Because they say so:
Exploring the effect of critical acclaim on film posters on attitudes and viewing intentions
Joost Kamer 11746548
Master's Thesis
Graduate School of Communication Entertainment Communication
Supervisor: Dr. K.M. Fikkers June 29, 2018
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to all those who supported me during the writing of this thesis. I would especially like to thank Dr. Karin Fikkers for her guidance, patience and
constructive criticisms, which challenged me to continue digging just a little deeper. I would also like to thank my family and friends, especially Lotte, Esther and Juul, for lending a sympathetic ear when I needed it most. Finally, I would like to extend my thanks to actor Michiel Huisman, who filled out my survey and encouraged his fans to do so too. I am honored to have you in my sample.
Abstract
Academic research on movie marketing has identified critics' reviews as an important factor influencing box office performance. Prior studies, however, remain inconclusive about the expected benefits of referring to critical acclaim. The current study extends previous research by investigating if star ratings on a film's poster positively influence film attitudes and viewing intentions. Real-world posters from two different film genres were used to test the hypotheses. Using heuristics, need for cognition, hedonism, eudaimonia and elements from the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), this study found that star ratings have no effect on attitudes or viewing intentions, regardless of differences in film genre, interpersonal differences or congruency
between type of film and personal preference. The findings are discussed in relation to previous research. In addition, theoretical and practical implications, as well as limitations and directions for future research are given.
Because they say so: Exploring the effect of critical acclaim on film posters on attitudes and
viewing intentions
In the spring of 2018, two movies illustrated how reviews can make or break a film. The Disney movie A Wrinkle in Time was tracking towards a $50+ million opening (BoxOffice Pro, 2018a), until news broke that the film was critically panned. The movie then underperformed severely, grossing only $33.1 million during its opening weekend (McClintock, 2018). Many news outlets detailing the disappointing debut referred to bad reviews as one of the major explanations (e.g., Mendelson, 2018). Disney ultimately pulled the film from many foreign markets, suggesting that negative reviews can seriously impact a movie's circulation.
Conversely, then, positive movie reviews can propel films to new heights of financial success. Initially, expectations regarding A Quiet Place were low (BoxOffice Pro, 2018b). The film overperformed at the box office, however, opening to $50.2 million in its first weekend (Brevet, 2018). Many analysts cited the film's critical approval and strong word-of-mouth as the driving forces behind its success (e.g., Rubin, 2018).
The examples above can be considered evidence for the importance that critical acclaim (defined here as enthusiastic approval from critics who are well experienced with the respective art form) can have on a film's box office performance (i.e., ticket sales). It comes as no surprise, then, that positively valenced film reviews have long been an integral part of film advertisements (Baumann, 2007; Debenedetti & Ghariani, 2018). Given that elements such as quotes from reviews and star ratings are used to increase a film's appeal, incorporating them into
advertisements is believed to enhance their persuasiveness (Debenedetti & Ghariani, 2018). Marketers, then, use these elements in the hopes of creating a more positive film attitude and
stronger viewing intention in audiences, thereby improving a film's chances of commercial success.
Both practice and extant research, however, provide mixed support for this belief. Not all critically acclaimed films, for example, perform up to the expectations set by reviewers (e.g., It Comes at Night). In contrast, some poorly reviewed films do surprisingly well at the box office (e.g., Daddy's Home). Empirical literature reflects this paradox. Whereas some studies (e.g., Collins, Hand, & Snell, 2002) report a direct effect of critical acclaim on box office performance, results from other studies (e.g., d'Astous & Touil, 1999; Reinstein & Snyder, 2005) are mixed. Together, these examples illustrate that the relationship between critical acclaim and box office performance is more complex than it may initially seem. It is important to note, however, that most research only studies the effect of acclaim within the context of a movie review. Given that the references to critical acclaim on film posters are very common despite a proper
understanding of its effectiveness, the scope of this study is restricted to this specific medium. In addition, although critical acclaim can be referred to in a variety of ways, this study will look only at the effect of star ratings because these are easy to identify and understand, thereby making them an effective tool to communicate about a film's quality. The first goal of this study, then, is to examine the extent to which star ratings enhance the persuasiveness of a film's poster.
The complex relationship between critical acclaim and box office performance may in part be explained by the fact that there are different types (i.e., genres) of films as well as different types of consumers. Understanding which types of films gratify which types of
audiences facilitates targeting, in which specific films can be marketed towards specific crowds. One characteristic in which both films and consumers can differ is the amount of hedonism (i.e., ''pleasure'' and ''comfort'', Huta & Ryan, 2010, p. 736) and eudaimonia (i.e., ''insight into or
understanding of the human condition'', Oliver & Raney, 2011, p. 989) they contain (in the case of films) or pursue (in the case of people). Research has found that the type of needs and motivations people have correspond to a preference for certain types of films, with individuals looking for hedonic (eudaimonic) experiences favoring hedonic (eudaimonic) films over eudaimonic (hedonic) films (Oliver & Raney, 2011). Given, then, that predispositional
preferences appear to guide the selection of films and that this selection is furthermore motivated by differences in film genre (De Silva, 1998), it seems reasonable to expect that the effect of star ratings is also influenced by these factors. Therefore, the second goal of this study is to explore to what extent the effect of star ratings on film posters differs between film genres and people. Movie Posters and Different Routes of Persuasion
This study will incorporate elements of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) to explain how people may be persuaded by film posters. Given that marketeers use posters to attract people to the theatre and often rely on evaluative elements (e.g., stressing uniqueness) to influence individuals, film posters can be considered examples of persuasive messages.
According to the ELM, the degree to which a persuasive message is able to stimulate attitudinal and behavioral change depends on the way in which it is processed (i.e., thought about): under the central route or under the peripheral route (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a). Depending on which route is taken, different message features are more impactful. One of the model's key
assumptions is that the route under which a message is processed is determined by
predispositions of the individual, most importantly their level of motivation and ability to process said message (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a). Because the ELM looks at the effectiveness of
different types of arguments within a message under both routes of processing, the model can help explain which elements on a movie's poster are most persuasive.
When an individual is motivated and able to think carefully about a message, it is likely to be processed under the central route (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a). Accordingly, this form of processing involves a high level of elaboration (i.e., extensive thinking). Under the central route, persuasion occurs primarily through the evaluation of factual information (Petty & Hinsenkamp, 2017). When exposed to a message, people carefully scrutinize the information it contains in order to arrive at a set of thoughts, which can be favorable, unfavorable or neutral. Only if these thoughts are favorable, the desired change (and, thus, persuasion) will take place. Given that attitudes that are formed under the central route are based on careful analysis of the arguments presented, they have been found to be more resistant to future persuasive attempts and to be better predictors of behavior than attitudes formed under the peripheral route of persuasion (Petty, Strathman, Cacioppo, & Priester, 2005). Nonetheless, central route processing is under some conditions abandoned in favor of peripheral route processing because the latter saves people time and energy.
When an individual is unmotivated and/or unable to think carefully about a message, it is likely to be processed under the peripheral route (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a). This form of processing involves, in contrast to central route processing, a low level of elaboration. As individuals in a peripheral state of processing lack, for example, the capacity or time to pay attention to the quality of an argument, factual information is unlikely to yield the best
persuasive result. Instead, these individuals tend to rely on heuristic cues: mental shortcuts that help them make decisions without having to elaborate so much (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a; Petty & Hinsenkamp, 2017). Often, these cues are elements that are unrelated to the main topic (e.g., a celebrity endorsement). Although the attitudes formed under the central route are generally more durable and stable than attitudes formed under the peripheral route, they also take more time and
effort to develop (Petty, Strathman, Cacioppo, & Priester, 2005). Hence, as people often lack the time to pay close attention to a movie poster, the film industry relies predominantly on peripheral cues to influence potential consumers.
Stars as Signals of Quality on Film Posters
Although there are many types of shortcuts, one is particularly valuable for the film industry and the current study: the belief that the more stars (★) a movie receives from critics, the higher its value must be. Films are experience goods (i.e., goods which cannot be accurately judged in terms of quality prior to consumption), which means that potential moviegoers have to decide if they want to see a certain film without knowing if the experience will be satisfactory. A star rating on a movie's poster, then, functions as a signal of film quality, which tells potential viewers that the advertised movie is indeed worth seeing (Elliott & Simmons, 2011). These ratings can best be described as appeals to authority because they function as statements or opinions of some outside source, used to strengthen an argument (Gula, 2002). According to Cialdini (2001), people's susceptibility to such appeals
comes from systematic socialization practices designed to instill in members of society the perception that . . . it is adaptive to [concur with] authorities because such individuals usually possess high levels of knowledge [and] wisdom. For these reasons, [agreement with] authorities can occur in a mindless fashion as a kind of decision-making shortcut. (p. 200–201)
In other words, individuals tend to agree with critics simply because they are taught that these people know what they are talking about and that what they claim is, therefore, true. Given that star ratings are a symbol of expertise, they should evoke the ''if an expert says it, it must be true''-decision heuristic (Guadagno, 2013) and convince people of a film's cinematic merit. Research,
however, has found mixed support for the use of authority cues in persuasive messages: whereas some studies (e.g., Sundar, Xu, & Oeldorf-Hirsch, 2009) find a direct effect on purchase
intention and/or attitude, other studies (e.g., Whitehead, 1971) do not (for a review, see Pornpitakpan, 2004). It is important to note, however, that none of this research has been
conducted in the context of film posters. By studying the effect of authority cues in a new area of interest, then, this study fills an important research gap.
For many individuals, exposure to film posters is likely to be a quick and unmemorable experience, with exposure taking place, for example, while commuting to work. Accordingly, it is more likely that messages on a poster are processed peripherally rather than centrally. It seems reasonable to expect, then, that individuals who are exposed to a poster that features a star rating (compared to the same poster without such a rating) would rely on this cue to simplify their decision-making. As a result, they should evaluate the film more positively and report a stronger viewing intention than individuals exposed to the same poster without such a rating. Thus, the first hypothesis becomes:
Hypothesis 1 (H1): A poster that features a star rating will lead to (a) a more positive
film attitude and (b) more willingness to see the movie, compared to a poster without such a rating.
Hedonism and Eudaimonia
It could be that the effect of a star rating on film attitude and viewing intention depends on factors related to characteristics of the film or individual exposed to the poster. To explain how genre differences and/or personal preferences might influence the main relationship, this study now turns to the concepts of hedonism and eudaimonia.
In essence, hedonism and eudaimonia cover different aspects of personal well-being: pleasure and enjoyment (hedonism; Huta & Ryan, 2010) and ''seeking to use or develop the best in oneself'' (eudaimonia; Huta & Ryan, 2010, p. 736). Research has found that both terms can be applied to a variety of things, including films.
Hedonism and eudaimonia in film: Comedy versus drama. Films can differ in a
variety of aspects, including in the level of hedonism and eudaimonia they contain. These levels are reflected in a film's tone (i.e., valence). Generally, films are either positively valenced (i.e., uplifting) or negative/mixed in valence (i.e., moving). More specifically, hedonic movies are more positively valenced, featuring humor, whereas eudaimonic films are more mixed in valence and meaningful (Oliver & Bartsch, 2010; Oliver & Raney, 2011). In terms of concrete genres, Oliver & Bartsch (2010) found that ''comedies were most strongly associated with fun . . . and dramas with moving/thought-provoking experiences'' (p. 65). This suggests that differences in a film's level of hedonism and eudaimonia may be operationalized as differences in genre (i.e., comedy or drama).
The type of film (comedy or drama) may exercise a critical role in moderating the effect of a star rating. As discussed previously, a star rating can be used as a shortcut to rely upon when making a decision. Previous research on the persuasiveness of such a rating suggests that its effect depends on one's familiarity with specific film genres, decreasing as one acquires more viewing experience (Desai & Basuroy, 2005). In other words, the more films one sees of a specific genre, the more he or she knows what to expect. This, in turn, impacts the extent to which they feel the need to rely on other information (e.g., star ratings) to make their movie-viewing choices (Desai & Basuroy, 2005).
Granted, both the comedy and drama genre enjoy widespread popularity. Nonetheless, Oliver, Ash, Woolley, Shade, and Kim (2014) found that films with funny elements (i.e., comedies) are associated with greater viewership and stronger box office results than films with contemplative elements (i.e., dramas). Moreover, comedies are generally more predictable than dramas (i.e., there is, content-wise, less variation in comedic fare; Neale, 2000). Given, then, that a star rating is relied upon more in cases of relative uncertainty regarding expectations (Desai & Basuroy, 2005) and that this uncertainty is higher for dramas than for comedies (Neale, 2000; Oliver et al., 2014), it seems logical to expect that a star rating on a drama poster would evoke a stronger persuasive response than a star rating on a comedy poster. More specifically, individuals exposed to a star rating on a drama poster should have a more positive film attitude and stronger viewing intention than individuals exposed to a star rating on a comedy poster. Hypothesis 2, then, is proposed as follows:
Hypothesis 2 (H2): The effect of a star rating on (a) film attitude and (b) willingness to
see the movie will be stronger for a dramatic film than for a comedic film.
Hedonism and eudaimonia in people: Predispositional factors. In their analysis,
Oliver and Bartsch (2010) stress that feelings of appreciation and excitement when watching a film were not tied to specific genres. Instead, they found that even funny films generated some feelings of appreciation and that dramas were – to a certain extent – also considered enjoyable. This suggests that a film's ability to be gratifying also depends on personal characteristics. The effect of a star rating might, then, also be influenced by such characteristics.
Just as films differ in their levels of hedonism and eudaimonia, so do people. In general, hedonism in people is associated with more ''lighthearted and playful tendencies'' and a
In contrast, individuals with more reflective (i.e., eudaimonic) tendencies display a stronger need to ''search for and ponder life's meaning, truths and purposes'' and tend to favor films that
challenge their worldview and focus on human connections (i.e., dramas; Oliver & Raney, 2011, p. 985). In addition, hedonism and eudaimonia are also related to other traits, including need for cognition; Oliver and Raney (2011) found that eudaimonic individuals display a significantly stronger need for cognition than hedonic individuals. Defined by Cohen, Stotland, and Wolfe (1955) as ''a need to structure relevant situations in meaningful, integrated ways'' (p. 291), need for cognition refers to the intrinsic motivation to engage in cognitively challenging activities. As eudaimonic individuals, then, tend to enjoy thinking and the effect of persuasive messages depends on the amount of cognitive effort they receive, differences in people's levels of hedonism and eudaimonia may have a critical impact on the effectiveness of a star rating. In addition, given that no research has studied the effects of hedonism and eudaimonia in message recipients on message persuasiveness, this study addresses an important knowledge gap.
Because a star rating on a film poster is a peripheral cue, its effect is strongest when said poster is processed under the peripheral route. Previous studies on need for cognition have demonstrated that people with a high need for cognition tend to make more of an effort when evaluating a message than people with a low need for cognition (Haugtvedt, Petty, & Cacioppo, 1992). Given that individuals with eudaimonic motivations tend to display a significantly stronger need for cognition than individuals with hedonic motivations (Oliver & Raney, 2011), eudaimonic individuals are likely to attribute more weight to substantial arguments of a message and are, therefore, less susceptible to heuristic cues than hedonic individuals (Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, & Jarvis, 1996). This would suggest that eudaimonic individuals engage in central message processing and that hedonic individuals engage in peripheral message processing.
Accordingly, then, when evaluating the film poster, eudaimonic individuals are likely to ignore the star rating. In contrast, as hedonic individuals are expected to process the poster peripherally, they are likely to be persuaded by the star rating and report a more positive film attitude and stronger viewing intention. Therefore, hypothesis 3 becomes:
Hypothesis 3 (H3): The effect of a star rating on (a) film attitude and (b) willingness to
see the movie will be stronger for people with higher hedonic motivations.
Congruency between film genre and personal preference: Drama. In the preceding
discussion, hedonism and eudaimonia in films and people were treated as distinct elements. The effect of a star rating on one's film attitude and viewing intention might, however, not only depend on a film's genre (H2) or on one's amount of hedonic and eudaimonic motivations (H3),
but rather on a match between film genre and personal preferences.
One of the key propositions in the field of persuasion is that, in comparison to incongruent messages, messages that are congruent with (i.e., consistent with) receivers' pre-existing attitudes will be more persuasive (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986b). Although this assumption has received mixed support, a large body of research has found evidence of congruency effects in multiple domains (for a review, see Lee & Schumann, 2004). According to Updegraff, Sherman, Luyster, and Mann (2007), congruent messages elicit stronger responses because they fit into a recipient's frame of reference. This, then, leads to greater elaboration and an increased likelihood of central route processing. This implies that a star rating on a poster for a film in a
much-watched genre is less effective than a star rating on a poster for a film in a lesser-much-watched genre. In other words, the effect of a star rating should be stronger when there is a mismatch between film genre and preference – perhaps not only due to the fact that incongruent messages tend to be processed peripherally, but also because exposure to a poster for a film in a lesser-watched genre
is associated with more unstable genre expectations. This, in turn, might increase the need to rely on the opinions of others (H2).
Research on movie preferences (e.g., Oliver & Raney, 2011) has found that individuals with hedonic tendencies tend to favor comedies over dramas. Exposing hedonic individuals to a comedy film poster, then, would likely result in central route processing and a weak effect of the star rating. Considering the aforementioned line of reasoning, the effect of a star rating is likely to be strongest for exposure to a drama poster. Coupled with the expectation that hedonic individuals are more susceptible to a star rating than eudaimonic individuals (H3), exposure to
incongruent material should yield a strong effect of the star rating. In other words, a star rating on a drama poster should evoke a more positive film attitude and stronger viewing intention for hedonic individuals than for eudaimonic individuals. Therefore:
Hypothesis 4 (H4): The effect of a star rating on a poster for a drama film on (a) film
attitude and (b) willingness to see the movie should be stronger for individuals who score high on hedonic motivations, compared to individuals who score high on eudaimonic motivations.
Congruency between film genre and personal preference: Comedy. This study infers
that the relationship studied in H4 also holds true for comedy films and eudaimonic individuals.
It is important to note, however, that eudaimonic individuals tend to engage in central route processing (Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, & Jarvis, 1996), which would decrease the effect of the star rating (H3). Nonetheless, message incongruency ''may serve as a distraction from processing
extensively'' (Lee & Schumann, 2004, p. 66), which hampers one's ability to engage in central route processing. As a result, eudaimonic individuals may, too, come to rely on a star rating when evaluating a poster for a film in a genre that is incongruent with their preferences. Thus:
Hypothesis 5 (H5): The effect of a star rating on a poster for a comedic film on (a) film
attitude and (b) willingness to see the movie will be stronger for individuals who score high on eudaimonic motivations, compared to individuals who score high on hedonic motivations.
Method
Participants
Data collection began after receiving ethical approval from the University of Amsterdam. Adults were recruited on a variety of social media platforms and the sample was further enlarged through snowballing. Data was collected over a three-week period in April and May 2018. Overall, 400 Dutch adults participated. Sixty-three participants ended the survey prematurely, indicating an 84.25% completion rate. The final sample consisted of 337 participants (64.70% female, Mage = 37.13 years, SDage = 16.56 years).
Procedure
Data was collected through the online survey tool Qualtrics. After signing the consent form, participants were first asked questions about demographics. Participants were then randomly assigned to one of the four conditions: comedy poster cue (experimental), comedy poster no cue (control), drama poster cue (experimental) or drama poster no cue (control). Participants were instructed to look at the poster and to create a first impression for themselves. After seeing the poster, participants evaluated the film and indicated their own movie
preferences. On average, time taken to complete the survey was 5 minutes and 36 seconds (SD = 206 minutes and 55 seconds).
Stimuli
A pilot study with 30 participants (64.29% female, Mage = 23.89 years, SDage = 7.88 years) was conducted to determine which film posters were most strongly associated with the
genres comedy and drama. Ten posters (five for drama films, five for comedies) were selected after browsing the ''Coming Soon'' section of the Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Results revealed that the poster for The Last Son received the highest score on drama and was rated low on comedy. In contrast, the poster for Life of the Party was associated strongly with comedy and less so with drama. As such, these posters were selected as the final stimuli. Two versions were created of each poster. The experimental versions featured a fabricated star rating (see
Appendix), which was attributed to De Volkskrant (a high-quality, nationally distributed morning newspaper). The choice to rely on a Dutch newspaper was made to increase the level of
relevance to participants. The control versions of the posters were identical to the experimental versions, except for the five-star review.
To ensure that the experimental posters would be comparable as well as true-to-life, careful consideration was paid to the rating's location. A horizontal banner was added at the top of each poster to have the rating stand out and to create consistency between the two posters. In both cases, the banner was transparent and resembled the design of the original poster. In addition, the rating and source were given the same color as all other textual elements. Because banners generally highlight the nominations a film has received, most critically successful films feature them on their poster. Since the purpose of this study was to manipulate a film's perceived quality, using a banner to do so was regarded as a good way to test the key relationships while at the same time maximizing internal and external validity.
Twelve participants reported being familiar with the films prior to the experiment. Because this familiarity could potentially mitigate the effect of the rating, they were excluded from the analyses.
Film attitude. Participants' attitude towards the film was assessed with seven items
(unappealing/appealing; bad/good; unpleasant/pleasant; unfavorable/favorable; unlikable/likable; dull/dynamic; not worth my time/worth my time), each measured on a five-point semantic differential. Values ranged from 1.00 (negative attitude) to 5.00 (positive attitude). Items were selected from previous research (e.g., Laczniak & Teas, 2002; Spears & Singh, 2004; Wells, 1964) and translated into Dutch. Together, the items formed a reliable scale (Cronbach's = .89). The items were combined to create a mean for each participant. Higher means indicate a more positive film attitude. The average mean score was 3.03 (SD = 0.81).
Viewing intention. A four-item Likert scale was adapted from previous research (e.g.,
Bearden, Lichtenstein, & Teel, 1984; Ilicic & Blakemore, 2015; Laczniak & Teas, 2002; Li, Daugherty, & Biocca, 2002; Westover & Randle, 2009) and translated into Dutch. Participants indicated the likelihood of watching the film on four seven-point answer scales (very
unlikely/very likely; very improbable/very probable; very uncertain/very certain; definitely not/definitely). Together, the items formed a reliable scale (Cronbach's = .94). The items were combined to create a mean for each participant. Higher means indicate a stronger viewing intention. The average mean score was 2.67 (SD = 1.47).
Moderating Variables
Self-reported levels of hedonism and eudaimonia were measured using 12 five-point Likert items adapted from Oliver and Raney (2011). Together, these items tapped into the movie preferences of participants, covering aspects of gratification (e.g., ''I like movies that make me more reflective''), the feeling of enjoyment (e.g., ''I find that even simple movies can be enjoyable as long as they are fun'') and the importance of meaningfulness (e.g., ''I am very
moved by movies that are about people's search for greater understanding in life''). Each item was translated into Dutch.
A principal axis factoring analysis with oblique rotation (direct oblimin) was conducted, which showed that the scale was multidimensional (three components with Eigenvalues above 1.00). The scree plot, however, indicated the presence of only two factors. Based on existing literature on hedonism and eudaimonia, two factors were extracted. Together, these two factors accounted for 53% the variance. Similar to the findings by Oliver and Raney (2011), the six items loading on component one all clustered around hedonic motivations and the six items loading on component two all related to eudaimonic motivations. Both scales were reliable (Cronbach's of .78 and .85, respectively). The average mean score for hedonic motivations was 3.33 (SD = 0.66). The average mean score for eudaimonic motivations was 3.66 (SD = 0.67). Manipulation Checks
Two questionnaire items were included as manipulation checks. To measure genre associations, participants responded to the following statements (measured on five-point scales anchored by ''Disagree strongly/Agree strongly''): ''the genre of this film is drama'' and ''the genre of this film is comedy.'' Perceived cue presence was a one-item measure (''The poster featured a reference to a five-star review''). The answer scale included three options (''yes,'' ''no'' and ''I do not remember'').
Results
Randomization and Manipulation Checks
Cross-tabulation analyses revealed that age was successfully randomized across conditions, χ2 (165, n = 325) = 151.68, p = .763. Gender, however, was not, χ2 (3, n = 325) =
11.35, p = .010. In addition, gender differences had a significant impact on both film attitude (p = .002) and viewing intention (p = .001). Therefore, all main analyses controlled for gender.
An independent samples t-test performed to assess the effect of the genre manipulation on perceived genre associations revealed that participants exposed to the Life of the Party poster classified the film significantly more as a comedy (M = 4.37, SD = 0.80) than participants exposed to The Last Son poster (M = 1.46, SD = 0.72), t(323) = -34.28, p < .001, 95% CI [-3.07, -2.74]. Vice versa, The Last Son poster received a significantly higher score on drama (M = 4.11, SD = 0.75) than the Life of the Party poster (M = 2.26, SD = 1.08), t(284.83) = 17.87, p < .001, 95% CI [1.65, 2.05]. Thus, this manipulation was successful.
A cross-tabulation analysis on perceived cue presence suggested that the manipulation worked as intended, χ2 (6, n = 325) = 126.46, p < .001. However, 176 participants (54%)
wrongly remembered the presence of the star rating. To understand if (in)correctly remembering the manipulation had any effect on film attitudes or viewing intentions, post-hoc analyses ran separate tests on these two groups.
The Effect of a Five-star Review (H1)
H1 posited that individuals would have a more positive film attitude and higher viewing
intention after seeing a poster that features a star rating in comparison a similar poster without such a rating. To test this hypothesis, a MANCOVA was performed for the two dependent variables (film attitude and viewing intention), using gender as a control variable and cue presence (present vs. absent) as the independent variable. The presence of a star rating did not have an effect on film attitude, F(1,322) = 0.91, p = .229, or on viewing intention, F(1,322) = 0.62, p = .430. Therefore, H1a and H1b are not supported. Mean scores per condition can be found
The Moderating Role of Film Genre (H2)
H2 asserted that the effect of a star rating on film attitude and viewing intention would be
stronger for a drama movie than for a comedic movie. A MANCOVA with gender as a control variable and film genre (drama vs. comedy) and cue presence (present vs. absent) as the
independent variables revealed again no main effect of cue presence on film attitude, F(1,320) = 1.57, p = .211, nor on viewing intention, F(1,320) = 0.70, p = .404. Results did reveal a weak but significant main effect of film genre on both film attitude, F(1,320) = 5.74, p = .017, η2 = 0.02
and viewing intention, F(1,320) = 5.71, p = .017, η2 = 0.02. Participants exposed to The Last Son
poster held a significantly more positive film attitude (M = 3.07, SE = 0.06) than participants exposed to the Life of the Party poster (M = 2.86, SE = 0.09). Similarly, exposure to The Last Son poster was associated with a stronger viewing intention (M = 2.85, SE = 0.11) than exposure to the Life of the Party poster (M = 2.47, SE = 0.11). The hypothesized interaction effect between cue presence and film genre was non-significant for both film attitude, F(1,320) = 0.88, p = .348, and viewing intention, F(1,320) = 0.98, p = .323, however. Although the interaction term
revealed minor differences between participants (see Table 2 for means), these were not significant. Consequently, H2a and H2b are not supported.
The Moderating Role of Personal Preferences (H3)
H3 proposed that in comparison to people with more eudaimonic motivations, people
with more hedonic motivations would hold a more favorable film attitude and stronger viewing intention if a poster featured a star rating. To test this hypothesis, a MANCOVA was performed, using gender as a control variable and type of motivation (hedonic vs. eudaimonic) and cue presence (present vs. absent) as the independent variables. In order to create a dichotomous variable for type of motivation, people's scores on the hedonism scale were subtracted from their
scores on the eudaimonia scale. Depending on their score, participants were classified as either more hedonic or more eudaimonic (a score below 0 indicated a relative preference for more hedonic films, whereas a score above 0 indicated a relative preference for more eudaimonic films).
There was again a non-significant main effect of cue presence for both film attitude, F(1,320) = 1.71, p = .192, and viewing intention, F(1,320) = 0.66, p = .417. Similarly, the main effect of personal preferences was non-significant for both film attitude, F(1,320) = 1.14, p = .287, as well as viewing intention, F(1,320) = 0.26, p = .609. Furthermore, results revealed a non-significant interaction effect between cue presence and personal preferences towards film attitude, F(1,320) = 0.17, p = .678, and viewing intention, F(1,320) = 0.01, p = .924. H3a and H3b
are, thus, not supported. Mean scores are reported in Table 3.
Congruency Between Film Genre and Personal Preference (H4 and H5)
H4 and H5 posited that the effect of a star rating would be strongest when the type of film
(comedy or drama) is incongruent with one's film preferences (more hedonic or more
eudaimonic). To test these hypotheses, a MANCOVA was performed, using gender as a control variable and type of motivation (hedonic vs. eudaimonic), film genre (drama vs. comedy) and cue presence (present vs. absent) as the independent variables. The three-way interaction between cue presence, film genre and personal preference was not significant for either film attitude, F(1,316) = 0.30, p = .585, or viewing intention, F(1,316) = 1.66, p = .199. As such, H4
and H5 are not supported. Mean scores can be found in Table 4.
Post-hoc Analyses
To determine if the results of the main analyses differed for participants who correctly or incorrectly remembered the presence of the rating cue, additional MANCOVA were run. Each
MANCOVA was run twice; once on all participants who correctly remembered the presence of the rating and once on all those who did not. Results revealed that all effects – minus the main effect of film genre (H2) – remained non-significant. Therefore, all hypotheses remain
unsupported.
Discussion
The purpose of this research was to increase the understanding of the persuasive effect of critical acclaim on movie posters while simultaneously generating new insights into the
conditions under which this effect may occur. To do so, this study not only focused on the direct effect of critical acclaim in the form of star ratings on a movie poster (H1), but also included two
additional variables (film genre [H2] and personal preferences [H3]) with the expectation that
these may moderate the strength of the effect.
Results for the hypothesized effect of critical acclaim showed that attitudes and viewing intentions in regard to the films did not vary as a result of exposure to a star rating, rejecting H1.
In addition, neither film genre (H2) nor interpersonal differences (H3) had a significant impact on
the persuasiveness of a star rating. Additionally, incongruency between film type and preference (H4 and H5) was not significantly related to responses to the stimuli. Together, the results of this
study suggest that inserting a star rating on a film's poster does not lead to a more positive film attitude or stronger viewing intention, regardless of the genre of the film or the preferences of the audience. In other words, this study found no support for the persuasive effect of critical acclaim (in the form of a star rating) on a film's poster.
A Theoretical Perspective on Critical Acclaim
The fact that this study only observed null effects warrants a closer examination of its basic assumption: the idea that the authoritative power of critics – when included on a movie
poster in the form of a star rating – is strong enough to draw people to the movie theatre. This study adapted elements from the Elaboration Likelihood Model (e.g., Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a), as well as from research on heuristics, hedonism and eudaimonia and differences in film genre (e.g., Oliver & Raney, 2011) to explain and contextualize this influence. Together, these
arguments proposed that exposure to cues in the form of star ratings on a film's poster would lead to a more positive film attitude and stronger viewing intention – especially in the case of a
mismatch (i.e., incongruency) between content and preference. Although results of this study did not support these propositions, they do provide three relevant theoretical implications for future research studying critical acclaim.
First, the ELM centers around the idea that people's motivation and ability to process a message are the most powerful determinants for the processing route (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a). In addition, the model posits that amount of motivation and ability one has are inversely related to the need to rely on heuristics: the more (less) message-processing motivation and ability one has, the less (more) he or she will rely on peripheral cues (Petty & Hinsenkamp, 2017). Guided by these principles and the assumption that individuals are generally unmotivated to process film posters centrally, this study expected a strong effect of the cue (i.e., star rating). Other studies (e.g., Yang, Sarathy, & Walsh, 2016) have been more successful in showing that differences in review valence had an effect on people's purchase intentions, perhaps due to the use of a
different stimulus (i.e., a product of a different category). This suggests that star ratings might be of more value for certain product categories – which implies that not all advertisements are processed under the same route (i.e., advertisements for some products may be processed centrally). This study's assumption that film posters are generally processed peripherally, then, could be incorrect. Thus, future research might benefit from examining how film posters are
processed and how much attention is paid to a critic's endorsement under each route (perhaps through eye-tracking). Additionally, if it is indeed the case that film posters are processed centrally rather than peripherally, the effect of a star rating on a film poster might be subdued by other elements (e.g., the content of the film).
Second, it is widely understood that individual differences influence the selection of and preference for particular types of films (Oliver & Raney, 2011). More specifically, past research has used differences in hedonism and eudaimonia to explain how these lead to genre preferences (Oliver & Raney, 2011). Given that this study mirrored the approach of previous work (e.g., Oliver & Raney, 2011) in its measurement of hedonism and eudaimonia, the null effects found raise questions regarding the extent to which hedonism and eudaimonia are mutually exclusive. In other words, it could be that hedonism and eudaimonia do not form bipolar motivations, but instead exist on a continuum. In that case, people can display both motivations and preferences are context-dependent (Elsaesser, 2001). Given that this study only found a weak, negative correlation (r = -.29) between participants' levels of hedonism and eudaimonia, perhaps
differences between these two motivations were too small to detect any meaningful variance in their effects on attitudes and viewing intentions. Therefore, a second suggestion for future
research would be to take into account how contextual factors may (temporarily) impact people's preferences.
Third, prior studies on critical acclaim each operationalize acclaim differently (e.g., as ''good reviews,'' Reinstein & Snyder, 2005; as at least a three-star rating given by the magazine Empire, Collins, Hand, & Snell, 2002). This makes it very difficult to make any general claims about the effect of ''critical acclaim.'' Given that critical acclaim can be referred to in a variety of ways on a film's poster, much research remains to be done. Therefore, future studies might not
only look at other forms of critical acclaim (e.g., critics' quotes), but perhaps also compare them to arrive at a better understanding of the nature of acclaim. Notwithstanding, just because this study failed to provide support for the effect of star ratings, does not mean that other forms of critical acclaim are ineffective too.
Methodological Limitations
The lack of significant results may also be explained by a variety of methodological issues. First, as over half of this study's sample wrongly remembered the presence of the star rating, the placing of this cue requires critical re-examination. To maximize this study's internal and external validity, the choice was made to include the rating on a horizontal banner on top of the original poster. In general, when exposed to messages that combine images and text, people focus primarily on dominant illustrations and artwork (Chu, Paul, & Ruel, 2009; Holmqvist & Wartenberg, 2005). This suggests that perhaps the indistinctness of the star rating was not due to its location, but rather to its small size in print or to the fact that the poster featured too much elements. Nevertheless, post-hoc analyses revealed that even for individuals who did correctly remember the cue's presence, it still had no effect on either film attitudes or viewing intentions. Although this might also be due to a relatively low sample size (n = 149), it does suggest that the authoritative power of critics is less strong than expected. Still, future research that manipulates the presence of a star rating might benefit from making it more visible – either by enlarging the rating or by adjusting the contrast between the rating and its surrounding imagery – and
conducting a pilot study to ensure its effectiveness.
Second, it is possible that the stimuli differed in too many aspects to detect meaningful differences in film attitudes and viewing intentions. To prevent this from happening, a pilot study was conducted to carefully select the stimuli from a series of posters. It could have been,
however, that the posters were deemed too uninteresting or irrelevant. This might have had a negative impact on the receptivity of participants to a star rating. Admittedly, both films dealt with subject matters that were perhaps too discrepant for Dutch audiences (e.g., a car crash which involved then-U.S. senator Ted Kennedy). This suggests that perhaps more posters should have been included in the pilot study. In addition, it could be that the effect of a star rating depends on repeated exposure. Given that, in real life, people tend to come across film
advertisements on multiple occasions, the effect of a star rating might only appear after multiple observations (Cacioppo & Petty, 1979). Future research should therefore consider not only looking at variables of interest, but also take into account that differences in perceived relevance, interestingness of the film and/or the amount of exposure might be other factors that influence the extent to which a star rating is able to evoke stronger responses.
Implications for Practitioners
From a practical perspective, these findings do not support the idea that the use of critical acclaim on a film's poster has a positive effect on box office returns. Nevertheless, this study does offer two important implications for practitioners. First, if possible, film marketers should always include a reference to critical acclaim. While this seems paradoxical given the results of this study, the findings also do not suggest that star ratings have any negative impact. In fact, this study is one of the few that does not find any effect of critical acclaim (for a review, see Gunter, 2018), which suggests that the observed null effects are due to external influences rather than to the manipulation itself. When including a reference to critical acclaim, however, careful attention should always be paid to its visibility. In addition, it should be noted that the strength of the effect may not only depend on cultural differences (d'Astous, Colbert, & Nobert, 2007) or on the valence of a review (Mishne & Glance, 2006), but also on the amount of excitement (i.e., hype)
surrounding a film's release. High-profile blockbusters generally have a built-in audience who support a film regardless of its quality – to the extent that the use of critical acclaim becomes ineffective. In comparison, including a star rating could be more effective for films with low box office projections.
Second, as more attractive posters are more persuasive (Çakir & Demir, 2011), careful attention should not only be paid to the placing of the star rating, but also to the design and layout of the entire poster. In addition, if movie posters are indeed processed centrally rather than peripherally, individuals might evaluate the poster in its entirety instead of focusing solely on peripheral cues. As long as it is integrated properly, then, a star rating on an appealing film poster might prompt a stronger response than a star rating on an unappealing poster. Conclusion
Although there exists a large body of research on the effect of using critical acclaim as part of movie marketing (e.g., Jozefowicz, Brewer, & Kelley, 2009; Reinstein & Snyder, 2005), much remains unknown about the precise conditions under which this effect occurs. Given the prevalence of this marketing technique, more empirical insight into people's responses to critical acclaim on film posters is necessary to better understand its effectiveness. This study extends the current body of knowledge by showing that there are also instances in which the use of critical acclaim has no effect; a remarkable conclusion considering the many studies that do find an effect. Although results showed some variation in attitudinal responses to film posters, these differences could not be explained by film genre or interpersonal differences. This study, then, hopes to inspire other researchers to re-examine the effect of critical acclaim, perhaps with a different focus. The fact that people continue to flock to the theatres during any given week is
illustrative of the power of film. Perhaps new insights can make sure that people continue to do so in the future.
References
Baumann, S. (2007). Hollywood highbrow: From entertainment to art. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bearden, W. O., Lichtenstein, D. L., & Teel, J. E. (1984). Comparison price, coupon, and brand effects on consumer reactions to retail newspaper advertisements. Journal of Retailing, 60(2), 11–34. Retrieved from
http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/4666970/comparison-price-coupon-brand-effects-consumer-reactions-retail-newspaper-advertisements
BoxOffice Pro. (2018a). Long range forecast: Disney's 'A Wrinkle in Time'. Retrieved from https://pro.boxoffice.com/long-range-forecast-wrinkle-time/
BoxOffice Pro. (2018b). Long range tracking: 'Blockers' & 'A Quiet Place' could mark positive start to April box office. Retrieved from https://pro.boxoffice.com/long-range-tracking-blockers-quiet-place/
Brevet, B. (2018). 'A Quiet Place' delivers not so quiet $50 million opening. Retrieved from http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4386&p=.htm
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1979). Effects of message repetition and position on cognitive response, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 97–109. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.97
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional
differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197–253. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197
Çakir, V., & Demir, S. (2011). The role of the movie posters on the behavior of audiences in choosing the movie. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(1), 11–28. Retrieved from http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/nwsahuman/article/view/5000062463/5000058728 Chu, S., Paul, N., & Ruel, L. (2009). Using eye tracking technology to examine the effectiveness
of design elements on news websites. Information Design Journal, 17(1), 31–43. doi:10.1075/idj.17.1.04chu
Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Cohen, A. R., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. M. (1955). An experimental investigation of need for cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291–294.
doi:10.1037/h0042761
Collins, A., Hand, C., & Snell, M. C. (2002). What makes a blockbuster? Economic analysis of film success in the United Kingdom. Managerial and Decision Economics, 23, 343–354. doi:10.1002/mde.1069
D'Astous, A., Colbert, F., & Nobert, V. (2007). Effects of country-genre congruence on the evaluation of movies: The moderating role of critical reviews and moviegoers' prior knowledge. International Journal of Arts Management, 10(1), 45–51. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2048/stable/41064907
D'Astous, A., & Touil, N. (1999). Consumer evaluations of movies on the basis of critics' judgments. Psychology & Marketing, 16(8), 677–694. Retrieved from
https://onlinelibrary-wiley-
Debenedetti, S., & Ghariani, G. (2018). To quote or not to quote? Critics' quotations in film advertisements as indicators of the continuing authority of film criticism. Poetics, 66, 30– 41. doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2018.02.003
Desai, K. K., & Basuroy, S. (2005). Interactive influence of genre familiarity, star power, and critics' reviews in the cultural goods industry: The case of motion pictures. Psychology & Marketing, 22(3), 203–223. doi:10.1002/mar.20055
De Silva, I. (1998). Consumer selection of motion pictures. In B. R. Litman (Ed.), The motion picture mega industry (pp. 144–171). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Elliott, C., & Simmons, R. (2011). Advertising media strategies in the film industry. Applied Economics, 43, 4461–4468. doi:10.1080/00036846.2010.491466
Elsaesser, T. (2001). The blockbuster: Everything connects, but not everything goes. In J. Lewis (Ed.), The end of cinema as we know it: American film in the nineties (pp. 11–22). London, England: Pluto.
Guadagno, R. E. (2013). Social influence online: The six principles in action. In C. Liberman (Ed.), Casing persuasive communication (pp. 321–344). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Gula, R. J. (2002). Nonsense: A handbook of logical fallacies. Mount Jackson, VA: Axion. Gunter, B. (2018). Predicting movie success at the box office. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Haugtvedt, C. P., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1992). Need for cognition and advertising: Understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(3), 239–260. doi:10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80038-1
Holmqvist, K., & Wartenberg, C. (2005). The role of local design factors for newspaper reading behavior – An eye-tracking perspective. Lund University Cognitive Studies, 127, 1–21. Retrieved from http://www.lucs.lu.se/LUCS/127/LUCS.127.pdf
Huta, V., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Pursuing pleasure or virtue: The differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11(6), 735–762. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9171-4
Ilicic, J., & Blakemore, J. (2015). Effectiveness of indecent language in advertising on young adult consumer attitudes and purchase intent. Journal of Promotion Management, 21(5), 614-629. doi:10.1080/10496491.2015.1055043
Jozefowicz, J. J., Brewer, S. M., & Kelly, J. M. (2009). A blueprint for success in the US film industry. Applied Economics, 41(5), 589–606. doi:10.1080/00036840601007351
Laczniak, R. N., & Teas, R. K. (2002). Context effects in the measurement of attitude toward the advertisement. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 24(1), 11–24. doi:10.1080/10641734.2002.10505124
Lee, E., & Schumann, D. W. (2004). Explaining the special case of incongruity in advertising: Combining classic theoretical approaches. Marketing Theory, 4(1/2), 59–90.
doi:10.1177/1470593104044087
Li, H., Daugherty, T., & Biocca, F. (2002). Impact of 3-D advertising on product knowledge, brand attitude, and purchase intention: The mediating role of presence. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 43-75. doi:10.1080/00913367.2002.10673675
McClintock, P. (2018). Weekend box office: 'Wrinkle in Time' stumbles with $33M; 'Black Panther' no. 1 with $41M. Retrieved from
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat- vision/weekend-box-office-wrinkle-time-stumbles-33m-black-panther-no-1-41m-1093635
Mendelson, S. (2018). Box office: Why 'Wrinkle in Time' disappointed with $33M debut weekend. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/03/11/box-office-why-wrinkle-in-time-stumbled-with-33m-debut-weekend/#246d5669258d
Mishne, G., & Glance, N. (2006). Predicting movie sales from blogger sentiment. Paper presented at the AAAI Spring Symposium on Computational Approaches to Analyzing Weblogs, Stanford: CA. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.405.172&rep=rep1&type=pdf Neale, S. (2000). Genre and Hollywood. London, England: Routledge.
Oliver, M. B., Ash, E., Woolley, J. K., Shade, D. D., & Kim, K. (2014). Entertainment we watch and entertainment we appreciate: Patterns of motion picture consumption and acclaim over three decades. Mass Communication and Society, 17, 853–873.
doi:10.1080/15205436.2013.872277
Oliver, M. B., & Bartsch, A. (2010). Appreciation as audience response: Exploring entertainment gratifications beyond hedonism. Human Communication Research, 36, 53–81.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01368.x
Oliver, M. B., & Raney, A. A. (2011). Entertainment as pleasurable and meaningful: Identifying hedonic and eudaimonic motivations for entertainment consumption. Journal of
Communication, 61, 984–1004. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01585.x
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986a). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986b). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Petty, R. E., & Hinsenkamp, L. (2017). Routes to persuasion, central and peripheral. In F. M. Moghaddam (Ed.). The SAGE encyclopedia of political behavior, 718–720. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Petty, R. E., Strathman, A. J., Cacioppo, J. T., & Priester, J. R. (2005). To think or not to think? Exploring two routes to persuasion. In T. C. Brock & M. C. Green (Eds.). Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives, 81–116. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades' evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243–281.
doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x
Reinstein, D. A., & Snyder, C. M. (2005). The influence of expert reviews on consumer demand for experience goods: A case study of movie critics. The Journal of Industrial
Economics, 53(1), 27–51. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3569753
Rubin, R. (2018). 'A Quiet Place': Why the horror film roared at the box office. Retrieved from http://variety.com/2018/film/box-office/a-quiet-place-box-office-anaylsis-john-krasinski-emily-blunt-1202746988/
Spears, N., & Singh, S. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53–66.
doi:10.1080/10641734.2004.10505164
Sundar, S. S., Xu, Q., & Oeldorf-Hirsch, A. (2009). Authority vs. peer: How interface cues influence users. Paper presented at the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in
Updegraff, J. A., Sherman, D. K., Luyster, F. S., & Mann, T. L. (2007). The effects of message quality and congruency on perceptions of tailored health communications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(2), 249–257. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.01.007 Wells, W. D. (1964). EQ, son of EQ, and the reaction profile. Journal of Marketing, 28(4), 45–
52. doi:10.2307/1249570
Westover, M. L., & Randle, Q. (2009). Endorser weight and perceptions of brand attitude and intent to purchase. Journal of Promotion Management, 15(1-2), 57–73.
doi:10.1080/10496490902908717
Whitehead, J. L., Jr. (1971). Effects of authority-based assertion on attitude and credibility. Speech Monographs, 38(4), 311–315. doi:10.1080/03637757109375723
Yang, J., Sarathy, R., & Walsh, S. M. (2016). Do review valence and review volume impact consumers' purchase decisions as assumed? Nankai Business Review International, 7(2), 231–247. doi:10.1108/NBRI-11-2015-0028
Table 1
Means per condition (adjusted for any differences in gender).
Dependent variable Cue presence M (SE)
Film attitude Present 2.91 (0.06)
Absent 3.01 (0.06)
Viewing intention Present 2.60 (0.11)
Table 2
Means per condition (adjusted for any differences in gender).
Dependent variable Cue presence Film genre M (SE)
Film attitude Present Drama 3.05 (0.09)
Comedy 2.76 (0.09)
Absent Drama 3.08 (0.09)
Comedy 2.95 (0.09)
Viewing intention Present Drama 2.87 (0.16)
Comedy 2.32 (0.16)
Absent Drama 2.84 (0.16)
Table 3
Means per condition (adjusted for any differences in gender).
Dependent variable Cue presence Personal preference M (SE)
Film attitude Present More eudaimonic 2.88 (0.08)
More hedonic 2.94 (0.10)
Absent More eudaimonic 2.96 (0.08)
More hedonic 3.10 (0.10) Viewing intention Present More eudaimonic 2.57 (0.15) More hedonic 2.64 (0.18)
Absent More eudaimonic 2.69 (0.14)
Table 4
Means per condition (adjusted for any differences in gender).
Dependent variable Cue presence Film genre Personal preference M (SE) Film attitude Present Drama More eudaimonic 3.16 (0.12)
More hedonic 2.92 (0.13) Comedy More eudaimonic 2.61 (0.12) More hedonic 2.96 (0.14)
Absent Drama More eudaimonic 3.11 (0.11)
More hedonic 3.04 (0.14) Comedy More eudaimonic 2.82 (0.11) More hedonic 3.16 (0.14) Viewing intention Present Drama More eudaimonic 2.96 (0.21) More hedonic 2.75 (0.24) Comedy More eudaimonic 2.18 (0.21) More hedonic 2.52 (0.25)
Absent Drama More eudaimonic 3.06 (0.20)
More hedonic 2.49 (0.25) Comedy More eudaimonic 2.31 (0.20) More hedonic 3.11 (0.26)
