‘@Volkswagen I’m particularly a fan of the giant middle finger gesture that you gave the environment in North America : great story : a study on the use of rational and emotional appeals in advertisements before and af

(1)

‘@Volkswagen I’m particularly a fan of the giant middle finger gesture

that you gave the environment in North America. Great story.’

– Gabriel Hill, September 2015.

A study on the use of rational and emotional appeals in advertisements before and after a brand crisis

Graduate School of Communication Miklyn Naus Supervisor

Master’s programme Communication Science 10187103 Dr. Sandra Zwier

(2)

Abstract

A brand crisis can severely affect a brand’s financial and reputational situation. To rebuild the relationship between the brand and its customers, brands use advertising to counter the

negative effects of a brand crisis. Research has found that appealing towards individuals’ emotions after a brand crisis is more effective than appealing to reason in post-crisis communication. This study aims to contribute to a better understanding of how brands respond after a brand crisis. Therefore, this paper examined to which extent brands change their advertising appeals after a brand crisis. Furthermore, it is determined if the type of crisis influences whether and how brands’ advertising appeals are changed. A content analysis was

carried out that primarily addressed which advertising appeals were used by a selected number of brands before and after the brand’s crisis. In total 59 advertisements that were

published before a brand crisis and 59 advertisements that were published after a brand crisis were analysed and compared. The results showed that brands do not focus more on emotional appeals in their advertisements after a brand crisis compared to before a brand crisis.

Furthermore, the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis and the

perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis did not influence the use of different advertising appeals after a brand crisis. In addition, research has argued that rational advertising appeals and emotional advertising appeals are opposing approaches. However, the analysis showed a positive correlation between emotional and rational advertising appeal and hence showed that these approaches actually complement each other. This present study provided insights into research on advertising appeals approaches and contributed to a deeper understanding of how brands respond after a brand crisis.

(3)

Introduction

In 2015 the Environmental Protection Agency discovered that Volkswagen cars exceeded allowable vehicle emissions. With software VW changed the emission performance of the cars while being tested, thereby artificially improving the results (BBC, 2015). When it became known that VW had tampered the test results and the cars did not meet environmental requirements their market shares decreased with 20% (De Volkskrant, 2015). After the crisis, Volkswagen launched a campaign stating: ‘everything but proud of our new color’, above this there was a box with the text ‘shameful red’. Volkswagen aimed to regain trust of its

customers after the crisis via this campaign. The advertisement is presented below.1

A brand crisis can result in revenue and market-share losses, it can harm the brands’ equity (Chen, Ganesan & Liu, 2009) and can severely damage the brand’s reputation

(Coombs, 2007). To minimize the damage of the brand crisis, companies try to communicate and respond in the most appropriate way towards consumers to restore the brands’ image (Coombs, 2004). Previous research has mainly focused on the extent to which crisis response strategies are effective in restoring an organization’s reputation (Coombs, 2007). Also the

(4)

strategies has been studied (Avery, Lariscy, Kim & Hocke, 2010). However, to our

knowledge there is less research on how and to what extent brand actually respond. Therefore, the present research aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of how brands actually respond after a brand crisis.

This study focuses on companies that were involved in a crisis. It is studied to which extent brands changed their advertising appeals after a brand crisis. Furthermore, it will be examined if the type of crisis had an influence on whether and how the brands’ advertising appeals changed. The research question thereby is: To what extent are a brand’s advertising appeals changed after a brand crisis? And if brands change their advertising appeals, does the type of crisis had an influence on whether and how advertising appeals are changed?

Existing literature on advertising appeals and crisis management will be discussed and reviewed in the following section, after which a content analysis will be carried out in order to answer the research question and to contribute to a better understanding of how brands

actually respond after a brand crisis.

Theoretical Framework

In 2011 Taco Bell was sued and accused that their beef ‘wasn’t beefy enough to be called beef’ (NPR, 2011). Although the company responded to the claims very quickly and

aggressively, their sales stagnated with 1% per cent. Afterwards in 2012, Taco Bell

introduced a new campaign. The campaign used the slogan “LIVE MAS” (Live more) and aimed to attract young, hip and multicultural consumers, and emphasized that their food is an experience and not just fuel. After the campaign their sales really took off (Adweek, 2012).

Research has shown that the size of advertising effects are rather small for established brands (Lodish et al., 1995). However, as the above example of Taco Bell illustrates,

heightened brand awareness and media attention to a brand during a brand crisis can result in an increase of return on advertising investments (Dawar, 1998). Berger, Sorensen and

(5)

Rasmussen (2010) for instance found that publicity increased awareness and accessibility of a brand even though the publicity itself was negative. They argued that people might forget the valence of the message but remain aware of the brand. Also Moore and Hutchinson (1985) reported that mentioning a brand in times of a crisis increased brand awareness even when the publicity was negative. Advertising during or after a brand crisis thus can increase top-of-mind awareness among consumers. Also, Cleeren, DeKimpe and Helsen (2008) argue that advertising is an important tool that can be used to counter negative news and re-establish the trust in a brand among consumers. Thus, advertising can be an effective tool to create brand awareness, counter negative news and re-establish trust among consumers after a brand crisis. Therefore, it is relevant to research whether brands change their advertising appeals echoing a crisis.

Rational versus emotional advertising appeals

Taco Bell emphasized emotional feelings of consumers when thinking of the fast-food chain in their after-crisis campaign. It is an example of a brand that utilises emotional advertising appeals to rebuild trust among consumers after a brand crisis. The term ‘advertising appeal’ refers to the approach that is used in advertisement campaigns to attract consumer’s attention

and to influence their thoughts and feelings towards the product or brand. Advertising appeals speak to consumers’ needs and aim to elicit their interest (Moriarty, 1991). Appeals are used

to frame advertising messages in a certain way and involve the way words, phrases or images are presented in a message (Yioutas & Segvic, 2003). Frames make certain aspects salient and hence with the use of frames individuals’ decisions can be influenced (Joslyn, 2003). This is also called the 'framing effect' (Druckman, 2001). Marketing managers are aware of this effect and use different appeals to frame advertising messages to consequently influence consumers' decisions.

(6)

Advertising appeals can be categorized in two main dimensions, namely

information/rational appeals and emotional appeals. Rational appeals focus on the consumer’s practical and utilitarian need for the product, service or brand. They try to persuade the

consumer by stating that the product has a specific benefit that satisfies their needs (Wells, Burnett & Moriarty, 1989). Weilbacher (1984) identified several types of rational advertising appeals. First, he identified appeals in which the ad focuses on the dominant traits of the product, such as a low calorie value for a diet food brand or high megapixels for a camera. Second, a so-called competitive advantage appeal can be used where the ad makes a comparison with another brand and emphasizes the superiority of their product. Third, favourable price appeals emphasize the price as the dominant point of the appeal. Furthermore, news appeals are used when the ad focuses on an announcement about the product or brand where improvements are highlighted. For example, when Apple introduced the Apple Watch and argued that it was its most personal device ever, featuring new

technologies which enabled consumers to communicate in new ways(Apple, 2014). Finally, product/service popularity appeals stress the popularity of a product or brand by stating how many people use it or how many people recommend the brand (Weilbacher, 1984). All these appeals can be categorized under rational advertising appeals since they focus on the practical appeals or uses of the product. The concept of ‘hard-sell advertising’ is closely related to rational advertising appeals. Hard-sell advertising appeals focus on the ‘reason why to buy the product’ versus the ‘atmospheric’ advertising of soft-sell advertising appeals (Beard, 2004).

Mueller (1987) defined hard-sell advertising appeals as the objective of the ad to evoke rational thinking from the receiver. The present study will assess to which extent advertisements of a specific brand focus on rational appeals before and after a crisis.

Besides rational appeals advertisements can also use emotional appeals. Emotional appeals emphasize the customers’ social and/or psychological needs for purchasing a product

(7)

(Belch & Belch, 2015). The appeal is based on feelings directed towards the consumers’ self

via pleasure or excitement but can also speak towards feelings of social orientation via status or recognition (Belch & Belch, 2015). Furthermore, emotional appeals often rely on the concept of emotional integration whereby characters in the ad experience an emotional outcome from purchasing or using the product (Kamp & Macinnes, 1995). For example, for their fragrance J’adore, Dior used Charlize Theron as endorser. The commercial is situated in a glamorous antique opera house and focuses on the sex appeal of the actress and how she feels when using the perfume namely strong and sexy. The ad thereby fuels the desire to feel and smell the same as miss Theron. Research has shown that feelings created by

advertisements can have a positive effect on consumers’ brand evaluations (Kamp & Macinnes, 1995). Furthermore, advertisements that use emotional appeals are often better remembered than ads that use rational appeals (Gardner, 1985). Moreover, via

transformational advertising feelings, beliefs and meanings are created about a product or brand (Belch & Belch, 2015). A transformational ad is defined as an ad that associates unique characteristics with the advertised brand (Puto & Wells, 1984). These characteristics are not necessarily to the same degree associated with the brand when consumers are not exposed to the advertisements. For example, the beer brand Heineken profiles itself as a premium beer brand and uses this high-quality profile in its advertising all over the world. A

transformational ad makes consumers believe that they can have these ‘unique’ experiences when they purchase the product (Puto & Wells, 1984). The concept of ‘soft-sell advertising’ is closely related to emotional advertising appeals. Soft-sell advertising appeals are defined by Mueller (1987) as appeals that use emotions to elicit an affective response of the receiver. They are atmospheric, subtle and indirect (Mueller, 1987). The present study will also assess to which extent advertisements of a specific brand focus on emotional appeals before and

(8)

after a crisis by analysing to what extent the ad emphasizes the customers’ social and/or psychological needs for purchasing a product.

In summary, extant research has shown that a brand crisis can heighten consumers’ brand awareness. Thereby, advertisements can be used as a tool to counter negative publicity and re-establish trust among consumers after a brand crisis. Further, two main categories of advertising appeals were distinguished namely rational and emotional advertising appeals. It is therefore relevant to research if brands adapt their advertising appeals after a crisis, and particularly the use of rational versus emotional appeals. Furthermore, it could be of interest to research if the type of crisis influences whether and how the advertising appeals have changed. The next section examines the extant research on brand crisis management, which is subsequently used to arrive at a number of specific hypotheses regarding expected changes in the use of rational versus emotional advertising appeals before and after a brand crisis.

Brand crises and response strategies

Seeger, Sellnow and Ulmer (1998) define ‘brand crisis’ as an unexpected event that (is perceived to) threaten a brand’s core goals. Crises can give consumers and other stakeholders

a reason to think poorly about a company and consequently, crises can severely damage a company’s financial and reputational situation (Coombs, 2007). Therefore, it is deemed

crucial that brands respond in the best way possible during and after a brand crisis.

Coombs’s (2007) provides the Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) for

which crisis response strategies are matched with different types of crises. The theory states the threat the crisis poses for the brand’s reputation is determined by the amount of

responsibility consumers attribute to the company for the crisis. SCCT provides a framework to maximize the company’s reputational protection during and after a crisis via post-crisis

communication. The crisis response strategies in the SCCT framework are linked to the amount of perceived responsibility for a crisis (Coombs, 2007). The framework depicts three

(9)

clusters of crisis types that are based on the perceived responsibility of an organization for the crisis. First, Coombs distinguished the ‘victim cluster’. There, the organization is a victim of the crisis. Further, the perceived responsibility of the company for the crisis is low and thus the crisis is only mildly threatening to the company’s reputation. Second, the ‘accidental cluster’ is distinguished. The organization’s actions are unintentional and the perceived

responsibility of the company for the crisis is minimal. There is a moderate reputational threat for the company. Finally, the ‘preventable cluster’ is distinguished. The organization took inappropriate action and/or violated the law/regulations. The perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis is high. Therefore, the brand crisis can have severe reputational threats. Subsequently, Coombs (2007) discusses three response strategies organizations can communicate during and after a brand crisis. First, a company can use ‘deny strategies’. Here, an attempt is made to remove the connection between the organization and the brand crisis. Coombs advises to use this response strategy in case of a victim crises. Secondly, a company can use the ‘diminish crisis response strategy’ where managers minimize the organization’s responsibility for the crisis. They need to prove this with solid evidence. The advice from Coomb’s model is to use this response strategy with the accidental cluster. Finally, Coombs

distinguishes the ‘rebuild strategies’ where companies try to improve their reputation by offering material or symbolic forms of aid to victims. Managers take positive action to restore the damage that was created by the crisis. This strategy is advised for the preventable cluster.

A brand crisis can affect the long-lasting relationship between the brand and its consumers (Huber, Vogel & Meyer, 2009). A relationship between the customer and the brand is challenged when customers are disappointed by their brand, because the brand did not behave according to the consumers’ expectations (Huber et al., 2009). Huber, Vogel and

Meyer (2009) also call this ‘brand misconduct’, which is described as actions of a brand that seriously disappoint consumers’ expectations of that brand. Brands can rebuild this

(10)

relationship by focussing on emotional appeals in their advertisements published after a brand crisis. Emotional advertising appeals can be used to frame an advertising message and thus to positively influence consumers’ thoughts and feelings about the brand and its responsibility

for the brand crisis. An experimental study by Braun-Latour, Latour and Loftus (2006) found that appealing towards individuals’ emotions after a crisis was more effective than appealing

to reason. The results show that consumers were more likely to return to the company despite a tampering incident when emotional appeals were used in advertisements created after a brand crisis (Braun-Latour et al., 2006). Also, Pringle and Field (2009) have shown that emotional appeals are more effective compared to rational appeals in post-crisis

communication. Thus, empirical research has shown that the use of emotional advertising appeals is more effective in post-crisis communication and can engender a deeper emotional connection between the brand and the consumer (Braun-Latour et al., 2006). Because research has shown that emotional appeals are more affective after a brand crisis, it is expected that brands will focus more on emotional advertising appeals echoing the crisis. Thereby, Hypothesis 1 is as follows:

H1: Brands will use more emotional appeals in their advertisements after a crisis than before a crisis.

Furthermore, following the SCCT framework, the amount of responsibility consumers attribute to the company for the crisis determines the threat the crisis poses for the brand’s

reputation. It can be expected that when the perceived responsibility of the brand for the brand crisis is high, the relationship between the brand and its consumers is more challenged

compared to companies for which the perceived responsibility for the brand crisis is low. Consequently, companies with a high perceived responsibility for a crisis, have to undertake more effort in rebuilding the long-lasting relationship between the company and its customers compared to when the perceived responsibility is low. Therefore, it can be expected that the

(11)

shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals will be larger for companies where the perceived responsibility for the brand crisis is high since the company has to undertake more effort in rebuilding the relationships with its customers. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 is as follows:

H2: If the perceived responsibility of a brand in a crisis is high, the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals will be larger than if the perceived responsibility of a brand in crisis is low.

Brand crises and ethical norms

As stated, ‘brand misconduct’ describes the actions of a brand that seriously disappoint consumers’ expectations of that brand (Huber et al., 2009). Huber et al. (2009) describe four

different types of brand misconduct. First, the category 'product quality differs from

expectations' is distinguished. This category describes the functional failures of the product. For example, in 2014 General Motors recalled nearly 30 million cars due to faulty ignition switches which could prevent the airbag from inflating. Second, the category 'lack of service orientation' is distinguished. For instance, in August 2008 airline Ryanair denied almost 1000 passengers a day who had bought their tickets through travel agents. Third,

'symbolic-psychological misconduct' is mentioned, which refers to a breach of the social and

psychological values brands fulfil in consumers’ life. For example, in 2007 it was revealed that parts of the trust foundation of Bill & Melinda Gates were invested in companies that caused environmental pollution (LA times, 2007). Finally, the category 'socially debatable actions' are distinguished which occur when consumers’ ethical and moral norms are violated. Examples are environmental pollution or advertisement strategies that are considered

unethical.

All types of brand misconduct can lead to negative responses of consumers towards the brand (Huber et al., 2009) as it arouses moral emotions. Moral emotions function as motivations to act (Grappi, Romani & Bagozzi, 2013). These motivations arise when human

(12)

freedom, dignity or communal values are (perceived to be) violated (Grappi et al., 2013). Brand misconduct thus involves a violation of ethical norms that causes enormous public impact and negative responses of consumers toward the brand (Huber et al., 2009). When the brand crisis arouses more moral emotions, the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis increases. When the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis increases, the relationship between the brand and its costumers is more challenged and the brand has to undertake more effort in rebuilding this relationship. As stated, research has shown that emotional advertising appeals are more effective in restoring the relationship between the brand and its consumers after a brand crisis (Braun-Latour et al., 2006; Pringle & Field, 2009). Therefore, it is expected that the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals in the ads published after the brand crisis is larger for brands where the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis is high, compared to brands where the perceived ethical violation for the brand crisis is low as for the latter the relationship between the brand and its consumers is less challenged. This expectation is formulated bythe third hypothesis:

H3: If the perceived level of ethical violation of the brand crisis is high, the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals will be larger than if the perceived level of ethical violation of a brand in crisis is low.

The next section describes how the materials for the present study were gathered and analysed.

Method

A content analysis was carried out to study if brands’ advertising appeals were adapted after a

crisis. The content analysis primarily addressed which advertising appeals were used by a selected number of brands before and after the brand’s crisis. To enable systematic

comparisons on the basis of brand crisis characteristics, the coding further targeted the responsibility attributed to the brand for the crisis by public media, and the type of ethical

(13)

violations involved in the brand crisis. The below sections describe the sample of brands and advertisements that are included in the analysis, the codebook, and coding procedure.

Sample of brands and advertisements

The advertisements for the content analysis were extracted from the online advertising archive Coloribus. Coloribus is an extensive database with more than 2 million ads from all over the world, containing information about brands, agencies and advertisements. The website does not give any information about the selection process of the advertisements that are presented on the website. It states that it is the biggest online advertising archive but does not provide any further information about the online database.2 All advertisements that were sampled for this research were created between the years 2000 and 2016 and were extracted from the Coloribus database.

In total 20 different brands were sampled that were involved in a crisis between the years 2000 and 2016. To assess that a brand actually went through a crisis and when this crisis took place, the following criterion was used: ‘more than six western public media sources should be found specifically addressing the brand and the brand crisis. These sources should all be published within a range of half a year to indicate when the brand crisis took place. The sources consisted solely of professional and objectively English written online newspaper articles such as The guardian, The New York Times, BBC and Daily Mail. Furthermore, all sources specifically addressed the brand crisis and did not refer to any other news and were published between the years 2000 and 2016. They contained at least two paragraphs each including more than 150 words’. Table 1 is attached in the Appendix 1 and lists the 20 brands, their main characteristics, and the type of crisis that has befallen them in which time period.

For every brand that was selected, six different print advertisements were sampled from the Coloribus database: the three advertisements from different campaigns closest in time to the period before the crisis, and the three different advertisements from different

(14)

campaigns closest in time to the period after the brand crisis. However, only two ads were selected for the brand Airbnb as this company is fairly new and it was not possible to find three advertisements before and three advertisements after the brand crisis. That is why the total sample contained 118 advertisements instead of 120 advertisements. Because English written sources were used to asses if the brand actually went through a crisis only English written ads were selected for this research.

Coding categories

Responsibility for brand crisis. First, the perceived responsibility for the brand crisis, as reflected in western public media sources, was coded. As was mentioned above, these sources were professional and objectively English written online newspaper articles specifically addressing the brand crisis. Following the SCCT framework of Coombs (2007) every brand crisis was categorized as belonging to either of three clusters:

a) Victim cluster. This category applied when the public media sources portrayed the brand mainly as a victim of the crisis and responsibility for the crisis was seen as low. b) Accidental cluster. This category applied when the brand’s actions leading to the

crisis were portrayed as unintentional and attributed responsibility was moderate. c) Preventable cluster. Here, the public media portrayal emphasized that the

organization took inappropriate action and/or violated regulations so that the attributed responsibility is high.

Ethical violation. Next, the ethical violation involved in the brand crisis as reflected in the public media sources was coded, using the first dimension of Reidenbach and Robin’s (1990) ethics scale. This scale targets the ‘moral equity dimension’, which is a broad term that

reflects forms of beliefs about right and wrong human conduct, expressed through terms such as ‘good’, ‘bad’, ‘just’ and ‘unjust’ (Beauchamp, 1982). The moral equity dimension of the

(15)

5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ (1) to ‘strongly agree’ (5). The scale

consisted of the following four items: ‘The ethical violation of the brand crisis as represented in the media sources is: just, fair, acceptable, and morally right’. A principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out to indicate if all items should be included in the scale. The PCA showed that all four items formed a single scale. Component one had an eigenvalue above 1 (eigenvalue 3.46, R2 = 86.57). Furthermore, all four items were positively correlated with the first component. The variable ‘please indicate on a five-point scale how just the brand crisis is’ had the strongest association with the component (factor loading is 0.96). The

reliability of the scale was very good, as shown by table 2 which is presented below. No items decreased the reliability of the scale. Therefore, a scale was created with all four items.

Advertising appeals. For every advertisement in the sample, it was assessed to which extent the advertisement made use of emotional and rational appeals. The use of emotional appeals in the ads was measured via a scale identified by Okazaki, Mueller and Taylor (2010) that covers feeling, implicitness and image. The scale consisted of 12 items: creative, instinctive, imaginative, abstract, insinuation, appealing, subjective, expressive, entertaining, interpretive, playful and impression-based. Five-point scales ranging from ‘not at all applicable’ (1) to ‘fully applicable’ (5) were used to code to which extent each ad made use of emotional

appeals. A principal component analysis showed that 9 out of the 12 emotional advertising appeal items formed a single scale. This component had an eigenvalue of above 4.07 (R2 = 58.86). After the first component there was a point of inflexion in the scree plot. Therefore, only the items in the first component were used in the scale (R2 = 33.89). All items are positively correlated with the first component. The variable ‘how entertaining is the ad’ had

the strongest association with the component (factor loading is 0.79). The reliability of the scale was good as shown in table 2. Therefore, a scale was created with 9 items including the items ‘how creative is the ad’, ‘how imaginative is the ad’, ‘how insinuated is the add’, ‘how

(16)

subjective is the ad’, ‘how expressive is the ad’, ‘how entertaining is the ad’, ‘how interpretive is the ad’, ‘how playful is the ad’ and ‘how impression-based is the ad’.

The use of rational appeals was measured via Okazaki et al.’s dimensions thinking, explicitness and fact. The scale consisted of 15 items: rational, logical, analytic, factual, concrete, precise, explanation, convincing, persuasion, instructive, educational, descriptive, realistic, informative and evidence-based. Again, five-point scales ranging from ‘not at all applicable’ (1) to ‘fully applicable’ (5) were used to code to which extent each ad made use of

rational appeals. A principal component analysis showed that 13 out of the 15 rational advertising appeal items formed a single scale. Four components had an eigenvalue of above 6.35 (R2 = 68.99). After the first two components there was a point of inflexion in the scree plot. Therefore, only the items in the first two components were used in the scale (R2 = 53.04). The variable ‘how evidence-based is the ad’ had the strongest association with the

component (factor loading is 0.82). The reliability of the scale was very good. Therefore, a scale was created with 13 items including the items ‘how rational is the ad’, ‘how logical is the ad’, ‘how analytical is the ad’, ‘how factual is the ad’, ‘how concrete is the ad’, ‘how precise is the ad’, ‘how well explained is the ad’, ‘how convincing is the ad’, ‘how persuasive is the ad’, ‘how descriptive is the ad’, ‘how informative is the ad’, ‘how realistic is the ad’, ‘how evidence-based is the ad’.

The codebook

The full codebook can be found in the Appendix 2. Coding items 1 through 4 assess if the brand actually went through a crisis and when this crisis took place. Second, the type of crisis was assessed following the SCCT framework of Coombs. Coding item 5 targets the perceived responsibility for the crisis attributed by the public media sources. Third, the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis was coded with the help of Coding item 6. Lastly, the use of advertising appeals in the advertisements was determined via Coding items 7 through 13.

(17)

Coding

The coding of the advertisements was done manually by the author of this research, the main coder. To assure that other coders come to the same conclusions when executing this research, another student served as a second coder. The results showed that the reliability of the

variables were sufficient as shown by table 2 below.

For this research another master student coded 15% of all the materials. The second coder also coded the advertisements for three brands namely Volkswagen, Gillette and Toyota. The coding was done independently to assure that the main coder did not influenced the second coder.

The Results

For every brand the perceived responsibility for the brand crisis and the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis were analysed and for every advertisement the use of emotional and rational advertising appeals was analysed to answer the main research question and to test the hypotheses.Thereby, the eventual sample consisted of 20 brands. From every brand 6 advertisements were analysed (3 before and 3 after the crisis) with the exception of one brand namely Airbnb. Thus, 59 advertisements that appeared before the crisis were analysed and 59 advertisements were analysed after the crisis, totalling 118 advertisements.

Table 2. The intercoder reliability scores of the Coding items

Coding item % agreement Krippendorff's alpha Cronbach's Alpha

Q5 100% 1

Q6 66,70% 0.74 0.94

Q12 77,78% 0.95 0.82

Q13 72,23% 0.89 0.9

Note: *Q5 measures the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis. Each brand is categorized as low, moderate or high perceived ethical violation for the brand crisis. The variable is not used as a scale and therefore, Cronbach's alpha was not calculated.

(18)

After the coding was completed, it was found that 35% (n= 7) of the brands in the sample were attributed a low responsibility for the brand crisis by the public media sources. 30% (n= 6) of the brands were attributed a moderate responsibility for the brand crisis, and 35% (n= 7) of the brands were attributed a high responsibility for the brand crisis.

Furthermore, the average ethical violation of the brand crises as reflected in the public media sources and the standard deviation was M = 1.64 (SD = 0.62) on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (high ethical violation) to 5 (low ethical violation). Finally, there was a significant

correlation between the use of rational advertising appeals scale and the emotional advertising appeals scale, r = -.32, p < 0.001and N = 118. This means that when the use of emotional advertising appeals in the advertisement increased, the use of rational advertising appeals also increased.

Hypothesis 1

The first hypothesis assumed that brands will use more emotional appeals in their advertisements after a crisis than before a crisis. An independent sample t-test with the variable before or after the crisis as grouping variable and the emotional advertising appeal scale as dependent variable was not significant, p > 0.05. The average use of emotional advertising appeals before a crisis was M = 3.36, SD = .52. This did not differ significantly from the average use of emotional advertising appeals after a crisis (M = 3.29, SD = .68), t(109.01) = 6.87, p = .567, 95% CI [-.16, .29].

Furthermore, a new variable was created that measured the difference in use of emotional and rational advertising appeals in advertisements. Compared to the previous analysis, the use of rational appeals was taken into account when running the analysis. Consequently, this analysis provided a more relative understanding of the use of advertising appeals after a brand crisis. An independent sample t-test with the variable ‘before versus after the crisis’ as grouping variable and the new scale that measured the difference between

(19)

the use of emotional appeals and rational appeals in the advertisement as dependent variable was not significant at the 5 percent significance level. The average use of emotional

advertising appeals before a crisis was M = 1.02, SD = .99. This did not differ significantly from the average use of emotional advertising appeals after a crisis (M = .89, SD = 1.18), t(112.65) = 5.37, p = .507, 95% CI [-.26, 0.53]. Following these results, the hypothesis that brands will use more emotional appeals in their advertisements after a crisis than before a crisis was not supported.

Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis tested if the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals will be larger when the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis is high

compared when the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis is low. A new variable was created that measured the difference in use of emotional and rational advertising appeals in advertisements before versus after the brand crisis. The new variable had a range from -4 to +4. The minimum score of -4 on this scale means that there was a maximum change in the use of advertising appeals in the ads whereby the brand focussed more on rational appeals after the crisis compared to the ads before the crisis. The maximum score of +4 on this scale meansthat there was a maximum change in the use of advertising appeals whereby the brand focussed more on emotional advertising after the crisis compared to the advertisements before the crisis. The actual scores on this new variable ranged from -3.09 to +2.86, with M = -.13 (SD = 1.25). A one-way ANOVA with the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis as independent variable (low vs. moderate vs. high) and the new scale that measured the difference between the use of emotional and rational advertising appeals before and after the crisis as dependent variable was conducted. The results showed a nonsignificant effect of the Perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis on the change in use of emotional and rational advertising appeals in the advertisements after a

(20)

crisis, F(2, 56) = 1.36, p > 0.05. Companies where the perceived responsibility for the brand crisis was low (M = -.04 , SD = .21) showed the least change in the use of different

advertising appeals after a crisis. Companies where the perceived responsibility for the brand crisis was moderate (M = -.52, SD = .36) showed the largest change in the use of different advertising advertising appeals after a crisis, whereby companies from both categories focused more on rational advertising appeals after a crisis than before a crisis. Companies where the responsibility for the brand crisis was perceived as high (M = .12, SD = .27) showed a moderate change in the use of different advertising appeals after a crisis, whereby these companies focus slightly more on emotional advertising appeals after a crisis.

Differences however were not significant and Hypothesis 2, which stated that when the perceived responsibility of a company for a brand crisis was high the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals will be larger than if the perceived responsibility of a brand crisis was low, was not supported.

Hypothesis 3

To test whether there was a difference in use of emotional advertising appeals after a crisis as a function of the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis, the scale for ethical violation involved in the brand crisis attributed by public media sources was recoded into three groups namely low ethical violation, moderate ethical violation and high ethical violation. The scale has a minimum score of 1.00, representing the highest level of ethical violation for the brand crisis. The maximum score on the scale was 2.75 in this sample, representing the lowest level of ethical violation for the brand crisis. The scale was divided in three categories namely high (1 – 1.58, n = 10), moderate (1.59 – 2.17, n = 5) and low ethical violation of the brand crisis (2.18 – 2.75, n = 5). A one-way ANOVA with the Perceived ethical violation of the brand (low vs. moderate vs. high) as independent variable and the scale that measured the difference in use of emotional and rational appeals in the advertisements before versus after the crisis as

(21)

dependent variable was carried out. Companies with low perceived ethical violation showed the least change in use of different advertising appeals after a crisis (M = -.09, SD = 1.43). Companies with a moderate perceived ethical violation (M = -.22, SD = 1.08) showed the largest change in use of different advertising appeals after a brand crisis, whereby companies from both categories focussed slightly more on rational advertising appeals after a crisis. Companies with the highest perceived ethical violation (M = -.11, SD = 1.28) likewise showed a slight increase in the use of rational appeals after a crisis. However, the result showed that the level of the Perceived ethical violation did not have a significant effect on the change in the use of emotional and rational advertising appeals after the crisis, F (2, 56) = 0.49, p = 0.952. Therefore, the Hypothesis 3, which stated that when the perceived level of ethical violation of the brand crisis is high, the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals will be larger than if the perceived level of ethical violation of a brand in crisis is low, was not supported.

Conclusion and discussion

This study researched to what extent a brand’s advertising appeals are adapted after a brand

crisis and researched if the type of crisis influences whether and how advertising appeals are changed. To answer this research question several hypotheses were drafted. Via a content analysis the hypotheses were answered where in total 59 advertisements that were published before a crisis and 59 advertisements that were published after a crisis were analysed and compared.

The first hypothesis stated that brands will use more emotional appeals in their advertisements after a crisis than before a crisis. Previous research found that appealing towards individuals’ emotions after a crisis is more effective in overcoming the negative

consequences of the brand crisis and in rebuilding the relationship between the brand and its consumers (Braun-Latour et al., 2006; Pringle & Field, 2009). Consequently, it was expected

(22)

that brands will use more emotional appeals in their advertisements after a crisis in an attempt to rebuild customer relationships. However, the results from the present study did not

correspond with this expectation, and showed that the brands we studied did not focus more emotional appeals in their advertisements after a crisis compared to before a crisis.

Also, it was examined if the type of crisis influences whether and how advertising appeals were changed. Following the SCCT framework of Coombs (2007), every brand crisis was categorized based on the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis as reflected in the news media. Each brand was then categorized in one of the three clusters namely ‘victim cluster’ where the perceived responsibility of the company for the brand crisis was low, ‘accidental cluster’ where the perceived responsibility of the brand crisis was

moderate and ‘preventable cluster’ where the perceived responsibility of the company for the

brand crisis was high. The results showed that brands involved in crises that were categorized in the victim cluster showed the least change in use of advertising appeals. Brands involved in crises that were categorized in the accidental cluster showed the largest change in use of advertising appeals. However, companies in both clusters focused more on rational

advertising appeals after a crisis versus before a crisis. Finally, brands involved in crises that were categorized in the preventable cluster showed a moderate change in the use of

advertising appeals after a crisis and focused slightly more on emotional advertising appeals after a brand crisis. However, statistical testing showed that there was no relationship between the perceived responsibility of a company for the brand crisis and a change in use of

advertising appeals after a crisis. Therefore, it must be concluded that the type of crisis did not influences if and how advertising appeals were changed after a brand crisis.

Finally, it was assessed if the level of ethical violation involved in a brand crisis as reflected in the news media influences whether and how brands’ change their advertising appeals after a brand crisis. As stated, brand crises can affect the long-lasting relationship

(23)

between that brand and its consumers. A brand misconduct – when consumers are seriously disappointed by the brand - can be caused by violating ethical norms and consequently, it can lead to negative responses of consumers towards the brand (Huber et al., 2009). Therefore, it was expected that if the perceived level of ethical violation of the brand crisis was high, the shift towards the use of emotional advertising appeals would be larger compared to if the perceived level of ethical violation of a brand in crisis was low. The results showed that companies with the lowest level of perceived ethical violation for the brand crisis showed the least change in use of different advertising appeals after a crisis. Furthermore, companies with a moderate level of perceived ethical violation for the brand crisis showed the largest change in use of different advertising appeals after a brand crisis, with a moderate increase in rational advertising appeals after a crisis. Companies with the highest perceived ethical violation for a brand crisis showed a slight increase in the use of rational advertising appeals after a crisis. However, statistical testing again showed that there was no relationship between the level of perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis and the use of different advertising appeals after a brand crisis. Therefore, it must be concluded that the level of ethical violation did not influence the use of different advertising appeals after a brand crisis.

Overall, it can be concluded that brands do not predominantly change the use of rational versus emotional advertising appeals after a crisis. Although existing academic work showed that brands should focus more on emotional advertising appeals after a crisis (Braun-Latour, Latour and Loftus, 2006; Pringle & Field, 2009), this content analysis showed that companies do not increase the use of emotional advertising appeals after a brand crisis in order to rebuild the relationship between the brand and its customers. Furthermore, the type of crisis and the perceived ethical violation of the brand crisis do not influence the use of

advertising appeals after a crisis. Hence,research about how brands should respond after a brand crisis and how brands actually respond after a brand crisis do not align.

(24)

The results of this study could be explained by an observation made by Cleeren, DeKimpe and Helsen. Although the authors emphasize the importance of advertising as a tool to overcome negative crisis effects, they also argue that a strong brand equity can function as a direct buffer against a brand crisis. The pre-crisis equity of a brand can protect a brand against a brand crisis (Cleeren et al., 2007). This could explain the results of this research as this study mainly focused on brands with a strong equity such as Coca-Cola and Dior.

Cleeren, DeKimpe and Helsen (2007) state that this observation should be researched more to see if the finding can be replicated.

Furthermore, although the present study did not specifically addressed how advertising appeals correlate to each other, the analysis showed that rational advertising appeals and emotional advertising appeals are positively correlated. This is interesting since research always substantiates these appeals as opposing approaches, where rational advertising appeals emphasize a direct and practical need for the product versus emotional advertising appeals that emphasize a subtle and social need for purchasing the product (Belch & Belch, 2015; Okazaki, Mueller & Taylor, 2010; Wells, Burnett & Moriarty, 1989; Weilbacher, 1984). The analysis showed that when the use of emotional advertising appeals in an advertisement increases, the use of rational advertising appeals in the advertisement also increases and vice versa. Consequently, it is concluded that the approaches complement each other. For example, an advertisement by Toyota published in February 2010 showed almost no difference between the use of emotional and rational advertising appeals in the advertisement. The ad emphasized that the car is perfect for families. This is highlighted by the drawing of a father made by a child which speaks to a fathers’ feelings, and thus the ad used emotional appeals. However, the text below the images emphasized that the car is very economical as it can drive 100 kilometres with 4.9 litres fuel, and thus the ad emphasized the practical need for purchasing the car.3 The ad illustrates that both emotional and rational advertising appeals were used in

(25)

creating advertising messages and that these approaches can be used complementary to each other. Overall, this research provided more insight into research on advertising appeals in general and a deeper understanding of the field and provided insight into if and which advertising strategies are actually used in the field after a crisis.

Future research

This study showed that emotional and rational advertising appeals are not opposing approaches but complement each other. It also showed that both appeals were used in advertising messages. Future research could focus on this relationship and research to which extent these two approaches relate to each other, for example how they are different from each other, to provide more insights in the operation between these two approaches.

Moreover, this research focused on brands and how brands can rebuild the relationship with customers after a brand crisis. However, research could also focus on how consumers want brands to responds after a brand crisis. Research has shown that a brand crisis can severely damage the relationship between the customer and the brand. Therefore, it is

important to listen to the brands’ customers. This could be researched via focus groups and in-depth interviews. It could provide important insight in how the consumer-brand relationship after a crisis can be rebuild.

Implications

In this study very different types of brands were used to answer the research question. Car, food and fashion brands were used to research if brands change the use of advertising appeals after a brand crisis. Consequently, a general idea on how different type of brands respond after a brand crisis is provided. However, the analysis only consisted of 20 brands which is a rather small sample. A larger sample would contribute to a research that is more generalizable to different companies. For example, the sample consisted of large well-know brands such as Coca-Cola, Toyota, Dior and WWF. Therefore, the findings of this study can be generalised

(26)

towards other large and well-known brands. It is possible however that for more local brands the change in use of advertising appeals after a crisis is different and therefore it is more difficult to generalise these findings towards less familiar brands.

Furthermore, existing scales were used to measure the use of emotional and rational advertising appeals. The use of emotional advertising appeals was assessed with 9 items measured on a 5-point scale. Likewise, the use of rational advertising appeals was assessed with 13 items on a 5-point scale. Both scales were very extensive as both consisted out of 9 or more items. This could make it more difficult to indicate a difference between the use of emotional and rational advertising appeals after a crisis as both scales were very exhaustive. Therefore, it is possible, when testing on specific items in the scales, that differences in the use of these specific items before and after the crisis can be detected even though in general the use of the appeals do not differ before and after a crisis.

Footnotes

1. Retrieved from www.marketingfacts.nl. The text is in Dutch, the translation is: ‘Everything but proud of our new colour, which is shameful red. It would not have

escaped your attention. At Volkswagen we have made a big mistake: we have violated your trust, which we are deeply embarrassed about. We realize you can’t do anything

with that. Our words will not be without deeds. We promise that we will solve this problem for every client who has been affected by this. We will do everything to rebuild your trust. You probably have questions. We would like to answer your questions on info.volkswagen.com/nl’.

2. The website is available via www.coloribus.com 3. An image of the ad is presented in the Appendix 3.

References

(27)

http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/emotional-messages-beat-rational/134920/ Adweek. (2012). Taco Bell gets a more relevant attitude: Draftfcb's "Live Más" cross

cultural branding wants food to be fun. Retrieved from: http://www.adweek.com/sa article/taco-bell-gets-more-relevant-attitude-138823.

Apple (2014). Apple unveils Apple Watch—Apple’s most personal device ever. Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2014/09/09Apple-Unveils-Apple-Watch-Apples-Most-Personal-Device-Ever.html

Avery, E. J., Lariscy, R. W., Kim, S., & Hocke, T. (2010). A quantitative review of

crisis communication research in public relations from 1991 to 2009. Public Relations Review, 36(2), 190–192.

Barclay, E. (2011). With Lawsuit over, Taco Bell’s mystery meat is a mystery no longer. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2011/04/22/135539926/with lawsuit-over-taco-bells-mystery-meat-is-a-mystery-no-longer

Beauchamp, T. (1982). Philosophical ethics: an introduction to moral philosophy. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York.

Beard, Fred K. (2004). Hard sell ‘killers’, and soft sell ‘poets’: Modern

advertising’s enduring message strategy debate. Journalism History, 30(3), 141–149.

Belch, G. E., Belch, M. A. (2003). Advertising and promotion: An integrated

marketing communications perspective. The McGraw− Hill Education, Singapore.

Berger, J., Sorensen, A. T., & Rasmussen, S. J. (2010). Positive effects of negative

publicity: When negative reviews increase sales. Marketing Science, 29(5), 815-827. Braun-Latour, K. A., Latour, M. S., & Loftus, E. F. (2006). Is that a finger in my

chili? Using affective advertising for postcrisis brand repair. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 106-120.

(28)

advertising: The different effects of time. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 638. Retrieved from: http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/6323/volumes/v11/NA-11.

Cleeren, K., Dekimpe, M. G., & Helsen, K. (2008). Weathering product-harm crises. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 262-270.

Coombs, W. T. (2004). West pharmaceutical's explosion: structuring crisis discourse knowledge. Public Relations Review, 30(4), 467–473.

Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The

development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163-176.

Davis, B. (2015). Social meida and crisis management: A volkswagen case study. Retrieved from https://econsultancy.com/blog/66972-social-media-and-crisis-management-a-volkswagen-case-study/

Dawar, N. (1998). Product-harm crises and the signaling ability of brands. International Studies of Management & Organization, 28(3), 109-119. Druckman, J.N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence.

Political Behavior, 23(3), 225–256.

Gardner, M. P. (1985). Mood states and consumer behavior: A critical review.

Journal of Consumer Research 12(3), 281-200.

Grappi, S., Romani, S., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2013). Consumer response to corporate irresponsible behavior: Moral emotions and virtues. Journal of business research, 66(10), 1814-1821.

Hotten, R. (2015). Volkswagen: The scandal explained. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772

Huber, F., Vogel, J., & Meyer, F. (2009). When brands get branded. Marketing Theory, 9(1), 131-136.

(29)

Joslyn, M.R. (2003) Framing the Lewinsky affair: Third-person judgments by scandal frame. Political Psychology, 24(4), 829–844.

Kamp, E., Macinnis, D. J. (1995). Characteristics of portrayed emotions in

commercials: When does what is shown in ads affects viewers?. Journal of

Advertising Research 22(4), 19-28.

Koster. B. (2015). Sorry seems to be the easiest word. Image retrieved from

http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/sorry-seems-to-be-the-easiest-word Lodish, L. M., Abraham, M., Kalmenson, S., Livelsberger, J., Lubetkin, B.,

Richardson, B., et al. (1995). How T.V. advertising works: A meta-analysis of 389 real world split cable T.V. advertising experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), 125–139.

Chen, Y., Ganesan S., & Liu, Y. (2009), Does a firm's product recall

strategy affect its financial value? An examination of strategic alternatives during product-harm crises. Journal of Marketing, 73 (November), 214-26.

Moore, D. L., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1985). The influence of affective reactions to advertising: Direct and indirect mechanisms of attitude change. Psychological processes and advertising effects, 65-87.

Moriarty, S. E. (1991). Creative Advertising: Theory and Practice. Prentice Hall. Mueller, B. (1987), Reflections of culture: An analysis of Japanese and

American advertising appeals. Journal of Advertising Research, 27 (3), 51–59. Okazaki, S., Mueller, B., & Taylor, C. R. (2010). Measuring soft-sell versus hard-sell

advertising appeals. Journal of Advertising, 39(2), 5-20.

Piller, C., Sanderd, E., & Dixon, R. (2007). Dark cloud over good works of Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-gatesx07jan07-story.html

(30)

Pringle, H., Field. P. (2009). Brand immortality: How brands can live long and prosper. Kogan Page Limited, London.

Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1990). Toward the development of a multidimensional scale for improving evaluations of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(8), 639-653.

Seeger, M. W., Sellnow, T. L., & Ulmer, R. R. (1998). Communication, organization and crisis. In M. E. Roloff (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 21 (pp. 231-275). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Weijer, van der B. (2015). Volkswagen haalt sjoemeldiesels uit de handel. Retrieved from:

http://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/volkswagen-haalt-sjoemeldiesels-uit-de-handel~a4146549/

Well, W., Burnett, J., & Moriarty S. (1989). Advertising. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: prentice Hall. Wikipedia. (2014). General Motors ignition switch recalls. Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_ignition_switch_recalls William M. Weilbacher. (Eds.). (1984). Advertising. New York: Macmillan.

Yioutas, J. and Segvic, I. (2003) Revisiting the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal: The convergence of agenda setting and framing. Journal and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(3), 567–582.

(31)

Appendix 1: Table 1 that list the 20 brand that were used in this study

Table 1. The sample consisted of 20 brands that were involved a crisis between the years 2000 and 2016. It contains the main characteristics of that specific brand and the brand crisis.

(32)

32

the main characteristics of that specific brand and the brand crisis.

Brand name Type of brand Region where

brand is active

Period the crisis took

place

Type of crisis

Volkswagen Car brand Globally September,

2015 Environmental crisis

Gillette Personal care brand Globally December,

2009 Representative scandal

Toyota Car brand Globally January, 2010 Technical errors

Dannon, Activia Dairy brand Globally September,

2009

False claims in advertisements

Kellogg's Cereal brand Globally April, 2009 False claims in