Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Influence of Ambiguity in Ads on Perceived Interpretation Difficulty and Attitude toward Ads: Moderating Effect of Thinking Style

광고의 애매 모호성이 지각된 해석난이도 및 광고태도에 미치는 영향: 사고방식의 조절효과

  • Chung, Jai-Ik (Dept. of Business Administration, Seojeong College) ;
  • Yun, Kyu-Do (Dept. of Business Administration, Kumoh National Institute of Technology) ;
  • Kim, Gwi-Gon (Dept. of Business Administration, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
  • 정재익 (서정대학교 경영학과) ;
  • 윤규도 (금오공과대학교 경영학과) ;
  • 김귀곤 (금오공과대학교 경영학과)
  • Received : 2015.04.13
  • Accepted : 2015.06.20
  • Published : 2015.06.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study examined the negative influence of ambiguity on the attitude toward ads by using mediating variable, perceived interpretation difficulty. It also tested the moderating effect of thinking style between ambiguity and perceived interpretation difficulty. In results, we found as follows. 1) Perceived interpretation difficulty is higher in case of higher ambiguity than lower one. 2) The influence of ambiguity on perceived interpretation difficulty is moderated by thinking style. 3) Attitude toward ads is more unfavorable in higher perceived interpretation difficulty than lower one. The results of this study may provide the implications that ambiguity ads using digital convergence media has to be connected to positive attitude for being successful and marketing staffs must consider thinking style as a key success factor to establish global advertising strategy.

본 연구에서는 소비자의 지각된 해석난이도를 매개변수로 사용하여 애매 모호성광고에 대한 태도가 부정적일 수 있음을 주장하였다. 또한 애매 모호성 광고에 대한 소비자의 지각된 난이도는 소비자의 사고방식에 따라 조절될 수 있음을 살펴보고자 하였다. 실증분석결과 첫째, 광고의 애매 모호성이 낮은 경우보다 높은 경우에 지각된 해석난이도는 더 높게 나타났다. 둘째, 애매 모호성이 소비자의 지각된 해석난이도에 미치는 영향은 소비자의 사고방식에 따라 조절되었다. 즉 애매 모호성이 낮은 광고에서는 종합적 사고자가 분석적 사고자에 비해 해석난이도를 높게 지각했고, 애매 모호성이 높은 광고에서는 종합적 사고자와 분석적 사고자 간에 지각된 해석난이도의 차이는 없는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 지각된 해석난이도가 낮은 경우보다 높은 경우에 광고에 대한 태도는 비호의적으로 나타났다. 본 연구결과는 디지털 융 복합 매체를 활용한 애매 모호성광고가 성공적이기 위해서는 반드시 광고에 대한 긍정적인 태도로 연결되어야 하며, 오늘날과 같은 글로벌 경영환경 하에서 글로벌 광고 전략을 수립하기 위한 중요고려 요인으로 소비자 간의 사고방식 차원의 문화적 차이를 고려해야 한다는 점을 시사해준다.

Keywords

References

  1. A. G. Sawyer, D. J. Howard, Effects of omitting conclusions in advertisements to involved and uninvolved audiences, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol 28, pp.467-474, 1991. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172786
  2. B. Phillips, The Impact of Verbal Anchoring on Consumer Response to Image Ads, Journal of Advertising, Vol 29, No 1, pp.15-24, 2000.
  3. D. Kim, Y. Pan, H. Park, High- versus low-context culture: A comparison of Chinese, Korean and American cultures. Psychology & Marketing, Vol 15, No 6, pp.507-521, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199809)15:6<507::AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-A
  4. D. Lee, D. Lee, J. Goo, The Moderating Effect of Self-Complexity on The Effects of Resonance Advertisement. The Korean Journal of Advertising, Vol 21, No 1, pp.179-193, 2010.
  5. D. Sperber, D. Wilson, Relevance: Communication and Cognition, Oxford: Blackwell, 1986.
  6. E. Choi, J. Hwang, Ads Effectiveness of Ambiguous Ads Message: Focusing on Moderating Effect of Need for Cognition, Korean Journal of Consumer and Adverting Psychology, Vol 12, No 2, pp 405-426, 2011. https://doi.org/10.21074/kjlcap.2011.12.2.405
  7. E. Mcquarrie, B. Phillips, It's not your father's magazine ad. Journal of Advertising, 37(3), pp.95-106, 2008.
  8. E. McQuarrie, D. Mick, On Resonance: A Critical Pluralistic Inquiry into Advertising Rhetoric, Journal of Consumer Research Vol 19, No 2, pp.180-197, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1086/209295
  9. E. McQuarrie, D. Mick, Visual Rhetoric in Advertising: Text-Interpretive, Experimental, and Reader-Response Analyses, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 26, No 1, pp.37-54, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1086/209549
  10. E. McQuarrie, D. Mick, Visual and Verbal Rhetorical Figures under Directed Processing versus Incidental Exposure to Advertising, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 29, No 4, pp.579-587, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1086/346252
  11. E. M. Eisenberg, Ambiguity as strategy in Organizational Communication, Communication Monograph, Vol 51, No 4, pp.227-242, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758409390197
  12. F. R. Kardes, Spontaneous inference processes in advertising: The effects of conclusion omission and involvement on persuasion, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 15, pp.225-233, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1086/209159
  13. H. Lee, G. An, Y. Ha, Consumer Behavior, bobmunsa, 2007.
  14. H. Lee, G. Ryu, D. Lee, The Effects of Visual Polysemy in Advertising: The Role of Cognitive Resources and Product Type. The Korean Journal of Advertising, Vol 34, No 1, pp.167-188, 2005.
  15. I. Choi, R. E. Nisbett, E. E. Smith, Culture, categorization and inductive reasoning, Cognition, Vol 65, pp.15-32, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00034-6
  16. I. Choi, D. Reeshad, K. Chu, H. Park, Culture and judgment of causal relevance, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 84, No 1, pp.46-59, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.46
  17. I. Choi, M. Koo, J. Choi, A., Individual differences in analytic versus holistic thinking, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol 33, No 5, pp.691-705, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206298568
  18. J. Lee, Search for procedural rationality under uncertainty, ambiguity, and dilemma, Korean Journal of Public Administration, Vol 43, No 4, pp.1-27, 2005.
  19. L. Peracchio, J. Meyers-Levy, How Ambiguous Cropped Objects in Ad Photos Affect Product Evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 21, pp.190-204, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1086/209392
  20. P. Anand, B. Sternthal, Ease of message processing as a moderator of repetition effect in advertising, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol 27, No 3, pp.345-353, 1990. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172591
  21. P. W. Linville, Self-Complexity as a Cognitive Buffer Against Stress-Related Illness and Depression, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 52, No 4, pp.663-676, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.663
  22. R. E. Nisbett, K. Peng, I. Choi, A. Norenzayan, Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychol. Rev. Vol 108, pp.291-310, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291
  23. R. Gregory, L. Sarah, S. Paul, Valuing Environmental Resources: A Constructive Approach, Jounal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol 7, No 2, pp.177-197, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065813
  24. S. Budner, Intolerance of Ambiguity as a Personality Variable. Journal of Personality, Vol 30, No 1, pp.29-50, 1962. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.x
  25. S. Bulmer, B. M. Margo, Meaningless of meaningful? Interpretation and intentionality in post-modern communication, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol 10, No 1, pp.1-15, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/1352726042000207171
  26. S. B. Mackenzie, J. L. Richard, E. B. George, The Role of Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol 23, No 2, pp.130-143, 1986. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151660
  27. T. Enkchimeg, G. Kim, J. Oh, The Effect of Sponsorship Articulation and Moderating Effect of Articulation Type & Thinking Style, The Society of Digital Policy & Management, Vol 12, No 5, pp.149-157, 2014.
  28. T. H. James, J. Jacob, The Zeigarnik Effect in Advertising, ACR, pp.746-758, 1972.
  29. T. M. Singelis, H. C. Triandis, D. Bhawuk, M. J. Gelfand, Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research, Vol 29, pp.240-275, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939719502900302
  30. Y. Choi, A Study on the Pictorial Simile in Printed Advertisements, Journal of Practical Research in Advertising and Public Relations, 2011, Vol 4, No 1, pp.49-69, 2011.