., the product presented in the ad-vertisement is shown with the surrounding situation, so that the at-mosphere, emotion, or feeling is understood. The ’fused metaphor’presents the product, tenor, combined with visual elements, vehi-cle. Such a fused metaphor shows the tenor and the vehicle visuallyfused because they are visually inferred.

2.2 Expectation Level

In the dimension of interaction effects between visual images andverbal messages, research on advertisements congruity-incongruityreported positive influences on attitudes and recall when visual im-ages and verbal messages are incongruent than when they are con-gruent 8,9.

It has been reported that expectation incongruent advertise-ments than congruent ones are easier to recall because they allowremembering information more and longer about the advertisementdue to high level of cognitive elaboration 10. In the case of visualelements, Heckler & Childer (1992) found that memory ability ishigher due to the increased level of elaboration because of highercognitive effort made for expectation incongruent advertisementsthan congruent ones 11. Ang & Low (2000) investigated the ef-fects of expectation congruity-incongruity according to the level ofcreative advertisements and found positive responses due to thecognitive effort to elaborately process advertisements when visualelements are incongruent 12.

According to the findings of previous studies, expectation in-congruity plays a positive role in purchasing products because itincreases interest in advertisement information and positive influ-ence on attitudes and memory by the cognitive effort to under-

4


2438

stand the information. It may be necessary, however, to maintainthe appropriate level of difficulty in advertisements through visualmetaphors due to the possibility of reduced understanding of adver-tisement information when the level of expectation incongruity ishigh. On the other hand, advertisements with high level of expec-tation congruity can be considered to have low level of attention toadvertisements due to the difficulty in inducing consumers’ interesteven though information is easily understood because it is withinthe range of consumers’ schema.

The present study empirically investigated differences in products-and advertisements-related recall and attitude toward advertise-ments according to visual metaphor (parallel metaphor vs. fusedmetaphor vs. pure metaphor) and expectation levels (expectationcongruity vs. expectation incongruity).

Advertisements that present rhetoric expressions such as visualmetaphors are reported to positively influence memory and atti-tude compared to explicit advertisements due to the possibility ofdeep elaboration because they give consumers the enjoyment andsatisfaction of solving puzzles 13.

In addition, in relation to expectation congruity and incon-gruity, expectation incongruent advertisements were found to im-prove memory and attitude by increasing the possibility of cognitiveelaboration compared to expectation congruent advertisements. Assuch, consumers do a lot of semantic interpretation of advertisementstimuli for visual metaphor advertisements due to their high needfor cognition. It means that for expectation incongruent advertise-ments influence judgments and the possibility of positive attitudetoward advertisements is high due to the activation of memory com-pared to congruent ones.

Especially, it has been reported that concrete product attributeinformation rather than abstract information tends to be inferredfirst because motivation is high to process advertise information ininterpreting and inferring the rhetoric expression of advertisementwhen expectation is incongruent 14.

Considering these findings together, the memory effect of visualmetaphor causes product-attribute centered motivation due to theexpectation effect by visual images and verbal expressions when ex-pectation is congruent and, as a result, ’Attribute-related memory(ARM)’ will be highly recalled. When expectation is incongru-

5


2439

ent, however, the possibility of highly recalling ’Advertising-relatedmemory (ADRM)’ of the overall attitude form is high due to thereduction of cognitive elaboration because consumers feel trouble-some to interpret the visual metaphor. With insight into thesetheoretical discussions, following four hypotheses were establishedand tested.

Hypothesis 1: Memory and advertising attitudes will be higherfor expectation incongruity than expectation congruity. In addi-tion, memory will be high for parallel metaphor when expectationis incongruent while memory will be high for pure metaphor whenexpectation is congruent.

Hypothesis 2: The memory effect of visual metaphor (paral-lel, fused, pure) will be higher for ’Attribute-related memory’ than’Advertising-related memory’ when expectation is congruent.

Hypothesis 3: The memory effect of visual metaphor (parallel,fused, pure) will be higher for ’Advertising-related memory’ than’Attribute-related memory’ when expectation is incongruent.

Hypothesis 4: Parallel metaphor, when compared to fused meta-phor and pure metaphor, will have higher attitude toward adver-tisements for ’Advertising-related memory’ than ’Attribute-relatedmemory’ for expectation incongruent advertisements.

Hypothesis 5: Pure metaphor, when compared to parallel meta-phor and fused metaphor, will have higher attitude toward adver-tisements for ’Attribute-related memory’ than ’Advertising-relatedmemory’ for expectation congruent advertisements.

3 Research Method

3.1 Manipulation of Experimental Advertisement

Products were selected with priority given to the personal productinvolvement of college students who are subjects through a pre-liminary survey before the manipulation of experimental advertise-

6


2440

ments. Among cameras, coffee, and smartphones, coffee, whichwas found to have the highest variance value (M=44.1, SD=11.0)through the measurement of the level of personal involvement us-ing an instrument developed by Zaichkowsky (1985). A total of sixexperimental advertisements of coffee products selected through apreliminary survey were produced according to visual metaphor(parallel, fused, pure) and expectancy (congruity, incongruity). Inaddition, a meaningless virtual brand ’Croso’, which cannot be as-sociated with coffee products, was selected to prevent confoundingeffects and the influence of brand names on the research results.

For expectancy manipulation, visuals that subjects can suffi-ciently understand the meaning of the products and specific infor-mation (verbal information) on the products were presented accord-ing to visual metaphor (parallel vs. fused vs. pure) in the case ofexpectation congruity. In the case of expectation incongruity, onthe other hand, only product names along with images with whichthe products are difficult to predict were presented by determiningthe level of tenor and vehicle according to visual metaphor (paral-lel vs. fused vs. pure). In addition, inferencing the product beingadvertised through brand names was made difficult by presentingonly brand names. In the case of such expectation incongruent ad-vertisements, advertising images that correspond with expectationincongruity among the award-winning advertisements at CannesInternational Advertising Festival were modified and used ratherthan the investigator making detailed manipulations.

3.2 Research Design and Analysis Method

The present study investigated differences in memory and atti-tude toward advertisements through an experiment according tovisual metaphor (parallel metaphor vs. fused metaphor vs. puremetaphor) and expectation levels (expectation congruity vs. ex-pectation incongruity). Accordingly, a 3 (visual metaphor: parallelmetaphor vs. fused metaphor vs. pure metaphor) × 2 (expectationlevels: expectation congruity vs. expectation incongruity) between-subject factorial design was created, and analysis was conductedusing two-way MANOVA. Hereupon, 179 subjects were randomlyassigned to six experimental advertisements.

7


2441

4 Research Results

4.1 Experiment Design and Experiment Sub-ject

In this study, 179 college students were selected and 165 respon-dents were coded and analyzed. Of these subjects, 74 were maleand 91 were female.

The visual metaphor (parallel metaphor / convergence metaphor/ pure metaphor) and expectation level (congruity / incongruity)are used as independent variables for the hypothesis test. A to-tal recall, and an attitude toward advertising (Aad) as subordinatevariables. Table 1 and Table 2 show the results.

Table 1: Mean and Std. Deviation

8


2442

Table 2: Research of ANOVA

Note : *p<.05, **p<.01

The main effect of visual metaphor (parallel metaphor / con-vergence metaphor / pure metaphor) was statistically evaluated asWilks’ Lambda value of .06 (F = 152.40, df = 6, p <.01) The resultsshowed significant differences. Also, the main effect on expectedlevel (coincidence / discrepancy) was also statistically significantas Wilks’ Lambda value was .79 (F = 13.90, df = 3, p <.01). Fi-nally, the interaction effect on the two independent variables wasstatistically significant as Wilks’ Lambda value was .42 (F = 28.21,df = 6, p <.01).

Next, statistical significance was verified by post-analysis ANOVAanalysis. First, in the post-analysis ANOVA analysis of VisualMetaphor, the dependent variable, ARM (F = 145.62, p <.01),showed statistically significant difference (p <.01). ADRM (F =98.98, p <.01) also showed a significant difference.

In the post-analysis ANOVA analysis of Visual Metaphor, thedependent variable, ARM (F = 6.97, p <.05), showed statisticallysignificant differences (p <.05). There was also a significant differ-ence in ADRM (F = 10.59, p <.01) and Aad (F = 22.96, p <.01).

Finally, in the posttest ANOVA analysis of interaction effects onVisual Metaphor and Visual Metaphor, there was also a significantdifference between the dependent variables ARM (F = 20.48, p<.01) and ADRM (F = 24.04, p <.01) , Aad) F = 49.54, p <.01)were also significantly different (p <.01).

Based on the results of MANOVA analysis and post - analysisANOVA, the following hypotheses were comprehensively analyzed.

Hypothesis 1 predicted that memory and Aad were higher inincongruity than parallelism, and parallel metaphor in incongruityand pure metaphor in congruity.

9


2443

As a result of hypothesis testing, the total recalled memory wasincongruity (M = 6.01, SD = 1.36) congruity (M = 6.28, SD =1.92). However, Aad of incidence of Aad was higher than incon-gruity (M = 4.19, SD = 1.61) than congruity (M = 3.49, SD =0.11) As a result, in the whole recall, all of them showed no differ-ence in congruity and incongruity, but Aad showed that incongruityformed Aad more positive than congruity.

In the case of the parallel metaphor, the total recalled memorywas higher in incongruity (M = 8.34, SD = 1.03) than in congruity(M = 6.39, SD = 1.58) , SD = 1.03) was higher than incongruity (M= 4.73, SD = 0.96). As a result, the memory of parallel metaphorwas much memorized in incongruity. Hypothesis 1 was partiallysupported.

< Hypothesis 2 > predicted that the memory effect of thevisual metaphor (parallel, convergence, pure) would be higher thanthat of the ’ADRM’ when ’ARM’ was expected.

In the congruity test, the arm of the parallel metaphor (M =3.39, SD = 0.58) was higher than Grm (M = 3.00, SD = 1.34) =1.87 SD = 0.94). However, the convergence metaphor showed asomewhat higher Grm (M = 1.87 SD = 0.94) than Arm (M = 0.90,SD = 0.89) Hypothesis 2 was also partially supported.

< Hypothesis 3 > predicted that ’ADRM’ would be higherthan ’ARM’ when the memory effect of visual metaphor (parallelmetaphor / convergence metaphor / pure metaphor) is incongruity.

In the incongruity condition, Grm (M = 5.19, SD = 1.20) of theparallel metaphor was higher than Arm (M = 3.15, SD = 0.73) andGrem of the convergence metaphor M = 1.46, SD = 0.81), respec-tively. However, in the pure metaphor case, incongruity conditionshowed low memory level with almost no difference between Arm(M = 2.73, SD = 0.82) and Grm (M = 2.00, SD = 0.74). Hypothesis3 was also partially supported.

Hypothesis 4 predicted that ADRM is more likely to have highermemory and Aad compared to ARM than the convergence metaphorand pure metaphor.

As a result of the hypothesis test, Grm (M = 5.19, SD = 1.20)of the parallel metaphor was higher than Arm (M = 3.15, SD= 0.73) in incongruity condition. The Grm mean of convergencemetaphor in incongruity was 4.30 (SD = 0.83) and Grm mean ofpure metaphor was 2.00 (SD = 0.74). In the incongruity, the paral-

10


2444

lel metaphor showed higher ADRM than the convergence metaphorand pure metaphor. Aad was also more positive in the incongruitythan the convergence metaphor (M = 4.80, SD = 0.45) and thepure metaphor (M = 2.16, SD = 0.56) of the parallel metaphorAad (M = 5.60, SD = 0.85). Hypothesis 4 was supported.

< Hypothesis 5 > predicted that ’congruity’ ads would havehigher memory and Aad than ’pure’ metaphor, ’ARM’ and ’ADEM’as compared to parallel metaphor and convergence metaphor.

Hypothesis test result showed that arm of pure metaphor (M =4.00, SD = 0.67) was higher than Grm (M = 1.87, SD = 0.94) incongruity. In congruity, the arm mean of the parallel metaphor was3.39 (SD = 0.58), and the arm mean of the convergence metaphorwas 0.90, SD = 0.89). In congruity, pure metaphor is higher thanparallel metaphor and convergence metaphor, and ARM is higherthan ADRM. In contrast, Aad was in contrast to the convergencemetaphor (M = 2.88, SD = 0.46) and pure metaphor (M = 2.81,SD = 0.89) in the parallel metaphor of Aad (M = 5.30, SD = 0.82)Hypothesis 5 was partially supported..

5 Conclusion

The present study attempted to identify the effect of the three di-mensions of visual metaphor that includes parallel metaphor, fusedmetaphor, and pure metaphor on the differences in memory effectand attitude toward advertisements according to expectation lev-els (expectation congruity / expectation incongruity) through anexperiment.

The findings of the present study are summarized as follows.First, the difference in memory effect between expectation in-

congruent advertisements and expectation congruent advertisementswas high for visual metaphor advertisements. In the case of atti-tude toward advertisements, however, expectation incongruent ad-vertisements were found to form more positive attitude toward ad-vertisements than expectation congruent advertisements.

Second, high memory effect was found for parallel metaphor un-der expectation incongruity condition and for pure metaphor underexpectation congruity condition. In the case of pure metaphor, aquite large amount of cognitive elaboration is necessary because the

11


2445

product, which is the tenor, is visually less noticeable and only thevehicle is visible. Accordingly, pure metaphor needs a copy or addi-tional information that makes it possible to infer because attentionand interest will significantly drop if only rhetoric expressions ofvisual elements are presented.

Third, parallel and pure metaphors remember ’individual at-tribute memory information’ more than ’comprehensive evaluationmemory information’ and influence judgments when expectation iscongruent. Especially, pure metaphor influenced judgments by re-membering individual attribute information of products comparedto parallel metaphor.

Fourth, parallel and fused metaphors remember ’individual at-tribute memory information’ more than ’comprehensive evaluationmemory information’ and influence judgments when expectationis incongruent. Especially, parallel metaphor was positive for notonly the effect of comprehensively evaluated memory informationbut also the attitude toward advertisements compared to fusedmetaphor or pure metaphor. Because of the creative unexpect-edness induced when both product, which is the tenor, and image,which is the vehicle, are presented together as in the case of paral-lel metaphor among the rhetoric expressions using metaphors givesconsumers interest and curiosity, motivation to process the adver-tisements more deeply and elaborately appears to be induced.

Previous studies related to visual metaphor have been contend-ing that expectation-incongruent visual metaphor advertisementsare effective by presenting verbal cues other than visual rhetori-cal expressions when the distinction of visual metaphor is ambigu-ous. There has been a tendency to draw the results without clearlypresenting whether such effects of visual metaphor are inferred byrhetoric expressions of images or interaction effects by verbal ex-pressions. Therefore, the present study classified the types of vi-sual metaphors into parallel metaphor, fused metaphor, and puremetaphor according to tenor and vehicle to overcome such limita-tions. In addition, for expectation congruity level in the dimensionof the three visual metaphors, verbal elements were added to vi-sual rhetoric expressions and interactive roles were examined. Inaddition, the significance of the present study lies in closely exam-ining only the effect of visual rhetorical expressions without verbalelements under the expectation incongruity condition.

12


2446

6 Acknowledgment

Funding for this paper was provided by Namseoul University.

References

[1] Scott L M, Images in advertising: The Need for a Theory ofVisual Rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 1994, 21 (3),pp. 252-273.

[2] Stoltman J J, Advertising Effectiveness: The Role of Adver-tising Schemas, In Childers, T. L., et al. (Eds,). MarketingTheory and Applications, 1991, 2, pp. 317-318, Chicago, IL:American Marketing Association.

[3] Heckler S E. Childers T L, The Role of Expectancy and Rele-vancy in Memory for Verbal and Visual Information: Whatis Incongruency?. Jounal of Consumer Research, 1992, 18(March), pp. 475-492.

[4] Houston M J, Childers T L, Hescler S E, Picture-Word Consis-tency and the Elaborative Processing of Advertisement. Journalof Marketing Research, 1987, 87 (November), pp. 359-369.

[5] Phillips B J, McQuarrie E F, Beyond Visual Metaphor: a NewTypology of Visual Rhetoric in Advertising, 2004, MarketingTheory, 4 (12), pp. 113-136.

[6] McQuarrie E F, Mick D G, On Resonance: A Critical Plural-istic Inquiry into Advertising Rhetoric. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 1992, 19 (2), pp. 180-197.

[7] Lakoff G, Johnson M, Metaphors we live by. Chicago : Univer-sity of Chicago Press, 1980.

[8] Rossiter J R, Percy L, Visual Communication in Advertising,Information Processing Research in Advertising, 1983, Ed. J.Harris, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbram Associates, pp. 83-126

[9] Mick D G, Levels of Subjective Comprehension in AdvertisingProcessing and Their Relations to Ad Perceptions, Attitudes

13


2447

and Memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 1992, 18 (March),pp. 411-424.

[10] Houston M J, Childers T L, Hescler S E, Picture-Word Consis-tency and the Elaborative Processing of Advertisement. Journalof Marketing Research, 1987, 8 7(November), pp. 359-369.

[11] Heckler S E, Childers T L, The Role of Expectancy and Rele-vancy in Memory for Verbal and Visual Information: Whatis Incongruency?. Jounal of Consumer Research, 1992, 18(March), pp. 475-492.

[12] Ang S H, Low Y M, Exploring the Dimensions of Ad Creativity.Psychology & Marketing, 2000, 17 (10), pp. 835-854.

[13] Toncar M, Munch J, Consumer Responses to Tropes in PrintAdvertising. Journal of Advertising, 2000, 3 0(1), pp. 55-65.

[14] MacInnis D J, Price L L, The Role of Imagery in Informa-tion Processing: Review and Extensions. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 1987, 13 (March), pp. 473-491.

14


2448

2449

2450

Documents

The In uence of Visual Metaphor Advertising Types on ... · Advertising Types on Recall and Attitude According to Congruity-Incongruity KwangSeok Han1 1Dept. of Advertising and Public