Brand Placement in Context:
The effect of program type on brand attitude and brand memory
Master Thesis
Master’s programme Communication Science
Name: Esmee de Vries
Student number: 11200472
Graduate School of Communication
Supervisor: dr. S.C. Boerman
Submission date: 26-06-2017
Word count: 7497
Abstract
The fragmentation of traditional media and consumers’ resistance towards ads forces marketers to think outside the traditional commercial block. Brand placement solves the occurring problem of consumers skipping ads. This online experiment investigates the influence of brand placement in different program types on mood valence, brand attitude and brand memory (N = 86; between subject design: thriller vs. comedy). The results showed that (1) viewers who were exposed to a comedy showed a more positive mood than viewers who were exposed to a thriller; (2) brand placement in a thriller resulted in higher brand recall than brand placement in a comedy; (3) this effect was not mediated by mood valence.
Introduction
Remember Coca Cola’s figuring role in King Kong, being displayed on the billboard in Times Square? Or what about E.T. opening a can of coke in the midst of a scene? Coca Cola has claimed frequent roles in both blockbuster movies and cult classics throughout the years (Moye, 2014). Brand placement, the incorporation or integration of a brand or product in a cultural medium, is a communication technique which is increasingly used by advertisers (Karrh, McKee, & Pardun, 2003; Lehu & Bressoud, 2008; van Reijmersdal, Neijens, & Smit, 2007). Brand placement allows advertisers to expose viewers of a television program to their product in a more realistic setting compared to traditional advertising (Daugherty, 2005). For example, TV show Sex and The City is known for both visually and verbally promoting Manolo Blahnik shoes, and since Skyfall, Heineken has sought its connection with James Bond (Kolowich, 2015). Brand placement is a rapidly growing business. Global branded entertainment revenue hit $73.27 billion in 2014; double the amount generated by mobile advertising and marketing (PQ Media, 2015). A forecast of the upcoming five-year period from PQ Media shows accelerated annual growth – factors driving this trend are the fragmentation of traditional media, and consumers’ resistance toward ads. Watching TV shows on demand, digital recording, and streaming and downloading online, force marketers to think outside the traditional commercial block. Brand placement solves the occurring problem of consumers skipping ads.
The context in which a brand is placed affects the reception of the brand or product (Balasubramanian, Karrh, & Patwardhan, 2006; Russel, 2002; Heckler & Childers, 1992). Context characteristics such as the medium vehicle, consumer involvement, plot connection, message fit, and program type have shown to affect the attitude towards the brand, brand recall and behavioral intentions (Balasubramanian et al., 2006; van Reijmersdal, Smit, & Neijens, 2010). The current research is specifically directed at the program type (or: genre) in
which a brand is placed. Neijens and Smit (2003) already showed by means of a survey that brand placement is evaluated differently between different program types. Despite that we know that evaluations differ, we do not know whether people react differently on brand placement in different program types.
Various studies showed that context induced feelings can spillover to an advertised brand. Moorman, Neijens and Smit (2001) showed that the positive feelings that a context induces (whether being a TV program or a magazine), can be carried over to advertising blocks. Cho (2003) showed that positive evaluations of a medium spillover to advertisements. Based on these findings, I expect that the feelings that a program evokes can be carried over to the advertising in the program itself as well. In this study, the effect of a positive mood inducing program type on the attitude towards a placed brand is compared to the effect of a negative mood inducing program type on brand attitude. Brand attitude is defined as an “individual’s internal evaluation of the brand” (Mitchell & Olson, 1981, p. 318). The valence of the mood that is induced by a specific program type is expected to be carried over to the brand placement. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether mood valence mediates the relation between program type and attitude towards the placed brand.
A literature review by Balusabramanian et al. (2006) provides insight in the effects of program type induced mood on cognitive outcomes. They claim that a negative mood induced by a program type leads to more attention directed at the brand placement. The amount of attention a person has when processing a persuasive message is interesting in relation to the memory of a placed brand. I expect that the feelings induced by a certain program type affect the way brand placement is processed and remembered. For this reason, brand memory is treated as a dependent variable. According to the ‘mood as information’ theory (Schwarz, 1990), a negative mood signals a problem in the environment and activates a problem-solving mode of processing. More attention is directed at the source of the problem. This study aims
to investigate whether the valence of the mood induced by a program type explains the effect of program type on brand memory.
This project aims to provide marketers with valuable insight into the different effects of the program type in which a brand is placed on attitudes towards the advertised brand and memory of the brand. Bridging the gap in knowledge results in more substantiated strategic decisions regarding which genre to advertise in. This study will show that certain genres provide more effective contexts for brand placement than others. The following question is answered in this study: What is the effect of the program type wherein brand placement is included on brand attitude and brand memory? And is this effect mediated by mood valence?
Theoretical framework
This section presents a conceptual model that links the program type in which a brand is placed and the psychological processes that lead to memory and attitude change (see Figure 1).
Program type and mood valence
Central to the relation between program types and mood valence is the conceptualization of mood. Moods can be distinguished from emotions. In accordance with Aylesworth and Mackenzie (1998) moods can be distinguished as (1) general (not directed at any specific target), (2) reactive (as a response to the environment), and (3) acute or short lived. Emotions are distinguished as specific, active and chronic (Aylesworth and Mackenzie, 1998). Mood is therefore defined in terms of the valence of the mood (positive vs. negative), rather than in terms of arousal (high vs. low).
Mood management theory (Zillmann, 1998) proposes that individuals look for environments that provide opportunities for mood-altering experiences. According to this theory, individuals consume media entertainment intentionally in efforts to manage moods;
individuals arrange and rearrange their environments so as to minimize bad moods and maximize good moods (Zillmann, 1998). Individuals who experience watching a comedy as mood enhancing are likely to attribute the improved mood state to the environmental stimulus – in this case, the comedy. According to Zillmann (1998), mood management theory applies both to any type of communication (e.g., documentaries, dramas, sports, news, thrillers, dramas, comedies) as well as to selections within these types (e.g., choice of music, character interplay).
In this research, the effects of both a thriller and a comedy on mood valence are compared. A thriller, as the name implies, aims to thrill. In a program that is characterized as a thriller, the emphasis lies on action and danger (American Movie Classics Company, 2017a). In a comedy, the emphasis lies on humor. Comedies are in general airy, and often result in a happy ending. The main aim of a comedy is to entertain (American Movie Classics Company, 2017b). A comedy is therefore expected to result in a positive mood, whereas a thriller is expected to result in a negative mood (Strizhakova & Krcmar, 2007). Building on this, I expect the following:
H1: Consumers will report a more positive mood when they are exposed to a comedy than when they are exposed to a thriller.
Program type and brand attitude
Program type could influence the attitude towards a placed brand. Neijens and Smit (2003) demonstrated that brand placement is evaluated differently between different program types. According to Neijens and Smit (2003) brand placement in lifestyle programs is evaluated more positively than brand placement in either a soap or a police series. What we do not yet know is whether people react differently on brand placement in different program types. The effect of program types on the evaluation of a brand can be explained by the human associative memory (HAM) theory (Anderson & Bower, 1973). This theory states that
associations are connected through networks and can be changed or strengthened by presenting two stimuli together. In the case of brand placement, a brand is paired with a program. According to the findings of Russell (2002), the associations with the program and the associations with the brand become linked in this network of meaning.
The fact that brand placement lacks a clear sender who wishes to influence the viewer (Neijens & Smit, 2003) can explain the differences in attitude towards brand placement between program types. As brand placement is embedded in the editorial content, we can assume that the persuasive message is received less critically compared to traditional
advertising (Neijens & Smit, 2003). In the context of the differences between program types we can think in terms of the appropriateness of brand placement. Research on in-game advertising demonstrated that advertising can disrupt the flow of an experience (Mau, Silberer, & Constien, 2008). In the context of a thriller we can expect that brand placement could disrupt the suspense and therefore the flow of the program experience. Disruption of the flow experience could result in a less positive attitude towards the program.
The image of a program can spillover to an advertised brand. Moorman et al. (2001) for instance showed that the positive feelings that a context induces (whether being a TV program or a magazine), can be carried over to advertising blocks. In line with this finding, Cho (2003) proposed that positive evaluations of a medium spillover to advertisements, resulting in more positive attitudes and positive intentions towards the advertised brands. In accordance with these findings, van Reijmersdal et al. (2007) showed that the image of a program can spillover to the brand image of a placed brand. Building on these findings I expect that:
H2a: Consumers will report a more positive attitude towards a brand that is placed in a comedy than towards a brand that is placed in a thriller.
Mood valence and brand attitude
Mood congruence theory can help explain the effect of mood valence on brand attitude. This theory asserts that mood states influence evaluations, judgments and behaviors in mood congruent directions (Kamins, Marks, & Skinner, 1991). This means that positive moods are likely to influence evaluations in a positive way, whilst negative moods are likely to change evaluations in a negative way. The mood congruency effect has been demonstrated and explained by Bower (1981) in the context of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM; Cacioppo & Petty, 1986). The ELM describes and explains the process of attitude formation with regard to persuasive communication messages. According to Bower (1981), moods are encoded in memory, whereby each mood has a distinct memory node which collects events during which the mood is activated. The network that is formed by all interconnected nodes can be triggered by a variety of stimuli; for instance, the content of a program. Bower (1981) argues that once a mood state is activated, perceptions and processing are influenced.
Several studies support the above outlined theory. Forgas and Moylan (1987) showed that mood biases – initiated by the affective tone of a movie – influence judgments regarding expectations about the future, responsibility and guilt, and quality of life. Veitch and Griffitt (1976) showed that the valence of news broadcasts influence the affective responses of individuals in a congruent direction: individuals exposed to good news evaluated others more positively than individuals who were exposed to bad news.
The mood congruency theory suggests that a positive mood induced by a program activates positive memory nodes. These nodes should have an enhancing effect on the evaluation of a brand that is embedded in the editorial content of the program. The above explicated theoretical lens suggests the following relation:
H2b: Consumers who report a positive mood will report higher scores on brand attitude than consumers who report a negative mood.
The following hypothesis states the expected mediated effect:
H2c: The effect of program type on brand attitude is mediated by mood valence: comedy (vs. thriller) leads to a more positive mood which consequently leads to a more positive brand attitude.
Program type and brand memory
The relation between program type and brand memory can be understood from the
perspective of the flow concept (Novak & Hoffman, 1997). The model of flow was designed by Novak and Hoffman (1997) to understand flow within computer games. Schneider, Systems and Cornwell (2005, p. 326) define flow as “an enjoyable state of focused attention that appears to require, at the minimum, interest and an adequate level of challenge.” One of the major characteristics of flow is the individual’s total concentration (Ghani & Deshpande, 1994). This can be seen as a focusing of attention (Novak & Hoffman, 1997).
We can expect that the flow experience differs between program types. Where comedies are in general airy, thrillers aim to thrill (American Movie Classics Company, 2017a). Suspense is evoked by postponing the outcome of a story, which is merely the case in a thriller, in which the emphasis lies on action and danger (Hoeken & van Vliet, 2000). Therefore, it is suggested that the experience of a flow, characterized by a state of focused attention, is more common when consuming a thriller, than when consuming a comedy. In a state of flow experience we can expect that more attention is focused on the content. As brand placement is embedded within editorial content (in contrast to brand content which
accompanies editorial content), brand placement is expected to be better remembered in the context of a thriller. The following relation is suggested:
H3a: Consumers will report higher scores on brand memory when they are exposed to a thriller than when they are exposed to a comedy.
Mood valence and brand memory
The above explicated relation is presumably mediated by mood valence. The relation between mood valence and brand memory can be understood from the perspective that the ELM offers (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). According to the ELM there are two determinants which influence the route that is taken when processing a message, namely: motivation and ability. These two determinants shape the nature and amount of processing (or: the likelihood of elaboration) that occurs in response to a persuasive message.
A general finding in the literature on the application of ELM to consumer research is that negative moods increase central processing, whereas positive moods decrease central processing (see for a review Lien, 2001). Schwarz (1990) explains this by claiming that affective states inform a person about the state of his or her world. Aylesworth and MacKenzie (1998) add that a negative mood functions as a way to signal a problem. This results in switching to a mode of thinking that enables problem solving and the reduction of risk: a central route to persuasion. On the other hand, a positive mood informs a person that a situation is acceptable and a simpler evaluation of the message takes place: the peripheral route to persuasion.
The above explanation takes into account the source of the mood (Schwarz, 1990). When a negative mood functions as a way of signaling a problem, attention is directed at the cause of the problem. The activation of the central route to persuasion causes the individual to be highly attentive and motivated to comprehend and evaluate a persuasive message – the receiver engages in detailed cognitive processing. In this mode of central processing the individual thoroughly examines the content of the message and weighs its arguments.
Another explanation for the effect of mood valence on depth of processing is
motivational in nature. Bless, Bohmer, Schwarz and Strack (1990) claim that individuals in a negative mood state are motivated to change their mood. Bless et al. (1990) claim that central processing can distract a person from an unpleasant mood state. Central processing is not activated in a positive mood as this mode of critical thinking is threatening to the positive mood. As individuals in a positive mood are motivated to maintain their mood, they are motivated to process persuasive messages peripherally.
The literature suggests that a negative mood leads to a more thorough examination of the content of a message. Therefore, the following relation between mood valence and brand memory is expected:
H3b: Consumers who report a negative mood will report higher scores on brand memory than consumers who report a positive mood.
The following hypothesis states the expected mediated effect:
H3c: The effect of program type on brand memory is mediated by mood valence: thriller (vs. comedy) leads to a more negative mood which consequently leads to higher scores on brand memory.
Brand placement in Program Type (thriller vs. comedy)
Brand attitude
Brand memory Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Method Design
An online experiment with a one-factorial between subject design was conducted to test the hypotheses. The factor involved brand placements in two program types: comedy vs. thriller. Furthermore, the experiment had a between-subjects design to avoid carryover effects; each participant was assigned to one of the two conditions at random. In the experimental design, Mood Valence was treated as a mediator. This experiment enables investigating if Mood Valence (MV) has a mediating role in the relationship between Brand Placement in Program Type (PT) and Brand attitude (BA), and PT and Brand memory (BM). The data was collected over a period of 17 days, between May 3rd 2017 and May 19th 2017.
Sample
All participants were recruited via the researcher’s personal extended network. A link to the online survey was posted on Facebook, and spread to possible participants via e-mail. The participants have been sampled by means of a convenience sample. Via the ‘share’ functionality on Facebook participating subjects could also recruit subjects for the survey among their own Facebook friends. Thus, participants have been sampled by means of both a
Mood valence H1 H2a H3a H2b H3b
convenience sample and by snowball sampling. I have chosen for these two types of non-probability sampling due to time constraints and the scope of this research. Participants did not receive a compensation for taking part in the survey.
Participants
120 people agreed to participate in the study, of which 86 participants completed the questionnaire. Analyses where thus conducted over a final sample of N = 86 participants (comedy n = 43; thriller n = 43). In the final sample of 86 participants (29.1% male and 70.9% female) ages ranged between 21 to 74 years old (M = 39; SD = 17.40). Educational level was scored on an item with response categories ranging from “No education” (1) to “University Master” (7). 54.7% of the sample reported that they are undergraduate, 20.9% of the sample reported that they are graduate, 11.6% reported to have finished high school, 7.0% of the sample finished an intermediate vocational education, 3.5% of the sample finished middle school, and 2.3% of the sample finished lower vocational education. Current work situation was scored on an item with response categories ranging from “Employed” (1) to “Retired” (5). 40.7% of the sample reported that they are employed, 34.9% reported to be a student, 12.8% reported to be their own boss, 8.1% of the sample reported to be retired, and 3.5% of the sample reported to be unemployed. 94.2% of all participants originated from the Netherlands. 95.3% of the sample reported to be native Dutch speakers.
Procedure
An invitation to the online experiment was sent to possible participants, who were first asked to read the terms before taking part in the experiment. After participants confirmed their informed consent they were randomly assigned to one of the conditions. The experiment started with a short fragment from a TV program. This was either a fragment from a comedy show or from a thriller. Participants were informed that they would be asked questions about
the fragment afterwards and were informed from which TV program they were about to see a fragment. After the participants were exposed to the stimulus material, they were directed to a question block measuring mood valence. These questions were followed by questions
measuring brand recall, brand recognition and brand attitude respectively. The questionnaire continued with control questions regarding the placed brand: Coca Cola. These questions were followed up by control questions regarding liking of the TV show, liking of the program type, time spent watching TV shows and movies, and whether or not the fragment was fully understood as it was in English. These questions were followed by questions on demographic information. The survey was ended with a debrief in which the manipulation within the survey was explained and all participants were thanked for taking part in the experiment. Appendices A-D contain all mentioned parts of the survey.
Stimuli Manipulation
Brand Placement in Program Type was manipulated by using fragments of two different program types: a thriller (Stranger Things) and a comedy (Friends). It is expected that the fragment of Stranger Things induces a negative mood and that the fragment of Friends induces a positive mood. Both fragments were carefully selected with regard to the duration, prominence and the brand that was advertised as these factors are shown to be of influence on the perception of the placed brand (Balusabramanian et al., 2006). In both fragments the brand Coca Cola was prominently displayed. This brand was chosen as was expected that most people are familiar with the brand Coca Cola.
Positive Mood Inducing Program Type Description
Friends is a TV show about six friends who work and live in New York. This TV show is categorized as a ‘sitcom’: a situational comedy. In episode two of the fourth season
Ross Geller (David Schwimmer) and Rachel Green (Jennifer Aniston) have a confrontation with each other. Rachel mentions in a sarcastic manner that she has to read a product report of eight pages, and that she hopes she will not fall asleep. Ross responds in a witty way by saying “why, did you write it?”. Within the same scene, Ross tricks Rachel again when Rachel spots a note saying that a high school lover has called. Little did she know that ‘Chip Matthews’ did not call for her, but for her roommate Monica Geller (Courteney Cox). The interplay between Ross and Rachel makes this fragment humorous and positive mood inducing.
During the conversation between Ross and Rachel, Ross is holding a can of Coca Cola. Eventually, Ross takes a sip from the can. The screenshots in Figure 1 and 2 are taken from the fragment and display the prominence of the brand placement. The selected fragment had a total duration of 1 minute 34 seconds. The brand placement was in view for a total of 11 seconds.
Figure 2. Brand placement in Friends: Coca Cola.
Negative Mood Inducing Program Type Description
Stranger Things is a TV show centered around a girl with mystical powers and a sinister governmental organization which tries to take advantage of these powers. This TV show is categorized as a science-fiction thriller. In episode three of the first season of Stranger Things, main character Eleven (Millie Bobby Brown) has a flashback to Hawkins Laboratory, a facility in which experiments were performed on her. In this fragment Eleven is encouraged to use her telekinetic powers to crush a can of Coca Cola in an experimental setting. Moments later she finds herself in the same setting, but this time the object of her powers is a harmless cat. When she refuses to use her telekinetic powers to harm the cat, she is put in solitary confinement by Martin Brenner (Matthew Modine) the scientist in charge of the laboratory, whom she calls ‘Papa’. The interplay of the characters, the level of suspense and the creepy laboratory setting make this fragment very dark and negative mood inducing.
The screenshots in Figure 3 and 4 are taken from the fragment and display the
seconds. The brand placement was in view for a total of 10 seconds.
Figure 3. Brand placement in Stranger Things: Coca Cola.
Figure 4. Brand placement in Stranger Things: Coca Cola.
Measurements Brand Memory
The measure for Brand memory consisted of both brand recognition and brand recall. Participants were first asked if they had seen a brand in the fragment (Nicholls, Roslow, &
Dublish, 1999). Participants could answer either yes or no, and if they recalled seeing a brand they were asked to note which brand they had seen. The measure for brand recall therefore was a dichotomous variable equal to one if the participants answered that they had seen a brand and reported that it was Coca Cola, and zero if they answered otherwise. 53.5% of all participants recalled the brand Coca Cola; 46.5% did not recall the placed brand.
After that, participants were asked to indicate which brand they had seen in the
fragment choosing from a list of brands in the same product category: soda. The list consisted of the following items: ‘Pepsi’, ‘Coca Cola’, ‘Fanta’, ‘Sprite’, ‘7 Up’, ‘Dr. Pepper’, ‘Redbull’, and ‘I did not see any of these brand’. This measure for brand recognition was a dichotomous variable equal to one if the participants checked the right brand (Coca Cola) in the list
provided, and zero if they answered otherwise (Russell, 2002). 69.8% of all participants recognized Coca Cola as the brand that they had seen in the fragment; 30.2% did not recognize Coca Cola as the placed brand.
Brand attitude
The measure for Brand attitude consisted of three items using a 7-point Likert-type scale. Participants were asked to indicate how they evaluate the brand Coca Cola. The following three items were used: bad – good, dislike – like, and negative – positive. The first two items are adopted from a scale from Berger & Mitchell (1989) who found their scale to have high internal reliability with all Cronbach’s alphas in the .90 range. The third item was added in the face of the definition of the construct and its correspondence with the
operationalization of the measurement (Bergkvist & Langner, 2017). Taken into consideration that attitude is evaluative in nature (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993) and that the semantic differential item positive – negative is used in more than 40% of all advertising research published
attitude scale.
A principal component analysis was conducted for the Brand Attitude scale.
Furthermore, a reliability analysis was conducted. The brand attitude scale consisting of three items resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of ( = .956; M = 13.41; SD = 5.50). The brand attitude scale consisting of two items (Bad – Good and Negative – Positive) resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of .96 (Eigenvalue = 2.76; explained variance = 91,87%; = .96; M = 4.46; SD = 1.91). Overall brand attitude scores for individual participants were computed by averaging across the two items. Higher scores on the brand attitude scale indicate a more positive evaluation of the brand Coca Cola.
Mood Valence
To measure the valence of the mood of the participants I decided the use the pleasure-arousal-dominance (PAD) scale constructed by Mehrabian and Russell (1974). This scale demonstrated adequate reliability in many empirical studies (Floyd, 1997; Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Robert & John, 1982). Just as in the experiment conducted by Aylesworth and MacKenzie (1998) mood valence was measured by using the pleasure component of this scale. This component consists of six semantic differential items.
Participants were asked to indicate their mood using a seven-point Likert-type scale. The scale consisted of the following six items: melancholic – contended, unsatisfied – satisfied, bored – relaxed, unhappy – happy, annoyed – pleased, and despairing – hopeful. A principal component analysis was conducted for the Mood Valence scale. The first
component explained a relatively large amount of variance, whereas the subsequent
component explained only a small amount of variance (Eigenvalue = 3.70; explained variance = 61.72%). As the factors were allowed to be correlated, direct Oblimin rotation was applied. Two components were extracted from the scale. There was only one item (Melancholic –
Contended) that did not load on the first component (.01). The principal component analysis suggested that this item should be removed from the scale as it did not represent the latent variable.
Furthermore, a reliability analysis was conducted. The Mood Valence scale consisting of six items resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of .84 (M = 23.78; SD = 6.98). Excluding the first item (Melancholic – Contended) resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of .91 (Eigenvalue = 3.70; explained variance = 74.07%; = .91). Overall Mood Valence scores for individual
participants were computed by averaging across the five items, resulting in a minimum score of 1 and a maximum score of 6.40 (M = 3.97; SD = 1.36). Higher scores on the mood valence scale indicate a more positive mood.
Control Variables
To measure whether participants in both conditions differed on other variables which could affect the outcomes of the study, several covariates were included in the survey.
Participants were asked whether they know the brand Coca Cola. All participants indicated that they know the brand. Next, participants were asked how often they use Coca Cola. Response categories for this item ranged from “Never” (1) to “Once a day” (9). 24.4% of the sample reported to use Coca Cola less than once a month, 20.9% answered “once a month”, 16.3% said never to use Coca Cola, 12.8% of the sample reported to use Coca Cola less than once a year, 7% reported to use Coca Cola less than once a week, another 7% of the sample reported to use Coca Cola once a week, 5.8% reported to use Coca Cola once a year, 3.5% reported to use Coca Cola once a day, and 2.3% of the sample reported to use Coca Cola less than once a day.
Next, participants were asked to indicate whether or not they know the TV program from which they got to see a fragment. 54.7% knew the TV program they were exposed to; 45.3% did not. After that, participants were asked whether they had seen the fragment before.
20.9% of the participants answered “Yes”, 68.6% answered “No”, and 10.5% answered “I don’t know”. Thereafter, participants were asked to indicate their attitude towards the
fragment. Fragment liking was scored on two items using a 7-point Likert-type scale: negative – positive, and don’t like – like. The fragment liking scale consisting of these two items resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of .97 (M = 8.01; SD = 3.95). Overall Fragment liking scores were computer by averaging across both items (M = 4.01; SD = 1.97). This means that the sample was rather neutral with regard to liking the fragment. Subsequently, participants were asked to indicate their level of interest in four genres on a 7-point Likert-type scale: comedy (M = 5.52; SD = 1.35), action (M = 4.91; SD = 1.58), thriller (M = 5.21; SD = 1.67) and drama (M = 5.10; SD = 1.53). After that, participants were asked to indicate how much time they spent watching TV programs and movies on average a week. Response categories for this item ranged from “0-4 hour” (1) to “12 hours or more” (4). The sample on average watches around 4 to 8 hours of TV shows and/or movies a week (M = 2.16; SD = 1.04). Lastly, participants were asked if they had understood the fragment, as it was in English. 93% of all participants answered “Yes” – 7% of all participants answered “No”. All covariates were part of a randomization check on which is reported in the next chapter.
Demographic information
The survey ended by asking the participants’ demographic information, being: age, gender, nationality, native language, level of education and current work situation.
Results Manipulation check
To check whether the stimuli were perceived as intended, a manipulation check item was included in the survey. Participants were asked to indicate from which genre they had
seen a short fragment, choosing from “Action” (1), “Thriller” (2), “Drama” (3), and “Comedy” (4). A chi-square test of independence was performed, x2
(3, N = 86) = 82.33, p = <.001. For the Stranger Things condition 74.4% indicated they had seen a fragment from a thriller, and 25.6% from a drama. For the Friends condition 95.3% indicated they had seen a fragment from a comedy, 2.3% from an action, and 2.3% from a drama. These results show that perceived program type differed significantly between both conditions; Stranger Things was mainly perceived as a thriller and Friends was mainly perceived as a comedy.
Randomization check
To check whether participants were evenly distributed over the conditions on relevant covariates, an independent T-Test with the covariates age, brand usage, fragment liking, liking of program type comedy, and liking of program type thriller as test variables was conducted. For the variables gender, TV show familiarity, fragment familiarity, time spent watching series, and understanding of English, a Chi-square was conducted. For all of the following variables the distribution of participants did not differ significantly between
conditions: Gender x2(1, N = 86) = 0.06, p = .812; age t(84) = 0.37, p = .273 (Stranger Things M = 40.65; SD = 17.45; Friends M = 36.51; SD = 17.30), liking of program type t(84) = 2.08, p = .704 (Stranger Things M = 5.15; SD = 0.81; Friends M = 5.22; SD = 0.89), brand usage t(84) = 0.61, p = .082 (Stranger Things M = 3.62; SD = 1.89; Friends M = 4.42; SD = 2.26), time spent watching series x2(1, N = 86) = 0.00, p = >.99, and understanding of English x2(1, N = 86) = 2.27, p = .518. For the following variables there was a significant difference in the scores between both conditions: Fragment liking t(84) = -5.65, p = <.001 (Stranger Things M = 2.98; SD = 1.63; Friends M = 5.03; SD = 1.75), TV show familiarity x2(1, N = 86) = 29.32, p = <.001, and fragment familiarity x2(2, N = 86) = 11.27, p = .004. These three variables were used as a covariate in the analyses for testing the hypotheses.
Main analyses
To test the difference in brand memory scores between both conditions, a chi-square test of independence was performed. Brand memory differed significantly between the groups x2(1, N = 86) = 18.70, p = <.001. Hypothesis 3a proposed that consumers who are exposed to brand placement in a thriller will report higher brand memory scores than consumers who are exposed to brand placement in a comedy. Compared to brand placement in a comedy, brand placement in a thriller was recalled more often. Therefore, hypothesis 3a is confirmed. To test the difference in mood valence and brand attitude between both variants, an independent t-test was conducted. Mood valence differed significantly between the groups t(84) = -7.46, p = <.001. Compared to a thriller, the comedy led to higher scores on the mood valence scale (b = 0.92, boot SE = 0.23, p < .001). Hypothesis 1 proposed that consumers who are exposed to a comedy will report a more positive mood than consumers who are exposed to a thriller. As higher scores on the mood valence scale indicate a more positive mood,
hypothesis 1 is supported. This means that brand placement in different program types
significantly affects consumers’ mood valence. The covariate fragment liking showed to be of significant influence on mood valence too (b = .44, boot SE = .06, p <.001).
Brand attitude did not differ significantly between groups t(84) = 0.08, p = .226 (Stranger Things M = 4.21; SD = 1.86; Friends M = 4.71; SD = 1.95). Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for all variables for both conditions.
TABLE 1
Descriptive Statistics for the Experimental Conditions
Variable Thriller Comedy
Brand Attitude 4.21 (1.86)a 4.71 (1.95)a
Brand Memory 76.7%a 30.2%b
Mood Valence 3.11 (0.98)a 4.82 (1.13)b
Note. Brand memory represents the percentage of participants who recalled the brand; Brand attitude and mood valence represent mean and standard deviation and are scaled from 1 to 7. N = 86: thriller n = 43, comedy n = 43.
a,b Means with a different superscript in the same row differ significantly at p < .05.
To test the effects of the program type in which a brand was placed on the memory of the brand and the attitude towards the brand mediated by mood valence, Hayes’ PROCESS macro was used (Hayes, 2009). This framework estimates the direct and indirect effect in mediator models, using an ordinary least squares or logistic regression based path. All analyses used 10.000 bootstrap samples to estimate the bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals (BCBCIs). To test the differences between the two program types, two separate mediation analyses were conducted. In the first mediation analysis Brand attitude was used as a dependent variable; in the second mediation analysis Brand memory served as dependent variable. In both analyses Brand placement in program type served as independent variable (thriller vs. comedy), and mood valence functioned as mediator. Fragment liking, TV show familiarity and fragment familiarity were used as covariates. All results are reported in Figure 5.
The analyses with brand attitude as dependent variable did not show any significant effects. Hypothesis 2a proposed that consumers who are exposed to brand placement in a comedy will report a more positive attitude towards the brand than when it is placed in a
Brand placement in Program Type (thriller vs. comedy)
Brand attitude thriller. The results show that there is no significant direct effect for program type on brand attitude (b = -0.30, boot SE = 0.54, p = .582). The total effect for program type on brand attitude is also insignificant (b = -0.58, boot SE = 0.49, p = .243). This means that the
program type in which a brand is placed does not significantly affect the attitude towards the brand. Therefore, hypothesis 2a must be rejected. The results show that fragment liking significantly influenced brand attitude (b = 0.37, boot SE = 0.17, p = .030).
Hypothesis 2b proposed that consumers who report a positive mood will report higher scores on brand attitude than consumers who report a negative mood. The results show that there is no significant effect measured for mood valence on brand attitude (b = -0.31, boot SE = 0.24, p = .209). This means that the valence of the mood does not significantly affect the attitude towards the placed brand. Therefore, hypothesis 2b must be rejected.
Hypothesis 2c proposed that the effect of program type on brand attitude is mediated by mood valence. Compared to brand placement in a comedy, brand placement in a thriller did not indirectly result in less favorable brand attitudes (indirect effect = -0.28, boot SE = 0.26, 95% BCBCI [-.97, .12]). Hypothesis 2c must be rejected.
Figure 5. Indirect effect of brand placement program types on brand attitude via mood valence. Unstandardized b coefficients (with boot SE between parentheses); the program type thriller is used as reference category; controlled for fragment liking, TV show familiarity, and fragment familiarity; Indirect effect = -0.28 (0.26) [-.968, .118]. BCBCI = bias-corrected 10.000 bootstrap confidence interval; N = 86. ***p < .001. 0.92 (0.23)*** Mood valence Total effect = -0.06 (0.49) Direct effect = -0.30 (0.54) -0.31 (0.24)
For the analysis in which brand memory functioned as dependent variable, brand recall was selected as the appropriate measurement. In comparison to brand recognition, brand recall tests whether participants can actually freely recall a placed brand. All results for this analysis are reported in Figure 6.
As brand recall was a dichotomous variable, the total effect of program type on brand memory without controlling for mood valence was analyzed by means of a logistic regression. A logistic regression was performed to ascertain the effects of program type on the likelihood that participants recall the brand placement. The logistic regression model was statistically significant, x2(5) = 21.73, p < .001. The model explained 29.8% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in brand recall and correctly classified 73.3% of cases. The odds ratio for the program type coefficient is -2.31 with a 95% confidence interval of [.02, .43]. This suggests that those who were exposed to a comedy are 2.3 times less likely to recall brand placement than those who were exposed to a thriller. The mediation analysis confirms the above model by showing a significant direct effect. Compared to brand placement in a comedy, brand placement in a thriller was recalled more often (b = -2.31, boot SE = 0.75, p = .002).
Hypothesis 3b proposed that consumers who report a negative mood will report higher scores on brand memory than consumers who report a positive mood. The results show no significant effect of mood valence on brand memory (b = -0.31, boot SE = 0.33, p = .348), thus hypothesis 3b must be rejected.
Hypothesis 3c proposed that mood valence mediates the relation between program type and memory. As the analysis with brand memory demonstrated no significant indirect effect (Indirect effect = -0.29, boot SE = 0.46, 95% BCBCI [-1.55, .36]), hypothesis 3c must be rejected.
Brand placement in Program Type (thriller vs. comedy)
Brand memory
Figure 6. Indirect effect of brand placement program types on brand memory via mood valence. Unstandardized b coefficients (with boot SE between parentheses); the program type thriller is used as reference category; controlled for fragment liking, TV show familiarity, and fragment familiarity; Indirect effect = -0.29 (0.45) [-1.549, .363]. BCBCI = bias-corrected 10.000 bootstrap confidence interval; N = 86.
**p < .01; ***p < .001.
Conclusion & Discussion
The fragmentation of traditional media and consumers’ resistance towards ads forces marketers to think outside the traditional commercial block. Brand placement seems an
adequate solution to consumers skipping ads. Despite that we know that evaluations differ, we do not know whether people react differently on brand placement in different program types. The present study explores the reaction of consumers on brand placement in different
program types. Based on our results we can draw threevaluable conclusions.
First, this study showed that viewing a different program type influences the valence of an individuals’ mood. According to mood management theory (Zillmann, 1998)
individuals consume media entertainment intentionally in efforts to manage moods. Although individuals may experience relieve from a bad mood or enhancement of a good mood
depending on whatever is associated with relief or gratification, the selected stimulus
materials had the anticipated effect. Viewers who were exposed to a comedy showed a more positive mood than viewers who were exposed to a thriller. Apart from that, differences in
0.92 (0.23)***
Mood valence
-0.31 (0.33)
mood valence were also partly explained by whether or not an individual liked the presented fragment.
Second, brand evaluations did not differ between program types. It was expected that in the context of a thriller brand placement could disrupt the flow of the experience (Mau et al., 2008). Disruption of the flow experience could result in less positive attitudes towards the program, which could spillover to the advertised brand (Moorman et al., 2001; Cho, 2003; van Reijmersdal et al., 2007). In the current study however, associations with a certain program type were not connected to the advertised brand (Anderson & Bower, 1973). Therefore, we can conclude that in the context of a thriller and a comedy, program type induced feelings do not spillover to an advertised brand.
Third, with regard to brand memory, the results demonstrate that being exposed to brand placement in a thriller results in higher brand recall compared to being exposed to brand placement in a comedy. This provides support for the idea that in the context of a thriller, the experience of a flow, characterized by a state of focused attention is more common than when consuming a comedy (Novak & Hoffman, 1997). The ‘mood as information’ theory (Schwarz, 1990) claims that affective states inform a person about the state of his or her world. This theory therefore suggested that individuals in a negative mood would recall and advertised brand more often. As individuals in a negative mood did not recall the advertised brand more often, mood valence does not explain the effect of program type on brand memory.
To put the findings of the current study in perspective the methodological choices that have been made need to be ascertained. The selection of stimulus material was focused on finding fragments which equally displayed the brand in terms of duration and prominence. However, when looking at the content the two fragments differed on many more points. Factors such as for instance plot connection congruency and the modality of the brand
placement could also be of influence (Russell, 2002). The TV program Friends showed to be more liked and more familiar than Stranger Things. Whether or not a participant liked the fragment influenced both mood valence and brand attitude. Considering the above, a follow up experiment should include multiple videos from multiple program types (e.g. five thriller fragments).
Furthermore, in the current experimental setup participants viewed the stimulus material online, therefore a lot of external factors (e.g. location, noise, time) could have been of influence on the participants’ moods. A laboratory setting could assure a higher external validity. Notwithstanding, the current experimental setup provided a high ecological validity; the fragmentation of traditional media is partly driven by the fact that TV programs are nowadays widely consumed online. Conducting the experiment online therefore considers the development of brand placement in TV programs altogether.
With regard to future research the results of the current study give a clear direction. Contradicting theory, mood valence did not explain the effect of program type on brand memory. Future research should consider persuasion knowledge as either a mediator or a moderator. Research has shown that the level of persuasion knowledge of an individual or whether or not persuasion knowledge is activated can influence both brand recall and brand evaluations (Friestad & Wright, 1994; Matthes, Schemer, & Wirth, 2007; Boerman, van Reijemersdal, & Neijens, 2012). Research on in-game advertising demonstrated that advertising can disrupt the flow of an experience (Mau, Silberer, & Constien, 2008). In the context of the differences between program types we can think in terms of the appropriateness of brand placement. In the context of a thriller we can expect that brand placement could disrupt the suspense and therefore the flow of the program. If the flow experience is disrupted we can expect that persuasion knowledge is activated. Building on this we can expect that the effect of program type on brand memory is influenced or explained by persuasion knowledge.
The current study has some important implications for marketers. Firstly, this study demonstrated that brand placement in different program types results in different moods. If and how these moods affect the reception and evaluation of a brand is not yet clear, but the findings of this study reaffirm the importance of taking the advertising context in careful consideration. Secondly, we did see an increase in brand recall for brand placement in a thriller, compared to a comedy. Thus, marketers who want to create awareness could perhaps choose to advertise in a thriller instead of a comedy. Thirdly, considering the limitations, if you want to influence the evaluation of a brand it does not matter in which program type it is placed.
Literature
American Movies Classics Company. (2017a). Thriller – Suspense films. Retrieved from: http://www.filmsite.org/thrillerfilms3.html.
American Movies Classics Company. (2017b). Comedy films. Retrieved from: http://www.filmsite.org/comedyfilms.html.
Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1973). Human associative memory. New York: Halstead. Aylesworth, A. B., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1998). Context is key: The effect of
program-induced mood on thoughts about the ad. Journal of Advertising, 27(2), 17-31.
http://dx.doi.org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2048/10.1080/00913367.1998.10673550
Balasubramanian, S. K., Karrh, J. A., & Patwardhan, H. (2006). Audience response to product placements: An integrative framework and future research agenda. Journal of
advertising, 35(3), 115-141. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2048/10.2753/JOA0091-3367350308
Bellizzi, J. A., & Hite, R. E. (1992). Environmental color, consumer feelings, and purchase likelihood.Psychology & marketing,9(5), 347-363. DOI: 10.1002/mar.4220090502
Berger, I. E., & Mitchell, A. A. (1989). The effect of advertising on attitude accessibility, attitude confidence, and the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(12), 269-279. https://doi.org/10.1086/209213
Bergkvist, L., & Langner, T. (2017). Construct Measurement in Advertising Research. Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 129-140. DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2017.1281778
Bless, H., Bohner, G., Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1990). Mood and persuasion: A cognitive response analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(6), 331-45. Retrieved from: http://ub-madoc.bib.uni-mannheim.de/11323
Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36(2), 129-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.129
Cho, C.H. (2003). Factors influencing clicking of banner ads on the www. CyberPscyhology and Behaviour, 6(2), 201-15. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493103321640400
Daugherty, T. (2005). A comparison of consumers' responses to traditional advertising and
product placement strategies: implications for advertisers. Deparment of Marketing, 256.
Retrieved from: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/marketing_ideas/256
Eagly, A. H. & Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Floyd, M. F. (1997). Pleasure, arousal, and dominance: Exploring affective determinants of recreation satisfaction. Leisure Sciences, 19(2), 83-96.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01490409709512241
Forgas, J. P., & Moylan, S. (1987). After the movies: Transient mood and social judgments. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 13(4), 467-477. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167287134004
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of consumer research, 21(1), 1-31.
https://doi.org/10.1086/209380
Ghani, J. A., & Deshpande, S. P. (1994). Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human-computer interaction. Journal of Psychology, 123(4), pp. 381-391.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1994.9712742
Hayes, A. F. (2009). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White Paper].
http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf.
Heckler, S. E., & Childers, T. L. (1992). The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for
verbal and visual information: What is incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research, 18
(March), 475-492. https://doi.org/10.1086/209275
Hoeken, H., & van Vliet, M. (2000). Suspense, curiosity, and surprise: How discourse
structure influences the affective and cognitive processing of a story. Poetics, 27(4),
277-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-422X(99)00021-2
Kamins, M. A., Marks, L. J., & Skinner, D. (1991). Television commercial evaluation in the context of program induced mood: Congruency versus consistency effects. Journal of Advertising, 20(2), 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1991.10673209
Karrh, J. A., McKee, K. B., & Pardun, C. J. (2003). Practitioners' evolving views on product placement effectiveness. Journal of advertising research, 43(2), 138-149. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021849903030198
Kolowich, L. (2015, November 12). From Ray-Bans to Reese’s Pieces: 13 unforgettable examples of product placement [Blog post]. Retrieved from:
https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/product-placement-examples#sm.0001ul59cwbilewyvie1ypb2o4eis.
Lehu, J. M., & Bressoud, E. (2008). Effectiveness of brand placement: New insights about
viewers. Journal of Business Research, 61(10), 1083-1090.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.09.015
Lien, N. H. (2001). Elaboration likelihood model in consumer research: a review. Proceedings of the National Science Council, 11(4), 301-310. DOI: 10.1.1.197.7986
Matthes, J., Schemer, C., & Wirth, W. (2007). More than meets the eye: Investigating the hidden impact of brand placements in television magazines. International Journal of Advertising, 26(4), 477-503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2007.11073029
Mau, G., Silberer, G., & Constien, C. (2008). Communicating brands playfully: Effects of in-game advertising for familiar and unfamiliar brands. International Journal of
Advertising, 27(5), 827-851. http://dx.doi.org/10.2501/S0265048708080293
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (3), 318–32. DOI:
10.1353/asr.2000.0010
Moorman, M., Neijens, P. C., & Smit, E. G. (2001). The effect of program-involvement on commercial exposure and recall in a real-life setting. Amsterdam: The Amsterdam School of Communications Research.
Moye. (2014). Coke Red on the silver screen: Exploring the brand’s role in movies
[Blogpost]. Retrieved from: http://www.coca-colacompany.com/stories/coke-red-on-the-silver-screen-exploring-the-brands-role-in-movies.
Neijens, P. C., & E. G. Smit. (2003). Audience reactions towards non-spot advertising: Influence of viewer and program characteristics. In: F. Hansen, & L. Bech Christensen (Eds.), Branding and Advertising, pp. 266-283. Copenhagen: CBS Press.
Novak, T. P., & Hoffman, D. L. (1997). Measuring the flow experience among web users. Paper presented at the Interval Research Corporation. Retrieved from:
http://www2000.ogsm.vanderbilt.edu/
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
PQ Media. (2015). Global branded entertainment marketing forecast 2015-19 (6th edition). Retrieved from: http://www.pqmedia.com/gbemf-2015-2019.html.
Robert, D., & John, R. (1982). Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach. Journal of retailing, 58(1), 34-57. Retrieved from:
https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-retailing
Russell, C. A. (2002). Investigating the effectiveness of product placements in television
shows: The role of modality and plot connection congruence on brand memory and
attitude. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 306-318. https://doi.org/10.1086/344432
Schneider, L. P., Systems, B., & Cornwell, T. B. (2005). Cashing in on crashes via brand
placement in computer games: The effects of experience and flow on memory.
International Journal of Advertising, 24(3), 321-343.
Schwarz, Norbert. (1990). Feelings as Information: Informational and Motivational Functions of Affective States. In T. Higgins, & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 527-561. Shrum, L. J. (2012). The psychology of entertainment media. Oxford: Taylor & Francis. Strizhakova, Y., & Krcmar, M. (2007). Mood management and video rental choices. Media
Psychology, 10(1), 91-112. Retrieved from: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmep20/current
Van Reijmersdal, E. A., Neijens, P. C., & Smit, E. G. (2007). Effects of television brand
placement on brand image. Psychology & Marketing, 24(5), 403-420. DOI:
10.1002/mar.20166
Van Reijmersdal, E., Smit, E., & Neijens, P. (2010). How media factors affect audience
responses to brand placement. International Journal of Advertising, 29(2), 279-301.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2501/S0265048710201154
Veitch, R., & Griffitt, W. (1976). Good news‐bad news: Affective and interpersonal effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 6(1), 69-75. DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1976.tb01313.x
Zillmann, D. 1988. “Mood management: Using entertainment media to full advantage”. In: L. Donohew, L., H. E. Sypher, and E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Communication, social cognition and affect, pp. 147-171. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..
Appendices A. Informed consent
Geachte heer, mevrouw,
U bent uitgenodigd deel te nemen aan een onderzoek dat wordt uitgevoerd onder
verantwoordelijkheid van onderzoeksinstituut ASCoR, onderdeel van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. ASCoR doet wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar media en communicatie in de samenleving.
Tijdens dit onderzoek krijgt u een fragment uit een televisieprogramma te zien. Het doel van dit onderzoek is om inzicht te krijgen in de reacties op verschillende programma types, ook wel: genres. Het onderzoek duurt ongeveer 7 minuten.
Omdat dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd onder de verantwoordelijkheid van ASCoR, Universiteit van Amsterdam, heeft u de garantie dat:
1. Uw anonimiteit is gewaarborgd en dat uw antwoorden of gegevens onder geen enkele voorwaarde aan derden zullen worden verstrekt, tenzij u hiervoor van tevoren uitdrukkelijke toestemming hebt verleend.
2. U zonder opgaaf van redenen kunt weigeren mee te doen aan het onderzoek of uw deelname voortijdig kunt afbreken. Ook kunt u achteraf (binnen 24 uur na deelname) uw toestemming intrekken voor het gebruik van uw antwoorden of gegevens voor het onderzoek.
3. Deelname aan het onderzoek geen noemenswaardige risico’s of ongemakken voor u met zich meebrengt, geen moedwillige misleiding plaatsvindt, en u niet met expliciet
aanstootgevend materiaal zult worden geconfronteerd.
4. U uiterlijk 5 maanden na afloop van het onderzoek de beschikking over een
onderzoeksrapportage kunt krijgen waarin de algemene resultaten van het onderzoek worden toegelicht.
Voor meer informatie over dit onderzoek en de uitnodiging tot deelname kunt u te allen tijde contact opnemen met de projectleider drs. S.C. Boerman (s.c.boerman@.uva.nl). Mochten er naar aanleiding van uw deelname aan dit onderzoek bij u toch klachten of opmerkingen zijn
over het verloop van het onderzoek en de daarbij gevolgde procedure, dan kunt u contact opnemen met het lid van de Commissie Ethiek namens ASCoR, per adres: ASCoR secretariaat, Commissie Ethiek, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-5253680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl. Een vertrouwelijke behandeling van uw klacht of opmerking is daarbij gewaarborgd.
Ik hoop u hiermee voldoende te hebben geïnformeerd en dank u bij voorbaat hartelijk voor uw deelname aan dit onderzoek dat voor mij van grote waarde is.
Met vriendelijke groet, Esmee de Vries
Ik verklaar hierbij op voor mij duidelijke wijze te zijn ingelicht over de aard en methode van het onderzoek, zoals hiervoor uiteengezet.
Ik stem geheel vrijwillig in met deelname aan dit onderzoek. Ik behoud daarbij het recht deze instemming weer in te trekken zonder dat ik daarvoor een reden hoef op te geven. Ik besef dat ik op elk moment mag stoppen met het onderzoek.
Als mijn onderzoeksresultaten gebruikt worden in wetenschappelijke publicaties, of op een andere manier openbaar worden gemaakt, dan zal dit volledig geanonimiseerd gebeuren. Mijn persoonsgegevens worden niet door derden ingezien zonder mijn uitdrukkelijke toestemming.
Als ik meer informatie wil, nu of in de toekomst, dan kan ik me wenden tot projectleider drs. S.C. Boerman (s.c.boerman@uva.nl). Voor eventuele klachten over dit onderzoek kan ik me wenden tot het lid van de Commissie Ethiek namens ASCoR, per adres: ASCoR secretariaat, Commissie Ethiek, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-525 3680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl.
B. Stimulus material
The first question of the questionnaire showed the stimulus material for either Stranger
Things or Friends. Below you can find several screenshots of the presented fragments for both conditions.
Question 1. U krijgt nu een kort fragment uit een televisieprogramma te zien. Vervolgens worden er een aantal vragen gesteld.
Stranger Things. Je gaat nu een fragment kijken uit de serie Stranger Things. Deze serie gaat over een meisje met mysterieuze krachten en een sinistere overheidsorganisatie die misbruik wil maken van deze krachten.
Friends. Je gaat nu een fragment kijken uit de serie Friends. Deze serie gaat over een groep van zes vrienden die in New York wonen en werken.
C. Questionnaire
Question 2. De volgende schaal bestaat uit een aantal woorden welke verschillende emoties omschrijven.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Melancholisch Strijdvaardig Ontevreden Tevreden Verveeld Relaxed Ongelukkig Gelukkig Geïrriteerd Blij Wanhopig Hoopvol
Question 3. Heeft u een merk gezien in het fragment? Nee
Ja, namelijk ___________________
Question 4. Kunt u aangeven welk van onderstaande merken u heeft gezien in het videofragment? Pepsi Coca Cola Fanta Sprite 7 Up Dr. Pepper Redbull
Question 5. Het merk dat zichtbaar was in het videofragment was Coca Cola. De volgende vraag heeft betrekking op Coca Cola.
Onderstaande stellingen gaan over uw algemene waardering van het merk Coca Cola.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Slecht Goed Negatief Positief Vind ik niet leuk Vind ik leuk
Question 6. Kent u het merk Coca Cola? Ja
Nee
Question 7. Hoe vaak maakt u gebruik van Coca Cola? minder dan 1 keer per dag
minder dan 1 keer per dag 1 keer per week
minder dan 1 keer per week minder dan 1 keer per maand 1 keer per jaar
minder dan 1 keer per jaar 1 keer per dag
Question 8. Kent u de serie waaruit u een fragment te zien hebt gekregen? Ja
Question 9. Heeft u het fragment al eens eerder gezien? Nee
Ja
Weet ik niet
Question 10. Kunt u uw houding ten opzichte van het fragment aangeven?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Negatief Positief
Niet leuk Leuk
Question 11. Kunt u aangeven van welke van de volgende genres u een kort fragment te zien heeft gekregen?
Actie Thriller Drama Komedie
Question 12. Kunt u aangeven in hoeverre u interesse heeft in onderstaande genres?
Ik kijk graag ... Helemaal oneens Oneens Enigszins mee oneens Noch eens noch oneens Enigszins mee eens Eens Helemaal eens Komedie Actie Thriller Drama
Question 13. Hoeveel tijd spendeert u per week aan het kijken van televisieprogramma's en films? 0-4 uur 4-8 uur 8-12 uur 12 uur of meer
Question 14. Het fragment was in het Engels, heeft u alles goed kunnen begrijpen? Ja
Nee
Question 15. Geef uw leeftijd in cijfers aan (bijv. 30)
Question 16. Wat is uw geslacht? Man
Vrouw
Question 17. Uit welk land bent u afkomstig? Nederland
Question 18. Wat is uw moedertaal? Nederlands
Anders ____________________
Question 19. Wat is uw hoogst genoten of afgeronde opleiding? Geen onderwijs / basisonderwijs / lagere school
LBO / VBO / VMBO (kader- en beroepsgerichte leerweg)
MAVO / eerste 3 jaar HAVO en VWO / VMBO (theoretische en gemengde leerweg) MBO
HAVO en VWO bovenbouw / WO propedeuse HBO / WO-Bachelor
WO-doctoraal of master
Anders: ____________________
Question 20. Wat is uw huidige werksituatie? In dienst Eigen baas Op school / universiteit Werkloos Gepensioneerd D. Debriefing
Hartelijk dank voor je deelname aan dit onderzoek!
Dit experiment was gericht op de effecten van adverteren in televisieseries. Hierbij onderzoek ik of er verschillend wordt gereageerd op reclame (ook wel: product placement) in
verschillende genres. Het genre van het fragment dat je te zien hebt gekregen was
gemanipuleerd. Je kreeg of een fragment uit een thriller of uit een komedie te zien waarin het merk Coca Cola duidelijk zichtbaar was. Het experiment is nog in volle gang, dus gelieve dat nog even niet te delen.
Bedankt voor je tijd, dankzij jou ben ik weer een stap dichterbij mijn afstuderen!
