Caricare documenti e articoli online 
INFtub.com è un sito progettato per cercare i documenti in vari tipi di file e il caricamento di articoli online.


 
Non ricordi la password?  ››  Iscriviti gratis
 

THE POWER OF PERSUASION IN SELLING

inglese



THE POWER OF PERSUASION IN SELLING



The European School of Economics validated by

Nottingham Trent University

ABSTRACT





Everyone of us, more than one time in life, has surely fallen victim of persuasion attempts by our neighbours, friends, lovers, children, offspring and, of course, sellers. We all have purchased something completely useless, bought items for which we had no need at all or been influenced by an impressive advertising. Have you ever thought about the reasons why? Have you ever thought how it could have happened? Is it fair in terms of ethics?

The purpose of this dissertation is to understand some of the psychological factors persuaders can use in order to convince people to do/not do something
(in selling terms) and the extent to which ethics are respected. Compliance, persuasion, framing effects are the main themes through which the question will be approached. Theoretical definitions are provided in order to deeply understand the subjects. Influences on consumers' choices will be afforded with the help of empirical evidence that reveal the complexity of decision making. In this field, many elements that play an important role are developed: the effect of alternatives and the manner in which they are evaluated; the effect of purchase timing and quantity; the effect of adding features and promotions. For what framing effects are concerned, after a theoretical introduction, they will be applied to advertising stressing the negative goal framing effects. This kind of approach will make us understand the negativity of using these frames to increase sales and the positiveness of using the same frames to develop a public awareness toward important matters such us safety on the road and cancer prevention. Through a general overview, it is possible concluding that manipulation and persuasion are not ethical in terms of increasing sales and deceiving people but if the same methods are used to increase consciousness about subjects that, otherwise, would be forgotten or underestimated, the sense of ethics has to be changed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS






CHAPTER 1

- Introduction   page 1



CHAPTER 2

- Definitions page 5



CHAPTER 3


- Influences on Consumers' choices: empirical evidence page 9

- The effect of the set of alternatives under consideration on

consumers' choices page 10

- The effect of the manner in which the alternatives are

evaluated on consumers' choices page 13

- The effect of alternatives' descriptions on consumers'

choices page 16

- The effect of purchase timing and quantity on consumers'

choices page 17

- The effect of adding features and promotions with limited

perceived value on brand choice page 19



CHAPTER 4

- The framing effects page 22

- What is a frame? page 24

- Attribute framing effects page 26

- Goal framing effects page 27



CHAPTER 5

- Frames and advertising  page 29

- The case analysis

- Philips Inc. and Alliance Capital page 33

- "Care enough to care for yourself" and TAC page 35



CHAPTER 6

- Conclusion    page 41


Appendix   

1. TAC Insurance statistics page 45

- 2. A shortcut example    page 46

- 3. The Federal Trade Commission page 47


- 3.1 The Antitrust Authority page 55

- 3.1.1 Legislative Decree no.74 (January 25th , 1992) page 59


- Bibliography page 67



















CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION


How many times have you purchased something you do not really need or something that is completely useless? Sometimes it is a magazine subscription or tickets to the sanitation workers' ball; other times, we easily give money to charity organisations without knowing anything about them or having the entire encyclopaedias with dozens of volumes. Why?

We can call it persuasion. Psychologists know it and, unluckily for us, also sellers do. But what are the principal factors which cause one person to accept a proposal? And which techniques most effectively use these factors to bring about such compliance? Why is it that a request stated in a certain way will be rejected, when a request that asks for the same favour in a slightly different fashion will be successful?

Of course, the compliance professionals are not the only ones who know about and use these principles to help them get their way. We all employ them and fall victims to them to some degree in our daily interactions with our neighbours, friends, lovers and offspring. But what is sure, the persuasion practitioners have much more than the vague and amateurish understanding of what works than the rest of us have. Let's think about the vacuum cleaner, portrait photography, dance lessons (or it could easily be Spanish, Info Tech or climbing courses.).

The evidence suggests that the ever-accelerating pace and informational crush of modern life will make this particular form of "unthinking" compliance more and more prevalent in the future. It will be increasingly important for the society, therefore, to understand the how's and why's of this automatic influence.

Here are some examples that demonstrate social influence in use:

A physical rehabilitation group was increasingly frustrated by their clientele's low compliance rates. For some reasons, patients were not following the exercise regimes recommended by the therapists. An influence consultant quickly increased patient compliance by more than 30% by having therapists make a single change in office decor.

Influence consultants are increasingly sought by political campaign managers to provide a range of services, from psychological analyses of the electorate to the creation of speeches, advertisements and strategies.

Local convenience stores had problems with teenagers "hanging out" in their parking lots. The stores wanted teens' business, but not the fights and drug-dealing that sometimes accompany late-night loitering. An influence expert recommended that store owners purchase several samples of a certain kind of music and play that music through loudspeakers in the parking lots. Upon hearing the music, the teenagers voluntarily left and stayed away from the parking lot. The music did not affect sales to teenagers, however, as music was not played inside the stores. The performer? Frank Sinatra.

The above examples demonstrate a few situations in which a knowledge of social influence can make the difference between success and failure. But persuasion is everywhere.

Try to count the number of direct attempts to control your thoughts and behaviour you encounter in a single day. This includes people requesting you to do things, forcing you to do things, asking you to buy things, telling you to pay for things, showing you where to stop and when to go, suggesting how you should think about things, offering you slogans to repeat, songs to remember, attitudes to change and ideologies to believe. I did it avoiding the morning newspaper and radio program because I knew I could not count that fast. By the time I reached the University at mid-morning, I lost count somewhere around 500.

We live in an environment dense with influence attempts. A large portion of the population makes a living simply getting others to comply with their requests. Conservative estimates suggest that a person will receive up to 400 persuasive appeals from marketers alone in the course of a single day. Whether a manager encouraging productivity, a policeman directing traffic, a salesperson closing a sale or a president telling us we need to spend more money on social programs, each of us is subjected to an uncountable number of influence attempts each day. Focusing on just the mass media, for example, a major contender for your attention, time and most profitably, your inevitable compliance. Each year, the average American spends 1550 hours of TV, listens to 1160 hours of radio and spends 290 hours reading newspapers and magazines. If you watch the normal amount of TV, each day you will have seen 100 TV ads. That does not even include the time you spend interfacing with people at work. It has been estimated, for instance, that general managers spend upward of 80% of their time in verbal communication, most of it attempting to cajole or persuade employees[2]. Don't forget your spouse or husband, your children, your neighbours, strangers and countless others you meet in the course of an average day.

Imagine if each influence attempt were replaced with coercion: the store owner whacking you across the knees if you did not purchase that shirt; your boss punching you in the stomach to make you work harder; the policeman simply shooting you in the back for doing 45 mph in a 35 mph zone. After the typical day, you would be a physical wreck. Persuasion, on the other hand, makes society work smoothly, while physical coercion grinds it to a halt. And those who know how to persuade, benefit the most from society. But, is this ethical or not? Is it right in terms of morality? Is there any respect for the truth, respect for the person, respect for the society in which we live?

In my dissertation, I would like to show, through empirical evidence, some psychological mechanisms present in every human being that can be exploited by sellers, advertisers and persuaders in general. I would like to make candid people aware of the dangers and the deceptions they could come across. Unluckily, the weakest ones are children, teenagers, elderly or disabled. This paper is also for them and for those who take care for them in order to help in developing a major consciousness, a necessary skill to live in the actual world. The ethical question will have a detailed answer after considering the various elements presented in the dissertation.

For what the structure is concerned, in the next chapters definitions are furnished to provide a further knowledge; experiments about influences on consumers' choices and a deep review of framing effects are inserted. The analysis of framing effects in the advertising will make the reader understand what happens when persuasion takes that specific form.










CHAPTER 2

DEFINITIONS


As said in the introduction, the subject is quite wide and complex. For these reasons, some technical definitions related to persuasion and sociology are included.

sOCIAL Influence

Influence investigates the causes of human change, whether that change is a behaviour, an attitude or a belief. Inducing a change in behaviour is called compliance. Inducing a change in attitude is called persuasion. Inducing a change in belief is called either education or propaganda.

Social influence is said to be employed by an agent or practitioner upon a target. The agent's message is called her advocacy. If your goal is to get your husband to stop overeating, you may seek compliance, by getting him to stay out of the refrigerator or you may influence him to internalise different eating habits, in which case he would be persuaded. You are the agent, your husband is the target, and your tactics or message would be your advocacy.

COMPLIANCE

Compliance is often a quick-fix solution to a social problem. Compliance does not require the target to agree with the advocacy but just simply perform the behaviour. The examples I used on the introduction provide a case in point: convenience stores sometimes have problems with teenagers hanging out in their parking lots. The stores want the teens' business, but not the fights and drug-dealing that sometimes accompany late-night loitering. In a situation like this, influence agents would not attempt to persuade teenagers that parking lot loitering is bad; the agent would attempt to modify the environment to deter gatherings. As I mentioned earlier, it has been found that simply playing classical music or Frank Sinatra over a loudspeaker will empty a parking lot full of teens in no time. Those teens have changed their attitudes and not their behaviour.

PERSUASION

Persuasion attempts to win the heart and mind of the target. Persuasion must induce attitude change, which entails affective (emotion-based) change. Although persuasion is more difficult to induce, its effects last longer because the target actually accepts and internalises the advocacy.

There are many persuasion tactics, one of which utilises the Socratic Effect, studied by the famous influence researcher, William McGuire. It states that by merely directing thoughts to attitudes and beliefs with logical implications for one another, those attitudes and beliefs become more consistent. If your wife wants you to start and maintain an exercise program, she might bring up other topics which have logical, positive implications for exercise. She might tell you about a friend who recently experienced a heart attack. That may lead to a discussion about the benefits of good health and the horrors of hospitals and how people who are in good health are better looking, have more energy and are more successful. Without ever pointing it out, your wife will have caused you to notice uncomfortable inconsistencies in your belief system. No one likes hospitals and exercise will help keep you out of them so, why do not go jogging with her? You will likely decide to do just that the next time you see her putting on her running shoes. At the next social gathering you attend, she may capitalise on the situation and mention that the two of you are now exercising together. You will agree and, in so doing, will have made a public commitment which will compel you to remain consistent with your stated behaviour. If your wife is an artful influence practitioner, your jogging will cease to be an external imposition and it will have become an internal value. As such, it will become part of your self concept and will become a long-term behaviour pattern.

A little note: surprisingly, the correlation between attitude and behaviour is weaker than you might think. So, just because someone has a positive attitude does not mean they will invariably behave in a consistent manner.

PROPAGANDA

Education is the propagation of a set of beliefs, or propaganda. We call it education if we already believe in it and propaganda if we do not. Beliefs are things known or believed to be true, as opposed to attitudes, which are evaluations of objects that we think about. Beliefs are important precursors to both attitudes and behaviour, but are often used or created after the fact to defend attitudes and behaviours we already own.

We call the learning of knowledge education if we believe and agree with the advocacy, and we call it propaganda if we do not, especially if a discrepant belief system is advocated through a large-scale, mass media appeal. The first documented use of the word propaganda was 1622, when Pope Gregory XV attempted to increase church membership by strengthening belief (Pratkanis & Aronson, 1992)[3]. The term now connotes mass persuasion attempts manufactured by political entities, which manipulate far more than mere belief. Nonetheless, central to both education and propaganda is the role of the fact, the statistic, the element of knowledge that the target believes to be true.

BRAINWASHING AND THOUGHT CONTROL

The term "brainwashing" was first used by the news correspondent Hunter in 1951 to describe the conversion process that American soldiers had undergone in Chinese prison camps during the Korean war. He translated the term from the Chinese concept of hse nao, "wash brain." Mao Tse-tung used the term ssu-hsiang tou-cheng, or "thought struggle," as early as 1929 to denote what we now commonly refer to as "mind control," "thought reform," or "thought control" (Singer, 1995).

Thought control truly represents the dark side of social influence, as it combines compliance, persuasion and propaganda tactics into a powerfully insidious form of coercive manipulation that robs an individual of his original identity and replaces it with another that the individual would not have freely chosen of his own accord. Thought control requires isolation of the individual from his normal social references and is therefore best accomplished in a separatist group such as a cult.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Social Psychology is the science that studies individual beliefs, attitudes and behaviours in settings where other people are present (or merely implied or imagined, which makes the definition pretty broad). Notice the focus is quite different from sociology, where groups of people are studied, but closer to psychology, where individuals are studied. The focus of social psychology is the individual within the group. As such, it is an ideal venue for studying those forces that change humans, their beliefs, their attitudes and their behaviours.










CHAPTER 3

Influences on Consumers' Choices: Empirical evidence


Every human being has psychological features which normally work if a proper stimulus is activated. Some of these mechanisms are known by experts as "shortcuts" because they allow people to take decisions in brief time. Persuaders appeal to shortcuts in order to not leave customers time enough to balance the pros and cons of a purchase. This automatic influence is very helpful to sellers who, in addition, can have the further support, through consumers' research, to know how to influence purchasing decisions. The ethics issue immediately comes to mind. A massive research, in fact, could allow companies just in search of profits (without caring about their customers) to persuade unconscious consumers. As we will see, to influence people's choices is not so difficult. In the past, it was assumed that consumers can estimate the utilities or values of products based on their characteristics and that these estimates guide the consumers' purchase decisions. For example, given information about the memory size, speed, monitor type, and other features of a personal computer, a consumer can assess the value of that product. If offered more than one personal computer, the consumer can simply determine the value of each alternative and then select the one with the highest value. The underlying assumption is that consumers have well-defined preferences that guide their purchase decisions.

Recent research on decision making, however, has revealed that people often do not have clear and stable preferences, even when they have complete information about the characteristics of the alternatives[4]. These findings are consistent with the idea that, in many situations, consumers construct their preferences when faced with a specific purchase decision, rather than retrieve preformed evaluations of product features and alternatives. Since preferences are constructed for a specific choice task, they depend on the particular characteristics of that task.

Most of the research reviewed below involves controlled experiments that allow for unconfounded tests of several systematic effects on consumer preferences. Companies and market research firms often employ such experiments for predicting consumers' choices in the marketplace and to know how convince better on a certain product. While no single research technique can perfectly capture all of the factors that determine market shares, such controlled experiments have been shown to be rather accurate predictors of consumers' actual choices. In the studies reported below, the researchers took great pains to make the choice task and product alternatives realistic and meaningful as well as to provide respondents with the kinds of information typically available to consumers. The participants in these experiments were consumers, students and business executives.

The Effect of the Set of Alternatives under Consideration on Consumers' Choices

Williams-Sonoma, a mail-order and retail business located in San Francisco, used to offer one home bread bakery priced at $275. Later they added a second home bread bakery, which was very similar to the first except for its larger size. The new item was priced about 50% higher than the original bread bakery. Williams-Sonoma did not sell many units of the new (relatively unattractive) item, but the sales of the less expensive bread bakery almost doubled. Why did the company make that choice?

This example illustrates the impact of changing the set of alternatives under consideration (or the choice set) on consumers' purchase decisions. Specifically, the effect of the second, relatively less attractive bread bakery on the sales of the existing one is consistent with experimental evidence that adding an alternative, which is inferior compared to another alternative, increases the market share of the (relatively) superior alternative.

The finding that the addition of a relatively less attractive product can increase the share of a second product has been replicated many times. In another study, Simonson and Tversky presented respondents with colour pictures and descriptions of microwave ovens taken from a catalogue[5]. In one version, only two alternatives were presented: an Emerson oven with a regular price of 109.99 and a larger oven by Panasonic with a regular price of $179.99. Both ovens were on sale for 35% off their regular price. The other version of the questionnaire included, in addition to the Emerson and Panasonic ovens, another Panasonic oven that was slightly larger and cost $199.99. The added Panasonic oven was on "sale" for only 10% off the regular price. Since the less expensive Panasonic offered a better value than the added Panasonic, it was expected that proportionally more respondents would choose the less expensive Panasonic in the version with the three microwave ovens. As predicted, the share of the less expensive Panasonic was significantly greater (60% vs. 43%) in the choice set with all three alternatives compared to the set with just the less expensive Panasonic and the Emerson. It appears, in fact, that the addition of the relatively inferior Panasonic caused some respondents, who would have otherwise preferred the Emerson, to choose the less expensive Panasonic.

Choice set configuration appears to affect preferences even when consumers can readily assess the quality and other relevant features of the considered alternatives. For example, several studies demonstrated that consumers (who chose among actual samples of paper towels and were asked to feel them to assess their quality) were highly susceptible to a variety of seemingly irrational influences. Paper towels are a very familiar product category with significant quality differences among brands, which could be revealed by inspecting the samples. The fact that choice set effects are observed in such product categories suggests that consumers often have difficulty determining their preferences and the values of products to them on the basis of the products' (absolute) characteristics (e.g., the price, quality, colour and design of a paper towel). Instead, purchase decisions appear to be based on both the absolute attribute values or characteristics of the alternatives and their relative positions within the particular choice sets under consideration.

Another study examined the ability of consumers to report their own tastes or importance weights accurately[6]. Respondents first chose from sets of alternatives that were designed so that one alternative appeared more attractive than the other. For example, in a choice among personal computers, most people choose the PC with the lowest price and least memory if the trade-off between price and memory is such that the cost of additional memory is very high and, vice versa, if the cost of memory is low. After making a choice from a set in which the cost of memory was either very high or very low, respondents were asked to indicate the importance to them of PC memory and price. As was predicted, the choices that respondents made had a systematic effect on their evaluations of the importance of memory and price. Respondents who chose the PC with the most memory (because the cost of memory was low in the choice set they were given) tended to believe that memory was more important for them than low price and vice versa for those who chose the cheapest PC. This finding suggests that consumers sometimes infer their values from observed products and they lack the insights needed for reporting their own tastes.



Since consumers are uncertain about their preferences and use the choices presented to them for determining the values of product alternatives, companies can increase overall sales and shift purchases to higher margin items by carefully designing the sets of alternatives that their customers consider. Direct marketers, advertisers, sales people and retailers can often influence the particular choice sets that their customers evaluate. A company can increase the sales of a new, improved model of a product by presenting it to customers alongside the old model and pricing the two similarly (i. e., make the new model appear like a bargain).

The Effect of the Manner in which Alternatives Are Evaluated on Consumers' Choices

Several studies have investigated the effect of the manner in which alternatives are evaluated and compared on consumers' preferences. Dhar and Simonson demonstrated that shifting the focus of attention to one of two considered alternatives tends to enhance the perceived attractiveness and choice probability of that alternative[7]. As an example, respondents were asked to assume that they were offered two desserts at the end of a meal: frozen yoghurt and fruit salad. Before indicating their choice, half the respondents answered the question, "How much more or less attractive to you is frozen yoghurt?", and the other half were asked, "How much more or less attractive to you is fruit salad?". The results indicated that those who focused on frozen yoghurt rated it, on aver-age, as slightly more attractive than fruit salad. On the other hand, those who focused on fruit salad rated it as much more attractive than frozen yoghurt. All respondents were then asked which of the two desserts they would choose. Of those who initially focused on frozen yoghurt, 52% selected frozen yoghurt and 48% chose fruit salad, whereas among those who initially focused on fruit salad, only 25% selected frozen yoghurt and 75% chose fruit salad. This result, which was replicated in several other product categories, suggests that by simply focusing the consumers' attention on one of the alternatives being considered (e.g., on the brand that a sales person is trying to sell), one can increase the perceived attractiveness and choice probability of that alternative.

Other manipulations of the manner in which alternatives are compared can influence purchase decisions. One of the most common decisions consumers have to make is whether to pay a certain price premium for additional features or a better-known brand. Simonson, Nowlis and Lemon demonstrated, in 1994, several ways in which marketers can influence buyers' willingness to pay a higher price for higher quality. One such effect relates to product categories where manufacturers offer different models of a product with different feature levels. For example, VCRs may be divided into low-price, basic 2-head models, 4-head models with slow motion and freeze frame, and high-price, top-of-the-line models with hi-fi stereo, "VCR-Plus," and other enhanced features. In these product categories, retailers can organise products by brand (i. e., each display presents all models of one brand) or by model (i. e., each display presents similar models by different brands), or some combination of the two display formats. Building on an earlier finding by Simonson and Tversky, which indicated that buyers are averse to choosing the lowest quality alternative in sets of three or more alternatives, Simonson et al. showed that consumers are less likely to choose the cheapest brand when the products are displayed by model rather than by brand. This result suggests that marketers of high-equity, high-price brands should encourage retailers to organise products at the store by model (or feature level), whereas marketers of low-equity, low-price brands should prefer product display s that are organised by brand.

Another study examined the effect of the manner in which alternatives are evaluated, focusing on the influence on purchase decisions of anticipating the possibility of making the wrong choice. In this study, respondents were asked to choose between a well-known brand and a lesser-known brand (e.g., Panasonic and SounDesign VCRs)[8]. The two brands had the same features except that the better-known brand was higher priced and it was emphasised that the reliability of the brands was unknown. Respondents in one condition were asked to consider two possible scenarios. If they chose the better-known and more expensive brand, they might find out later (e.g., from Consumer Reports) that it was actually not better in any way than the lesser-known brand. Conversely, if the lesser-known brand was selected, they might discover later that it was less reliable and durable than the better-known brand. Respondents were asked to anticipate how they would feel in these two scenarios. The majority indicated that they would be more upset with themselves and feel more responsible if they erred by choosing the lesser-known brand. A second group of respondents chose between the two brands, without considering the possibility of making the wrong decision. As was predicted, the group that first evaluated how they would feel if they made the wrong choice were significantly more likely (a difference of 17%) to choose the better-known and more expensive brand. In another part of this research, it was shown that respondents who consider the possibility of making the wrong decision are more likely to purchase a currently available item on sale rather than wait for a better sale. These findings are consistent with the notion that people expect to be less upset and feel less responsibility if they choose the safer, default option (e.g., a well-known brand).

We can say that merely asking consumers to consider how they would feel if they made the wrong purchase decision can have a systematic effect on their choices. In particular, sellers of high-price, high-equity brands can increase their market share relative to a cheaper brand by encouraging buyers to anticipate how they would feel if they found out later they made the wrong choice. For example, an ad by Kodak (1993) asked buyers to anticipate how they would have felt if they had bought a non-Kodak brand and the pictures had not turned out well.

Together, the findings of these studies suggest that consumers' purchase decisions can be influenced by a variety of seemingly irrelevant manipulations of the manner in which alternatives are evaluated.

The Effect of Alternatives' Descriptions on Consumers' Choices

Minor changes in the way alternatives are described, referred to as "framing," can have a large effect on consumers' preferences. For example, Levin and Gaeth asked different groups of respondents to evaluate ground beef that was labelled as either "75% lean" or "25% fat."13 They found that, even after tasting the beef, respondents perceived the beef labelled as "75% lean" as superior to that labelled "25% fat."[9]. For further details, please consult the paragraph "The Framing Effects".

Kahneman and Tversky provide another illustration of the impact of alternative description on preferences. One group of respondents received the following problem: "Imagine that you have decided to see a play and paid the admission price of $10 per ticket. As you enter the theatre, you discover that you have lost the ticket. The seat was not marked, and the ticket cannot be recovered. Would you pay $10 for an additional ticket?" In this version, 46% of the respondents said "yes" and 54% said "no." In the other version of the problem, respondents were asked to assume that as they entered the theatre, before buying a ticket, they discovered that they lost a $10 bill. With this version, 88% of the respondents said they would buy the ticket and 12% said they would not. Note that in both versions the consequence is the same (a loss of $10), except that in one case the loss is in the form of a ticket whereas in the other version it is a $10 bill. However, if a ticket is lost, respondents are likely to consider whether seeing the play is worth $20, whereas in the other case the loss of a $10 bill and the purchase of a ticket are mentally separated[10].

In a related study, Thaler examined the effect of descriptions of alternatives that consist of multiple components and proposed several principles. If an alternative has only positive components (e.g., Christmas gifts), consumers are happier when the components are described separately (e.g., gifts are individually wrapped). On the other hand, if the components are negative (e.g., credit card charges), then consumers prefer that they are all lumped together (in one bill). Also, an alternative with a large negative component (e.g., a product after a large price increase) and a small positive component (e.g., a rebate or a coupon) tends to be perceived as more attractive than the same alternative with a moderately negative component (e.g., a moderate price increase)[11]. These principles have important implications for marketers communications strategies.

In sum, consumers' evaluations of alternatives and purchase decisions can be systematically influenced by seemingly inconsequential changes of product descriptions.

The Effect of Purchase Timing and Quantity on Consumers' Choices

Most purchase decisions involve products that are consumed at a later period. For example, most supermarket food items are purchased for consumption in the days or weeks that follow. Consequently, when making purchase decisions, consumers should be able to predict their preferences at later periods. A question that naturally arises is how good consumers are at predicting their preferences. This question was investigated in a study in which participants were given a choice of different snacks[12]. One group of respondents were presented with six snacks and asked to indicate which one they wished to receive. The participants selected one item and received it. In each of the following two weeks, the same procedure was repeated, with the respondents selecting and receiving one of the six snacks for immediate consumption. A second group of respondents were presented with the same six snacks, informed that they would receive one snack immediately and one in each of the following two weeks, and asked to indicate which item they wanted for each week. It was emphasised that there was sufficient supply of all snacks and respondents could choose the same snack more than once.

As was predicted, respondents in the second group who made snack choices for three weeks at the same time were much more likely to select three different snacks (64% of the participants) than those who made one choice each week for immediate consumption (9%). If we assume that the choices for immediate consumption are the "correct" decisions (i.e., they are the best indicators of what respondents actually wanted at that time), then it can be concluded that consumers who make purchases for later consumption and need to predict their future preferences are susceptible to systematic errors and may often make sub-optimal decisions.

The tendency to select variety when making multiple choices simultaneously can be explained in at least two ways. First, people generally have a preference for variety ("Variety is the spice of life"), which is more likely to influence actual decisions when consumers make choices for later periods and are less certain which specific products they would want. Second, if buyers have difficulty deciding which of the available alternatives to choose, they can resolve this conflict when purchasing multiple items by choosing a bundle of their most preferred alternatives.

In a related study, Simonson and Winer showed that the number of items consumers purchase in a product category on a shopping occasion can influence what they purchase[13]. The data for this study consisted of scanner panel data of actual yoghurt purchases by households over a two-year period. The results indicated that, as the number of yoghurt cartons purchased on a specific shopping occasion increased, consumers were more likely to choose yoghurt flavours that they did not usually buy. Single-member households were analysed separately and the same pattern of results was observed. This finding has several managerial implications. It suggests, for example, that the number of items consumers typically purchase in a category (e.g., the number of yoghurt cartons per shopping occasion) can influence the market shares of product types and brands. It further proposes that marketers of bundles of items in a category (e.g., bags of dry soup) may increase sales by offering mixed bundles (e.g., different flavours of soup in one box).

The Effect of Adding Features and Promotions With Limited Perceived Value on Brand Choice

The research findings reviewed so far suggest that consumers often have difficulty assessing the values of product alternatives. One way that a consumer can choose between alternatives without being certain about their exact values is by eliminating all alternatives that have features which the consumer clearly does not need or finds irrelevant. Enhancing a product with a feature or premium that is of little or no value to many consumers, even without raising the price, may actually decrease the popularity of that product.

To test this proposition, Simonson, Camion and O'Curry examined in 1994 the effect of adding premiums and product features that are designed to attract a specific market segment, but which are perceived as having little or no value to most consumers. One choice problem was based on a sales promotion used by Pillsbury in the fall of 1991. In a choice between two brands of brownie cake mix (I will call them A and B), the unneeded premium was a Collector's Plate that could be purchased for $6.19. There were three versions of the choice problem, each evaluated by a third of the respondents. In one version, the option to buy the Collector's Plate was offered to buyers of the A brand; in a second version, a Collector's Plate was offered to buyers of the B brand; the third version did not mention the Collector's Plate promotion. In a second problem, involving a choice between two brands of 35mm film, the unattractive premium was an offer to purchase a golf umbrella for $8.29 (based on a past promotion by Fuji). Note that in both the cake mix and film examples, the promotion involved an option to purchase an item for a significant price and consumers could simply ignore these promotions.

As predicted, the market shares of the brands that offered the (unattractive) promotion were smaller (by an average of 13%) than their shares when they did not offer the promotion. Similar findings were obtained when new product features (rather than premiums) were offered, which were designed for a small target segment but had no negative effect on the product's value for other segments (e.g., a watch that can display two time-zones, a free subscription to a magazine with a limited appeal). These results are consistent with the notion that, when consumers are uncertain about their preferences, a product that offers an unneeded premium or feature provides consumers with a reason for rejecting it. It appears that consumers often automatically avoid alternatives with unneeded features, without thinking whether these features actually impact the product value in any way. Thus, companies should carefully evaluate the positive effect of new product features and promotions against the potentially negative effect associated with buyers' aversion to selecting products with features that they consider useless.

A related study by Simonson I., Nowlis and Simonson Y. investigated situations in which the choices of one consumer are influenced by knowing the choices and the reasons for these choices of another consumer. It was predicted that consumers would be less likely to choose an alternative that was chosen by another consumer for a reason that is irrelevant to them. Participants in this study were told that, in an effort to save paper and reduce duplicating costs, each questionnaire was designed for use by two respondents. Thus, when a participant had to enter a choice, he or she could see the choice of the "previous respondent" and the reason given for the decision. The answers and reasons of the "previous respondent" were systematically manipulated to influence the (real) respondents. For example, one problem involved a choice between the MBA programs at Northwestern and UCLA. In one version of the questionnaire, the "previous respondent" selected Northwestern and the reason given was "I have many relatives in the Chicago area." It was expected that this reason would not apply to most respondents and thus reduce the likelihood of choosing Northwestern. In a second version, no reason was given for the choice of Northwestern. As expected, respondents who saw a reason that was irrelevant to them were less likely to choose Northwestern than respondents who did not see the other respondent's reason (Moessinger P., 2000. Sociology and Social Psychology course. University of Geneva, Department of Sociology, Winter session).











CHAPTER 4

THE FRAMING EFFECTS


Let's read these three little stories:

A college undergraduate who has recently moved into his own apartment, Franklin is wrestling with a decision: he is considering whether or not to purchase a VCR with his limited funds. He now stands before a display of VCRs at the local electronics store, considering the purchase. He thinks: "With a VCR, I can watch high-quality movies instead of the same bad things on network TV. And the selection of movies on video is much larger than what is on TV. Plus, movies do not have ads!" Armed with three unassailable reasons, Franklin carries his prize to the cashier's counter.

Across the street Lisa and Jon are looking over the menus at their favourite restaurant. Jon orders a burger, but Lisa demurs, saying that she is watching her weight. "Don't worry," smiles the waitress. "Our burger's made of hamburger that's 75% lean." Lisa orders the burger and notices it tastes better than most.

Several blocks away, an encyclopædia salesman is talking to two young parents. He is well into his routine and has already got them to admit that a quality education is of utmost importance to their children's future. He approaches the topic of price with great skill. "Although this investment may seem substantial at first glance," he admits, "with our extended payment plan, this set of encyclopædias will cost you less than 40 cents a day. Why, that's less than a can of soda! Wouldn't you say your children's education is worth more than a daily can of soda?" Having never thought of it in just that way, the young couple decide to purchase the set.

Franklin, Lisa, and the young parents are the latest casualties of the insidious framing device. As subtle as it is powerful, the frame allows a communicator to manipulate choice alternatives in order to influence thinking processes and obtain consent without ever appearing to attempt to persuade. The target of influence is seldom aware that a particular response has been induced.

- Franklin was the victim of his own reframe, the least detectable and perhaps most powerful type of frame. Although he entered the store with the frame of VCR vs. no VCR, he allowed the frame to slip onto an entirely different topic: TV vs. Cinema. Once the decision was reframed, Franklin was unable to generate any reasons for not buying. Franklin might have reframed the purchase decision in other ways, too. He could have considered VCR vs. new computer, which might have led him to the computer section. And had Franklin reframed the decision as mindless entertainment vs. productivity he might have sped out of the store as he hurried home to get busy with something really important. But once Franklin allowed the decision to become one between TV vs. cinema, the decision was foregone.

- Lisa is the victim of a focus frame. She has been led to focus on the leanness, rather than the fatness of her burger. Would it have made a difference if Lisa had been told her burger was 25% fat? You bet it would. In fact, researchers Levin & Gaeth (1988) conducted a study using just this frame manipulation. The researchers gave identical samples of ground burger to two groups of tasters in their experiment. The only difference between them was that one group was told the beef was 75% lean and the second group told it was 25% fat. Those that had been told it was 75% lean rated the beef as significantly more lean, of higher quality, more greaseless and better tasting than ordinary hamburger. Those that had been told it was 25% fat rated the burger as more fatty, lower quality and more greasy than regular burger.

- Finally, the young couple fell victim to the contrast frame. The salesman craftily shifted the focus of decision away from the amount the young family could afford to spend. Instead, he focused attention onto the unimportance of a can of soda. Using it as a reference point, he then compared it to the value of not his encyclopædia set, but successfully educated children. He substituted associations for the actual item. Given the frame can of soda vs. children's education, education will win every time.


WHAT IS A FRAME?

A frame is a psychological device that offers a perspective and manipulates salience in order to influence subsequent judgement.

You can notice this definition consists of three separate components:

1) A frame "offers a perspective." It manages the viewer's alignment in relation to the issue. Just as a picture frame can obscure a painting from an oblique view, so a psychological frame invites the observer to view the topic from a certain perspective. By labelling ground beef as "75% lean" rather than "25% fat," for example, researchers Levin & Gaeth (1988) were able to impel people to consider meat in terms of its positive healthful qualities.

2) A frame "manipulates salience." That is, it directs the viewer to consider certain features and ignore others. A picture frame sets the artwork apart from the wallpaper. A psychological frame, however, encourages the observer to attend to a feature of the stimulus within the frame, while disregarding other features of that same stimulus which lie outside the frame. For example, referring to someone as "blue collar" or "intellectual" or "an athlete" emphasises one particular feature of that person. Perception may become organised around the label.

3) A frame influences "subsequent judgement." The frame precedes a persuasive attempt, and implies a certain organisation for the information that follows. A story tells of a Florentine patron of the arts who took a beautiful picture frame to Leonardo da Vinci and asked him to paint a picture that would fit within it. Ludicrous as this sounds, a successful psychological frame operates in precisely this fashion. Information received after the frame is delivered may be organised and resized to fit within the parameters established by the frame. The frame not only contains, but constrains. The frame helps create the picture we view.

Investigators are rightfully intrigued by the finding that decision makers respond differently to different but objectively equivalent descriptions of the same problem. Over the past decade, studies of training effects in the area of human judgement and decision-making have proliferated, expanding to include domains as diverse as cognition, psycholinguistics, perception, social psychology, health psychology, clinical psychology, educational psychology and business. The existence of framing effects has been documented in medical and clinical decisions (decisions made by both the provider and the recipient of health care), perceptual judgements, consumer choices, responses to social dilemmas, bargaining behaviours, auditing evaluations and many other decisions.

Despite this breadth of application, the search for a deeper understanding of the processes that underlie framing effects has been limited. Throughout the literature, valence framing effects, wherein the frame casts the same critical information in either a positive or a negative light, are often treated as a relatively homogeneous set of phenomena explained by a single theory, namely prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). As we have seen, it is possible to demonstrate that there are different types of framing effects with different underlying mechanisms and consequences and, second, that a closer examination of these different kinds of framing effects can reveal critical variables involved in representing, processing, and responding to information.

In what follows, I would like to describe two different types of framing manipulations which involve valence framing. The first of these manipulations is what we call attribution framing, in which some characteristics of an object or event serve as the focus of the framing manipulation. The second type of manipulation is goal framing, in which the goal of an action or behaviour is framed.

ATTRIBUTE FRAMING EFFECTS

Attribute framing represents perhaps the simplest case of framing, making it especially useful for gaining a basic understanding of how descriptive valence influences information processing. We call it "attribute framing" because only a single attribute within any given context is the subject of the framing manipulation. The choice is not between different options but is, instead, a measure of the more basic process of evaluation.

The effects occur when the evaluation of an object (a product of a company for example) or an event is more favourable if a key attribute is framed in positive rather than in negative terms such as % lean rather % fat of a food product. Positive labels, in fact, tend to evoke positive associations while negative labels tend to evoke negative ones.

OBJECT OR EVENT

POSITIVE FRAME

 




COMPARE TO

DETERMINE

FRAMING EFFECTS

 


OBJECT OR EVENT

 

NEGATIVE FRAME

 







Fig.1 The attribute of framing paradigm


In the very first study of the attribute framing effects (Levin & Gaeth, 1988) there is a clear explanation of the working process. The information is encoded relative to its descriptive valence. The positive labelling of an attribute leads to an encoding of the information that tends to evoke favourable associations in memory, whereas the negative labelling of the same attribute is likely to cause an encoding that evokes unfavourable associations.

GOAL FRAMING EFFECTS

Although attribute framing effects provide clear evidence of the importance of valence-based encoding in enhancing or hurting evaluations, valence framing may also have a quite different kind of effect. Imagine, for instance being faced with a seller that is only interested in enhancing the evaluation of some situation or behaviour. In this case, a different kind of framing manipulation can be designed to influence the implicit goals that an individual adopts. In particular, the issue may be framed to focus the attention on its potential to provide a benefit or gain (positive frame) or on its potential to prevent or avoid a loss (negative frame). Both frames should enhance the evaluation of the issue, but the question here is which type of goal is the more powerful enhancer.



This kind of frame is particularly popular in U.S.A. in studies of persuasive communication notably used in advertising. This type of manipulation is illustrated in Fig.2 with the variations due to the duality that increases the susceptibility of goal frames to several linguistic and contextual variations. In addition, the linguistic variation may also influence the strength of goal framing effects because, as we will see in the case study, the alternative terms are not perceptually equal. Generally, the positive frame focuses attention on the goal of obtaining the positive consequence (or gain), whereas the negative frame focuses attention on avoiding the negative consequences (or loss).




BEHAVIOUR X


POSITIVE FRAME

 

(APPROACH)

 




COMPARE TO

DETERMINE

FRAMING EFFECTS

 


BEHAVIOUR

NOT - X

 




NEGATIVE FRAME

 

(AVOID)

 



Fig.2 The basic goal framing paradigm


According to the frame definition (page 24), it is quite clear that they can be subtle methods to persuade customers. In the next chapters, in fact, we will see what happens if they are used in advertising and how the ethics issue is affected.








CHAPTER 5

FRAMES AND ADVERTISING


Advertising is a small part of the total marketing effort but it is the most visible and for this reason, so important to the companies and to the advertising agencies. In order to have a clearer idea of what we are going to afford, I would like to introduce some standard definitions.

According to the American Marketing Association (AMA), marketing is the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion and distribution of ideas, goods and services to create exchanges that satisfy the perceived needs, wants and objectives of the customers and the organisation[16].

The standard definition refers to advertising as a form of paid non-personal communication from an identified sponsor using media and mass media to persuade or influence an audience[17]. As said above, advertising is an integral but relatively small part of a marketing plan. Traditionally, businesses plan their marketing activities by examining the marketing mix, a blend of activities such as designing the product and its package, pricing it, distributing the product so that it is accessible to the customers and promoting or communicating about the product . This last element, also known as promotion, is an umbrella term for many types of promotional activities: advertising, direct marketing, interactive/Internet marketing, sales promotion, personal selling, publicity, public relations, point of sale and packages. In order to communicate effectively, marketers must understand the strengths and weaknesses of each technique. As for advertising, it is capable of reaching a mass audience repeatedly and effectively informing customers about new products. In addition, it can explain changes in existing products, remind customers to buy and reinforce past purchase. Finally, and mostly important for us, advertising can persuade customers to change their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours.

The main goals of an ad could be listed as follow:

to increase sales;

to change attitude;

to heighten brand awareness.


As said before, the main marketing principle in companies is to satisfy the customer giving to him/her what he/she is exactly looking for. In many cases, however, we witness a phenomenon able to create wants (sometimes they are transformed in real needs) not thinkable by the customers before. Since companies are more customer-oriented, in fact, experts state that marketing is the sole reason a product or service is successful, suggesting that its influence is not sufficiently supported by inherent consumer benefits. Where the product may not represent a proprietary benefit, its success may come instead from its ability to fulfil an image or status-based need. Consumer needs can be both tangible in terms of product performance, or intangible in terms of product image and how owning a particular product makes a person feel. We are continually exposed to an array of changing, newer and better products that we become convinced we must have these products (acquisitiveness).

Evidently, advertising is based on persuasion techniques used by advertisers in order to impress the audience. Furthermore they are interested in the results, not the processes. When a busy advertising executive writes advertisements, she does not want people to find them creative: she wants people to find it so interesting that they buy the product.

As we can see in the definition, advertising, by its very nature, tries to persuade the audience to do something and it cannot be objective or neutral (advocacy). Most people, however, are perfectly aware that advertising tries to sell us something, whether it is a product, a service or and idea. If we think about presidential elections in U.S.A., we can notice that any campaign ads will portray the candidate positively. The messages could be more troubling when they are aimed at particular groups with limited experiences such as children and teenagers, or limited resources such as elderly or disabled (subtle messages - accuracy).

Owing to their internal nature, frames are usually utilised in advertising. In particular, I would like to dwell on the effects of negative framing of message claims as an advertising tactic vs. the effects of positive framing. The use of negatively framed ads has been on the increase in both political and consumer-products domains suggesting that going negative works. This beliefs is shared between marketers despite of the fact that consumers consider the use of negative advertising to be unfair and inappropriate[19] .

Negative framing can occur, for example, when the claim focus primarily on a comparison brand and highlight the negative consequences of choosing that brand instead of the sponsor. A famous ad of AT&T vs. MCI (1997) was a clear example: "MCI had over twice as many network outages as AT&T" and then highlighted the disadvantages of being with MCI. In general, when processing resources are impoverished, the focus is likely to be on the information presented in the message. Under these circumstances (under-low elaboration conditions), negative framing is likely to be more effective than positive framing. On the other hand, when more elaborated processing than choice occur, for example attitude judgements that require a higher involvement, we have a reversal preference: the attitude toward the sponsor is less favourable when the message is framed negatively than when it is framed positively . In brief, using negative framing as an advertising tactic is likely to be more effective when consumers choose without much thought, such as for some low-involvement product categories or when the choice is an impulse. What is important to advertisers is that viewers do not perceive the attack to be unfair otherwise, it will not work.

Another case of negative framing occurs in insurance, protective services in general and financial services advertising. The so-called shock approach used in personal selling is exploited in advertising as well. Its purpose is to bring home a certain reality to the prospect by playing upon the emotions. A fire insurance salesperson uses the shock approach by showing pictures of burned-out buildings. A fire insurance company does the same on TV or in magazines, adding voices, noises and images that can impress the consumer even more. This kind of approach reminds people that such a catastrophe could happen to them and their insurance coverage is not adequate. Husbands are often shocked to learn that their present life insurance coverage would not support their family for even a year if they were to die suddenly. A poor financial investment can create many problems to a middle-class pre-retirement couple. In this case, the negative frame will create a negative sensation in customers' minds and the solution is in purchasing the service (or the product) which is advertised in order to eliminate the danger of losing what they have built up in all their lives. As you can see, this kind of techniques not only it is widely use, especially in U.S., but it is also extremely persuasive and effective.

Luckily, the negative framing effects are effective also in other cases. In particular, they are used in Public Service Advertising (PSA) which communicates a message on behalf of some good cause, such as stopping drunk driving or preventing child abuse. These advertisements are usually created for free by advertising professionals and the media often donate the space and time.

In the next section, I will compare these two types of negative frames utilisation. In the first case, I will analyse a commercial of Philips Inc. and Alliance Capital in which the negative effect is inserted to sell; in the second one, two PSA will show how much negative frames could be effective if used in social marketing (companies, government agencies, non profit organisations use advertisements to communicate about social programs in order to motivate their target audience to respond[21]).


THE CASE ANALYSIS

PHILIPS INC. AND ALLIANCE CAPITAL

The easiest shortcut to reach consumers is to appeal to what they care the most: their children, lovers, families, career. We are scared by pain, sorrow, illness, impairments but also sadness, solitude. Advertising can involve all these feelings: it can show satisfied people using a certain product/service but it can also show disheartened situations or even disasters caused by the lack of the same product/service's purchase.

That is the case of Philips Inc. in a commercial broadcast in U.S. television. A melancholic song is the background of a huge fire which is destroying a building. Firemen are attempting to calm down the flames while a desperate crying woman is trying to reach her apartment without succeeding. Firemen inside the building continue their work until one of them notices a cradle: a little child is there and he achieves to bring him out. Finally, the woman, the mother's child, can hug his son. Then the claim takes shape in a black background: "About 100 house fires a year are caused by irons left on. That's why our iron turns itself off after 30 seconds". The Philips brand mark ends the spot.

This is a typical example of negative goal framing effects used to increase sales: it focuses the attention on avoiding a negative consequence following the subtle advice of the spot (in this case, purchasing Philips' iron). It appeals to negative emotions caused by the loss of someone (the child) and/or something (the house). The ad was shown during planned hours, according to strategic research: soap operas or typical women programmes such as cooking advice were preferred but even prime-time shows, where families are expected to be together, were used in order to impress as much as possible the audience. Let's think about housewives at home watching TV and looking at this ad: they are certainly hit and scared by what can happen to them and their loved ones. It was, in fact, critically important that people watching the advertisement would spontaneously think that it could happen to them so easily. This is the goal of the shock approach: reminding people that such a catastrophe is not so far away but, at the same time, giving them a solution to overcome the problem. In this case, buying the "wise" iron could save lives. But, is this ethical?

Another case I would like to cite is a campaign of Alliance Capital, a global investment management firm. It manages retirement assets for many U.S. public and private employee benefit plans, for public employee retirement funds and for foundations, endowments, banks, and insurance companies world-wide. The campaign is called "Investors Behaving Badly" and it is comprised of four new commercials which are breaking nationally on the main U.S. channels. Even if the company states that it deals with black humour, it is possible to perceive immediately that the ads are in contrast to other commercials unleashed during the past years by investment companies, suggesting the wealth that can be achieved by who takes charge of their own investing. Alliance advertising, which focuses on the plight of people who failed to prepare themselves financially, pushes itself into territory particularly relevant today such as: college funds, retirement funds, investments. The campaign depicts what can happen when people without the benefit of guidance and counsel from a professional financial advisor, invest everything (or nearly everything) they have and lose it. The often bizarre behaviour of ordinary people thrust into extraordinary and near tragic financial situations give to the commercials a less tragic atmosphere than the Philips' ad. Even in this case we have research efforts: in 1996, a vast majority of American citizens greatly underestimated the amount they would need to have to retire successfully. Alliance Capital's ad campaigns subsequently pursued themes showing the consequences of failing to prepare and encouraging immediate corrective action. The principle is the same used in Philips' ad: a negative goal framing effect which stresses the negative consequences that can hit not just the main characters (parents for example) but also their sons and their families in general. The Alliance services are the solution for a best life for your relatives and also for yourself. But, are these advertisements accurate?

"CARE ENOUGH TO CARE FOR YOURSELF" AND TAC INSURANCE

As we have seen before, appealing to the fear that people have abut losing the most important things in their life is used to increase sales. What we are going to see, it is a wiser use of the negative goal framing effects: enhancing a preventive mammogram and safe behaviour on the road.

In 2002, it is estimated that in U.S. 182,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer (one every 3 minutes) and 40,800 women will die of breast cancer (one every 13 minutes). 96% of women live 5 years longer or more when breast cancer is caught in its early stage (National Cancer Institute[22]). Breast cancer are two extremely powerful and emotional words to women and their families. Yet for some reason the message of early detection through mammograms seems to not get through, particularly to lower income women.

The Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH), a government agency whose mission is to deliver social programs and the messages that support them, in order to increase prevention, asked Cronin & Company Advertising to develop a campaign able to break down the barriers and motivate this target group to schedule a free mammogram. The question was about finding a right way of communicating with those women whose last concern is their own personal well-being. The negative framing effects were the best solution in order to motivate and convince them that a mammogram was not low in their priority list. Showing and stating to women what could happen if they die, appeals to the emotional insight and make them think about the negative consequences that can be avoided through prevention.

Print ads, posters, outdoor boards, free coupons, reminder cards and brochures in English and Spanish, various television spots were developed. In one of the commercials, the negative consequences of a family who loses a mother and a wife are stressed (typical negative frame). At the beginning of the spot, a black title on a light blue sky colour background appears, "Victims of Breast Cancer", making the viewers wait for women images. This do not happen. Happy children, young and older men, typical houses that bring to mind a good family are shown. In the background, it is possible to hear a lullaby sung by a child. Subsequently, the message is developed: "Breast cancer takes women away from their families far too soon. With an early detection through mammograms, you and your loved ones don't have to be victims. Call info line to see if you qualify for a free mammogram".






This is one of the picture we can see in "Breaking Barriers, Saving Lives" commercial. Victims of breast cancer are not just women, but also their children, husbands and relatives. Appealing to emotions and to fear of losing and applying the negative frame in the claim and images helped to increase the number of screened women.

 





In another spot, "What is a Woman?", the voice of Meryl Streep says: "You're a mother, a daughter, a sister, a wife. You'd rather do without than have your family do without. But how will your family do without you? If you're a woman over the age of 40, you're at greater risk for breast cancer. But early detection can save your life. Call infoline to see if you qualify for a free mammogram. Care enough to care for yourself. Call today[24]". Here, images of all ages women appear and again, the message asks them to think about what their families would do without them.

The campaign worked: 1.972 women were screened in nearly 3 months - 247% of goal - surpassing by 35% the number screened over the preceding 16 months. The campaign was awarded with a Gold Effie by the American Marketing Association in 1998[25].

What happened? The frame used is a negative goal framing effect. Past experiments showed that women were more apt to engage in breast self-examination (BSE) when presented with information stressing the negative consequences of not engaging BSE than when presented with information stressing the positive consequences of engaging BSE. An example of one of the positively-framed sentences they used is: "Research shows that women who do BSE have an increased chance of finding tumour in the early, more treatable stages of the disease"; the negative complement was: "Research shows that women who do not do BSE have a decreased chance of finding tumour in the early, more treatable stages of the disease[26]". The positive goal frame describes the good consequences in terms of the goal of obtaining the potential gains associated with doing BSE, whereas the negative goal frame describes the good consequences in terms of goal of avoiding the potential losses associated with not doing BSE. In terms of persuasive effectiveness, as we have seen also in the case of preventive mammograms, the negative framed encoding of the consequences is more powerful than the positively worded encoding; that is, people are more highly motivated to avoid a loss by doing a BSE or a mammogram than they are to obtain a gain by doing the same. This is because there is a negative bias in processing information, incorporated into the prospect theory with the notion that "losses loom larger than gains", wherein negative information has a systematically stronger impact on judgement than objectively equivalent positive information. Experts have suggested that humans must possess some system for quickly recognising and responding to the valence of stimuli and events, in particular when those stimuli or events are negative .

Another example of a positive use of the negative goal framing effects are the TV advertisements of TAC (Transport Accident Commission) Insurance. The TAC is a state owned enterprise of the Victorian Government (U.S.A.) with the primary objective of reducing the incidence and the cost of transport accidents. The economic and social costs associated with road accidents have made the issue of road safety a major concern for the community. Every day people are killed or injured as a result of transport accidents. Some suffer minor injuries that cause only temporary disruption to their lives; others are so seriously injured they will need to be supported for the rest of their lives.

The advertisements are quite shocking but, as TAC stated, to encourage motorists to improve their driving behaviour, it is vital that the approach adopted is both attention-grabbing and relevant. Market research indicates that the key to modifying drivers' behaviour is to portray the harsh consequences of road trauma, and leave motorists thinking: "This could happen to me if I drink/drive too fast/I do not have fastened seatbelts". For every issues, a slogan has been developed:

ISSUES
Contributing factor

SLOGANS - brand names

Drink Driving

If you drink, then drive, you're a bloody idiot.

Speed

Don't fool yourself, speed kills

Concentration



It's in your hands, concentrate or kill.

Fatigue

Take a break, fatigue kills.

Rural Areas

Country people die on country

roads.

Seatbelts

Belt up, or suffer the pain[28].


The advertisements I monitored was those related to speed and seatbelts: in the first one (target: young drivers), a girl that was driving too fast has had an accident and her best friend is seriously injured. Blood, wounds, tears, shock make the scene really impressive. The sentence of the driver, "She is my best friend and I have killed her" and the slogan related make the rest; in the second one (target: parents, adult drivers in general), a little child has been run over by a car. The driver is a man aware that he was driving to fast but nothing else can be done to save the life of the kid. The angry and desperate cries of the mother ("I wanna take him home") hit, above all, adults that drive and have their own sons and daughters. The third one is related to seatbelts (target: young drivers). Two boys and a girl are in a car and the girl unfastens her seatbelts to be closer to the boy sat in front. For a distraction, they have an accident and she breaks the window jumping out of the car. After a few second, we see the same girl, terribly disfigured and on a wheel chair, trying to stand up in a rehabilitation centre. The slogan closes the ad.

The negative goal framing effects are evident in both cases (increasing the perceived risk of being involved in an accident through the portrayal of crashes and their consequences): in the first two cases, the fear of drivers finding themselves responsible for the death or serious injury of another human being is the main focus. In the last spot, the consequences of not behaving in a certain manner can bring to terrible losses. Furthermore, what is important in this kind of PSA is to achieve a sort of "brand loyalty", making the ad fully credible. Any hint of even a slight detail being staged would allow viewers to switch off and distance themselves from the message. It is critically important that people watching the advertisements would spontaneously think that it could happen to them really easily. The framing effects has helped this identification making the campaign successful also thanks to the media utilised to hit drivers of different age, sex and driving experience. The objectives were achieved: drivers changed their attitudes. To see some results, please consult the appendix (1).









CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION


The world we live in today is extremely complex, fast-paces and information-laden. Globalisation, information technology, Internet, telecommunications, multinationals: these are just some of the words that characterise our actual environment. It is quite impossible thinking about a society as ours without any attempt of persuasion or compliance. Companies need to grow; people need to be smarter; governments have to secure their own stability and citizens' peace. A shared conviction is that persuasion could be a good solution in order to achieve the expected goals and objectives. To what extent is this possible? Which is the limit between ethical or non ethical? Is there a line that cannot be crossed? We have seen together how many mechanisms human beings have in order to take decisions; but we have also seen how persuaders can use them in their favour.

What is sure is that people, in order to evaluate situations in brief time, need shortcuts. Very often, in fact, when we make a decision, we do not use all the relevant available information. We use instead, only a single highly representative piece of the total (selective perception - selective retention). We can compare this shortcut to the automatic responding of animals whose elaborate behaviour patterns could be triggered by the presence of a lone stimulus feature: for example, a "cheep cheep" sound that activates the mother turkey maternal behaviour[29]. Of course, we have vastly more effective brain mechanism but we have also seen our capacity limitations. For instance, in deciding whether to say yes or no to a requester, we frequently pay attention to a single piece of the relevant information. All this leads to an unnerving insight: with the sophisticated mental apparatus we have used to build work eminence as a species, we have created such an environment than we must increasingly deal with it in the fashion of the animals we long ago transcended. To see a shortcut example, please consult the appendix (2). Many of us, however, are able to recognise some tentative of persuasion and to deal with them appropriately, avoiding shortcuts if not suitable. This does not allow persuaders persisting in their work. Ethics must be respected: salespeople should not sell to people with no money, for example, and advertisers should be aware of the whole audience when preparing an ad. During my review, I have dealt with advertising as the most visible persuasive act and I would like to focus on it again.

Advertising is capable of reaching a mass audience repeatedly and effectively informing customers about new products. In addition, it can explain changes in existing products, remind customers to buy and reinforce past purchase. In the meanwhile, advertising is constantly bombarded by criticism. It is accused of encouraging materialism and consumption, of stereotyping, of causing us to purchase items for which we have no need, of taking advantage of children, of manipulating our behaviour, using sex to sell, and generally contributing to the downfall of our social system. Some rules have already been imposed: deception, puffery, subliminal messages but also ads to children, about tobacco, alcohol, or gambling are controlled by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in U.S. and the Antitrust Authority for what Italy is concerned (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato - AGCM). To see some of the norms applied, please consult the appendix (3 - 3.1). Is it true what many consumers, experts or critics affirm? The ethics question is quite complex and difficult to deal with. Despite of the intervention of the different bodies in charge, many issues are not solved and uncountable persuasion's attempts are to be taken into consideration.

Personally, I believe that advertising is a fundamental component of the modern business and, consequently, it appeals to those elements that will lead the consumer to purchase the advertised product/service. What I would like to stress is what happens when various attempts of persuasion are addressed to people not able to distinguish the useful from the useless, real/unreal, truth/lie. Many of us are firmly convinced to be smart enough to avoid needless purchases but everybody, at least one time (and I want to be optimistic), has been convinced by a seller, a persuader or an advertisement to buy something completely useless. If this can happen to those people who consider themselves perspicacious, what about children, elderly, teenagers, disabled, depressed? Are they protected? Does our society provide them enough knowledge to avoid any risk? I do not think so. In this cases, the truth is not respected, the person is not respected. I am deeply convinced that if everyone could receive the right education, ads would be no longer a problem. But not every child or teen has had the chance to grow up in a family which has transmitted them the right elements to live in the actual society. Some have neither a family. It could be so easy, at this point, think that the problem is not the advertising: the problem lies in the people's backgrounds. But we are not able to deal with every single issue of every single human being. Thus, if we can not intervene in their family problems, we can try to not mislead or deceive them. Advertising and selling more in general must have their ethical values, too. In order to be consumer-oriented, an advertisement will have to be truthful and ethical. It should not mislead the consumers. If it so happens and word does get out, the credibility is lost and the communication becomes ineffective and rather futile. Advertisements truth should be viewed from the consumer's point of view and not in the narrow legalistic frame in order to find a loophole and to get out after an irresponsible action. Many times a clear line of demarcation between truth and lies is difficult to establish, but the advertisement is as much judged by its impact as by its acceptance by the consumers. I am strongly convinced that what it promises must be there in the performance of products; indecent and obscene scenes must be avoided; gambling must not be advertised as well as alcohol or tobacco; endorsers (celebrities in general) must be qualified by experience or training to make judgements and they must actually use the product. Falsehood can have a very detrimental effect on consumers.

In my opinion, spots such as Philips are not ethical because they appeal to fear, to strong emotions, to extreme negative consequences. This is quite unfair, moreover if they want to sell an iron. I am perplexed also for what PSA is concerned. We have seen that TAC Insurance commercials worked but I think that the images were really too impressive. It is important teaching and training also very young people about safety on the road but I do not think that for children this is the best approach. In this case, I would propose an attentive broadcasting planning in order to avoid children's view. What I have just asserted does not mean that I am against social marketing. I agree with massive attacks against drug, AIDS, children abuse or violence on women and I share with advertisers the same convictions: a rude image can say more than thousand words. Those who have limited capabilities to understand to inner meanings, however, must be protected. As advertising a social process capable to exert social influence, it must honour the traditional norms of social behaviour and should not affront the moral senses of a society. Finally, as advertising part of selling, the concepts can stretched to the general argument. The initial question was to understand the extent to which persuasion in selling is ethical or not: as we can deduce, it is ethical until it remains in the limits of the moral norms of a society, avoiding subtle and deceiving attempts of manipulation. It is ethical until the imperative of respect for the truth in all human relations is respected. As soon as complaints from families, men and women all over the world are addressed to advertisements, selling practices or when moral and cultural values are perceived as in danger, it means that the line has been crossed. As experiments are exploited in order to understand how to convince consumers, further experiments could take place to learn how to respect them, giving them what they need in the manner they prefer.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

- Dhar R., Simonson I. (1992). "The effect of the focus of comparison on consumer preferences". Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 29, pp.430-440.

- Kanehman D., Tversky A. (1984). "Choices, values and frames". American Psychologist, Vol. 39/4, pp. 341-350.

- Innocenti M. (2000). Influence at work. 3rd Year Project, European School of Economics, Rome, page 15.

- Levin, I.P., Gaeth G. J. (1988). "How consumers are affected by the framing of an attribute information before and after consuming the product". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15/3, pp.374-378.

- Levin I., Gaeth G., Schreiber J., Lauriola M. "A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences and independence of types of effects". In press.

- Meyerovitz, B. E., Chaiken, S. (1987). "The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behaviour". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 52, pp. 517-522.

- Payne, J.W., Bettman J.R., Johnson, E. J. (1992). "Behavioural Decision Research: A Constructive Processing Perspective". Annual review of Psychology, Vol. 43, pp. 87-131.

- Shiv B., Edell J. A., Payne J. W. (1997). "Factors Affecting the Impact of Negatively and Positively Framed Ad Messages". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, page 285, 289.

- Simonson I. (1992). "The influence of anticipating regret and responsibility on purchase decisions". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19/1, pp.105-118.

- Simonson, I., Tversky A. (1992). "Choice in the context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion". Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.29, pp.281-295.

- Simonson I., Winer R. S. (1992). "The influence of purchase quantity and display format on consumer preferences for variety". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19/1, pp. 133-138.

- Simonson, I. (1991). "The effect of buying decisions on consumers' assessments of their tastes". Marketing Letters, Vol. 2/1, pp. 5-14.

- Simonson I., (1990). "The effect of purchase quantity and timing on variety-seeking behaviour". Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, pp. 150-162.

Thaler R. H. (1985). "Mental accounting and consumer choice". Marketing Science, Vol. 4, pp.199-214.

Wells W., Burnett J., Moriarty S. (2000). Advertising: Principles and Practice. Upple Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 5th Edition; page 6, 33, 62-64.


INTERNET SITES CONSULTED

- https://advertising.miningco.com/careers/advertising/cs/ethicsinads/

https://advertising.utexas.edu/world/critic.html

- https://www.agcm.it/

- https://www.cronin-co.com/victims.stm

https://dodd.senate.gov/features/breast_cancer/breast_cancer.htm

- https://www.effie.org/usa.htm

- https://www.freedomofmind.com

- https://www.ftc.gov

- https://www.tac.vic.gov.au


OTHER MATERIALS CONSULTED

- Cateora P. R., Graham J. L. (1999). International Marketing. Mc Graw Hill, 10th Edition.

- Homer P.M., Yoon S. (1992). "Message Framing and the Interrelationships Among Ad-based Feelings, Affect, and Cognition". Journal of Advertising, Vol. 21/1.

- Moessinger P. (2000). "Sociology and Social Psychology" course. Sociology Department, Geneva University, Winter session (notes).

- Quigg B., Wisner B. (1998). Selling the Right Way. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall.






Payne, J.W., Bettman J.R., Johnson, E. J. (1992). "Behavioural Decision Research: A Constructive Processing Perspective". Annual review of Psychology Vol. 43, pp. 87-131.

Simonson, I., Tversky A. (1992). "Choice in the context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion". Journal of Marketing Research Vol.29, pp.281-295.

Simonson, I. (1991). "The effect of buying decisions on consumers' assessments of their tastes". Marketing Letters, 2/1, pp. 5-14.

Dhar R., Simonson I. (1992). "The effect of the focus of comparison on consumer preferences". Journal of Marketing Research,Vol. 29, pp.430-440.

Simonson I. (1992). "The influence of anticipating regret and responsibility on purchase decisions". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19/1, pp.105-118.

Levin, I.P., Gaeth G. J. (1988). "How consumers are affected by the framing of an attribute information before and after consuming the product". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15/3, pp.374-378.

Kanehman D., Tversky A. (1984). "Choices, values and frames". American Psychologist, Vol. 39/4, pp. 341-350.

Thaler R. H. (1985). "Mental accounting and consumer choice". Marketing Science, Vol. 4, pp.199-214.

Simonson I. (1990). "The effect of purchase quantity and timing on variety-seeking behaviour". Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, pp. 150-162.

Simonson I., Winer R. S. (1992) "The influence of purchase quantity and display format on consumer preferences for variety". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19/1, pp. 133-138.

Levin I., Gaeth G., Schreiber J., Lauriola M. "A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences and independence of types of effects". In press.

Levin I., Gaeth G., Schreiber J., Lauriola M. "A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences and independence of types of effects". In press.


Cited in Wells W., Burnett J., Moriarty S. (2000). Advertising: Principles and Practice. Upple Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 5th Edition.

Wells W., Burnett J., Moriarty S. (2000). Advertising: Principles and Practice. Upple Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 5th Edition; page 6.

Wells W., Burnett J., Moriarty S. (2000). Advertising: Principles and Practice. Upple Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 5th Edition; page 63-64.





Shiv B., Edell Julie A., Payne John W. (1997). "Factors Affecting the Impact of Negatively and Positively Framed Ad Messages". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, page 285.

Shiv B., Edell Julie A., Payne John W. (1997). "Factors Affecting the Impact of Negatively and Positively Framed Ad Messages". Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, page 289.

Wells W., Burnett J., Moriarty S. (2000). Advertising: Principles and Practice. Upple Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 5th Edition; page 33.

Internet: https://dodd.senate.gov/features/breast_cancer/breast_cancer.htm


The image is taken from the web site https://www.cronin-co.com/victims.stm

Internet: https://www.effie.org/usa.htm

Internet: https://www.effie.org/usa.htm

Meyerovitz, B. E., Chaiken, S. (1987). "The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behaviour". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 52, pp. 517-522.

27 Levin I., Gaeth G., Schreiber J., Lauriola M. "A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences and independence of types of effects". In press.





Innocenti M. (2000). Influence at work. 3rd year project, European School of Economics, Rome, page 15.






Privacy




Articolo informazione


Hits: 6432
Apprezzato: scheda appunto

Commentare questo articolo:

Non sei registrato
Devi essere registrato per commentare

ISCRIVITI



Copiare il codice

nella pagina web del tuo sito.


Copyright InfTub.com 2024