Product Placement
PRODUCT PLACEMENTS
The Impact of Placement Type and Repetition on Attitude
Pamela Miles Homer
ABSTRACT: The global market for product placement, the practice in which firms pay to place branded products (e.g., brand name/logo, package, signage, other trademarks) in the content of mass media programming, has exploded. A pair of studies test two potential moderating factors that may help account for the lack of attitude change reported in past experimental studies of placement effects. Specifically, this paper examines the effects of repetition of branded product placements in television and movies, comparing those that are subtle/“not in your face” with those that are more prominent/obvious. Findings suggest that the type of placement (subtle/prominent) and repetition (low/moderate) interact to impact brand- and placement-related judgments. Specifically, repetition of prominent placements for known brands has a negative impact on brand attitude. For subtle cases of product placement, however, consumer attitudes are relatively positive and moderate levels of repetition have little incremental impact. In addition, findings suggest that studios ought to evaluate placement options carefully, as repetition of prominent placements may lead to reduced affect for their productions, thereby fueling a decline in their audiences. Theoretical and practical implications are offered.
The global market for product placement, the practice in which firms pay to place branded products (e.g., brand name/logo, package, signage, other trademarks) in the content of mass media programming, exploded to an estimated $7.5 billion in 2006 and is forecasted to reach $14 billion by 2010 (Graser and Stanley 2006). Product placement is no longer considered a novel marketing tactic; rather, it has now reached “celebrity status” as a media form as advertisers seek more effective means of influencing consumers’ attitudes in today’s oversaturated and fragmented advertising/marketing environment. Not
The Impact of Placement Type and Repetition on Attitude
Pamela Miles Homer
ABSTRACT: The global market for product placement, the practice in which firms pay to place branded products (e.g., brand name/logo, package, signage, other trademarks) in the content of mass media programming, has exploded. A pair of studies test two potential moderating factors that may help account for the lack of attitude change reported in past experimental studies of placement effects. Specifically, this paper examines the effects of repetition of branded product placements in television and movies, comparing those that are subtle/“not in your face” with those that are more prominent/obvious. Findings suggest that the type of placement (subtle/prominent) and repetition (low/moderate) interact to impact brand- and placement-related judgments. Specifically, repetition of prominent placements for known brands has a negative impact on brand attitude. For subtle cases of product placement, however, consumer attitudes are relatively positive and moderate levels of repetition have little incremental impact. In addition, findings suggest that studios ought to evaluate placement options carefully, as repetition of prominent placements may lead to reduced affect for their productions, thereby fueling a decline in their audiences. Theoretical and practical implications are offered.
The global market for product placement, the practice in which firms pay to place branded products (e.g., brand name/logo, package, signage, other trademarks) in the content of mass media programming, exploded to an estimated $7.5 billion in 2006 and is forecasted to reach $14 billion by 2010 (Graser and Stanley 2006). Product placement is no longer considered a novel marketing tactic; rather, it has now reached “celebrity status” as a media form as advertisers seek more effective means of influencing consumers’ attitudes in today’s oversaturated and fragmented advertising/marketing environment. Not
References: Anand, Punam, and Brian Sternthal (1990), “Ease of Message Processing as a Moderator of Repetition Effects in Advertising,” Journal of Marketing Research, 27 (August), 345–353. Andreoli, Virginia, and Stephen Worchel (1978), “Effects of Media, Communicator, and Message Position on Attitude Atkinson, Claire (2003), “Merger of Advertising and Content Worries Consumers,” Advertising Age, 74 (1), 1–2. Auty, Susan, and Charlie Lewis (2004), “Exploring Children’s Choice: The Reminder Effect of Product Placement,” Psychology and Marketing, 21 (September), 697–713. Babin, Laurie A., and Sheri Thompson Carder (1996a), “Advertising via the Box Office: Is Product Placement Effective?” Journal of Promotion Management, 3 (1/2), 31–52. ———, and ——— (1996b), “Viewers’ Recognition of Brands Placed Within a Film,” International Journal of Advertising, Balasubramanian, Siva K., James A. Karrh, and Hermant Patwardhan (2006), “Audience Response to Product Placements,” Journal of Advertising, 35 (Fall), 115–141. Batra, Rajeev, and Michael L. Ray (1986), “Affective Responses Mediating Acceptance of Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Belch, George E. (1982), “The Effects of Television Commercial Repetition on Cognitive Response and Message Acceptance,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 ( June), 56–66. Bensinger, Ken (2008), “Carmakers Stretch Mileage of Product Placement Deals,” Los Angeles Times ( June 14), C1, C2. Berlyne, Donald E. (1970), “Novelty, Complexity, and Hedonic Value,” Perception and Psychophysics, 8 (November), 279–286. Cacioppo, John T., and Richard E. Petty (1979), “Effects of Message Repetition and Position on Cognitive Response, Recall, and Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Calder, Bobby J., and Brian Sternthal (1980), “Television Commercial Wearout: An Information Processing View,” Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (May), 173–186. Campbell, Margaret C., and Kevin Lane Keller (2003), “Brand Familiarity and Advertising Repetition Effects,” Journal of Chaiken, Shelly, and Alice H. Eagly (1976), “Communication Modality as a Determinant of Message Persuasiveness and ———, and ——— (1983), “Communication Modality as a Determinant of Persuasion: The Role of Communicator Childers, Terry L., and Michael J. Houston (1984), “Conditions for a Picture-Superiority Effect on Consumer Memory,” Cox, Dena S., and Anthony D. Cox (1988), “What Does Familiarity Breed? Complexity as a Moderator of Repetition Effects in Advertisement Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, D’Astous, Alain, and Francis Chartier (2000), “A Study of Factors Affecting Consumer Evaluations and Memory of Product ———, and Nathalie Séguin (1999), “Consumer Reactions to Product Placement Strategies in Television Sponsorship,” Duncan, David B. (1955), “Multiple Range and Multiple F Tests,” Biometrics, 11, 1– 42. Fall 2009 Ephron, Erwin (2003), “The Paradox of Product Placement,” Finn, Adam (1988), “Print Ad Recognition Scores: An Information Processing Perspective,” Journal of Marketing Research, 25 (May), 168–177. Gould, Stephen J., Pola B. Gupta, and Sonja Grabner-Kräuter (2000), “Product Placements in Movies: A Cross-Cultural Graser, Marc, and T. I. Stanley (2006), “Study: Placement to Surge 25% in ’06,” Advertising Age, 77 (35), 6. Gupta, Pola B., and Stephen Gould (1997), “Consumers’ Perceptions of the Ethics and Acceptability of Product Placements in Movies: Product Category and Individual Differences,” ———, and Kenneth R. Lord (1998), “Product Placement in Movies: The Effect of Prominence and Mode on Audience Hall, Emma (2007), “Product Placement Faces Wary Welcome in Britain,” Advertising Age, 78 (2), 27. Hirschman, Elizabeth C., and Craig J. Thompson (1997), “Why Media Matter: Toward a Richer Understanding of Consumers’ Relationships with Advertising and Mass Media,” Karrh, James A. (1998a), “Brand Placement: A Review,” Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 20 (2), 31–49. ——— (1998b), “Brand Placement: Impression Management Predictions of Audience Impact,” Ph.D Kisielius, Jolita, and Brian Sternthal (1984), “Detecting and Explaining Vividness Effects in Attitudinal Judgments,” ———, and ——— (1986), “Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (March), 418–431. Klink, Richard R., and Daniel C. Smith (2001), “Threats to External Validity of Brand Extension Research,” Journal of