The effectiveness of cross media campaigns vs. single medium campaigns on cognitive, affective and behavioral responses : the mediation role of persuasive knowledge

(1)

campaigns on cognitive, affective and behavioral responses:

The mediation role of persuasive knowledge.

Author : Athina Benia Supervisor: Hilde Voorverld Student Number: 10488502

A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Amsterdam

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science in

Persuasive Communication

Graduate School of Communication University of Amsterdam

(2)

(3)

2

Hereby I want to express my gratefulness for the help of my thesis supervisor, Mrs. Hilde Voorveld, my classmates, and many friends who helped me out with recruiting respondents. I want to thank also study advisors who were always listening my worries and my fears. Thank you all for the precious help!

(6)

5

Abstract

Advertising is everything can be purposely communicate to have an effect on consumer behavior. The question how advertisers can reached their public has become much more complicated, as the active role of consumers has changed the communication process and advertising effectiveness. Many researcher state that combining media have a greater effect on advertising but this remain under-researched. For this reason, the purpose of this research is to complement the extant literature by investigating whether exposure to a campaign that makes use of more than one medium results in more positive consumer responses. Furthermore, this study will investigate whether synergy effects can be occurred between new forms of online and offline media use and the way consumers cope with persuasive attempts in an advertising campaign by analyzing the responses of 121 respondents from 21 countries who were exposed to one or two media in an advertising campaigns. Two media, Print and social network sites (SNS) were chosen and two forms of promotion techniques, Print ad and brand pages on SNS (Facebook) were used as the stimuli in one factor design. The overall findings of the study demonstrate a slightly agreement about the cross-media effects as the combination of Print and SNS had a more positive effect on brand attitude. In addition. the effect of persuasive knowledge was partially confirmed. Based on the results of this study, suggestions regarding the marketing and advertising strategy of integrate multiple media in one campaign were addressed at the end of the study.

(7)

6

Keywords

Marketing, Cross-media synergy, single media, offline & online media, persuasive knowledge, consumer behavior & attitudes, purchase intention.

1. Introduction

Nowadays, the advent of Internet and web technologies have brought many significant changes into marketing and advertising literature and practical filed. Advertisers are seeking new insights into new and less cluttered media while they can choose numerous media for their advertising campaigns. The fundamental role of advertising campaigns is to achieve synergy effects by using multiple media in one campaign (Halvena, Cardarelli, Montigny, 2007; Voorveld, Neijens & Smit, 2011). Synergy occurs when the combined effect of multiple activities exceeds the sum of their individual effects (Naik and Raman, 2003). Hence, academic researchers and marketers are trying to answer the questions how and under which circumstances different media work together and which medium type is way more appropriate to produce and contribute to the outcomes of marketing campaigns (Voorveld, Neijens & Smit, 2012). Ultimately, it is of crucial importance to understand the growing interest in studying cross-media advertising campaigns.

According to prior research they are two major reasons why the usage of multiple media is widespread. Firstly, the most important incentive is not only to reach the target audience but also to expand the reach of a campaign. For this reason, media choices plays the most crucial role in a campaigns and advertising companies spend more than

(8)

80%-7 85% of their budget on buying advertising space ( Moorman, Neijens & Smith, 2010). Therefore, when advertisers are choosing a medium to promote a campaign they should examine carefully the difference in media characteristics (Buchholz & Smith, 1991; Vacratsas & Ambler, 1999). For instance, print media such as newspapers can be chosen to reach a general but educated and well-read audience, while an online advertising campaign such as an Facebook Campaign can have complementary strength on very specific target group (young adults). Secondly, there is agreement that when two or more media are used in an advertising campaign, is more effective than using only one medium (Chang & Thorson, 2004). Prior research has examined the benefits of combining multiple media in one advertising campaign than using single media campaign (Chang and Thorson, 2004; Dijkstra, 2002; Dijkstra, Buijtels & Van Raaij, 2005; Edell and Keller, 1989; Naik and Raman, 2003; Voorveld, Neijens and Smit, 2011; Voorveld, Neijens and Smit, 2012).

However, the results of the earlier studies do not reveal straightforward positive effects. Regarding, cross-media usage studies contradict or find only weak results into the possible effectiveness of combining more than one media in an campaign ( Wakolbinger, Denk & Oberecker 2009). Despite the fact that several media combination have been examined ,only a limited number of studies investigate the advertising effect of multiple media in one campaign by combining online and offline media (Chang & Thorson, 2004; Dijkstra, Bijntels & van Raaij, 2005 ; Halvena, Cardarelli, Montigny, 2007; Naik & Peters, 2009, Sheehan, Doherty, 2001, Wakolbinger, Denk, Oberecker, 2009; Voorveld, Neijens and Smit, 2011; Voorveld, Neijens and Smit, 2012). Some of these studies has been conducted at a time that the number of Internet media users was limited and perhaps Internet was less impactful.

(9)

8 The growing importance of the Internet as well as the use of websites in combination with traditional media has raised the question which advertising online platform contributes more to the positive effects of a campaign. Recent evidences suggest a dramatic increase of Given new media platforms, online social networking is becoming renowned day by day. More than 50% of adolescents visit social media site more than once a day (O’Keeffe & Clarke-Pearson, 2011). The technological advance of Internet, including email and online social networking’s sites such as Facebook and Twitter, has become increasingly important form of communication. For example, (72%) of young people in the United States use SNS, while blogging, Twitter, MySpace and LinkedIn are not used in large numbers; respectively 15%, 8%, 48% and 14% of young adults have a profile on the aforementioned applications (Lenhart, Purcell, Smit & Zickuhr, 2010). By contrast, a much smaller number of older adults (40%) are using social networks platforms (Lenhart et al., 2010). Therefore, social networking is much more influential especially in young people and targeting different customers groups with the most efficient combination of media can increase synergy consistency and result in positive consumer’s responses.

Although SNS have monopolized the attention of researchers for a long time (Ahn, Han, Kwak, Moon & Jeong, 2007; Trusov, Bucklin & Pauwels, 2009; Pempek, Yermolayeva & Calvert, 2009) ,as mentioned above, little is known about the persuasive of SNS campaigns. Previous research on SNS campaigns, has focused focusing on emotionally motivation of consumers to forward advertising content with close friends (Van Noort, Antheunis & van Reijmersdal, 2012). From this perspective, interesting findings of mechanisms that indicate consumer’s behavior online, when they are

(10)

9 exposed to a campaign which uses two different media results in more positive forward encoding effect, image transfer effect and multiple source perceptions. In line with this, the question of whether exposure to SNS adverting campaign can reduce the persuasive knowledge of consumers or can increase synergy effects , needs to be answered.

In addition to the mentioned results, SNS campaigns have not yet investigated in combination with traditional media. Despite the fact that advertising budget have declined recently for print media compared to internet advertising (Nielsen, 2013), the traditional media format is still influential because Internet can enhance buying behavior but needs the traditional media to supplement it (Dijkstra et al., 2005). The reason why print media and SNS platform can be integrated into an advertising campaign is that both print and SNS are internally paced as people can control on their own the exposure to the medium (Dijkstra et al, 2005). Prior research indicated that Print is mostly superior in comprehension (Jacoby, Wayne, Hoyer& Zimmer, 1983), while SNS is more interactive (Hoy & Milne, 2010). Recent research in SNS demonstrated that campaigns which designed for social network sites are perceived as less persuasive and as results tend to be more persuasive (Van Noort, Antheunis & van Reijmersdal, 2012). In such cases, persuasion knowledge is limited or even not activated. Hence, because of the hidden that persuasive intent through Social Networking campaign is much more reduced compared to traditional media campaign, and thus, people tend to acknowledge the persuasive role of adverting in Social Networks. Hence, when people exposed to an advertising campaign on SNS tend to underestimate the persuasive role of persuasion and this perhaps may evoke greater cognitive and affective responses.

(11)

10 By taking a broader view on different media effects, the first aims of this study is to explore the possible effectiveness of cross media campaigns compared to single media campaigns. The second aim of this study to investigate the complementary role of SNS with traditional mass media to increase cross media consistency in an advertising campaign. In particular, the current study examines the advertising effectiveness of combining Print media and SNS platform on cognitive, affective and conative responses of consumers. By studying the effect of persuasive knowledge, the third aim of this study is to investigate how consumers use this knowledge when they are exposed with persuasive attempts in an advertising campaign that combines more than one medium. By giving insight into the effectiveness of cross-media campaigns, this study is of high practical relevance, and perhaps media planners and advertisers can build their media strategy and can reduce significantly their marketing budget without reducing their consumers outreach.

Thus , the core research question that guide the current study can be stated as follows: To what extent does the use of cross-media in an advertising campaign results in positive cognitive, affective and behavioral responses of consumers compared to a single media campaign? And this effect is mediated by persuasive knowledge?

In the following section, we first discuss a review of empirical research on cross-media studies. Second, we outline and justify our method research approach. Third, we present our finding providing insight into how different media can be used in one campaign to maximize customer impact. Finally, we discuss the implication and the limitations of our finding for future research.

(12)

11

2. Literature Review

2.1 Results of earlier studies into combining multiple media forms

2.1.2 Experimental studies

In a multimedia advertising campaign is being used more than one type of media order to get the message across. The ultimate purpose of using a multiple media campaign is to induce synergy (Voorveld et al., 2011), which is the “the combined effect of multiple communication tools significantly surpasses the sum of the individual effects” (Naik & Raman, 2003). Academic literature studies cross-media advertising situations (e.g Chang and Thorson, 2004; Edell & Keller, 1989; Denk & Oberecker, 2009; Dijkstra et al. 2005; Voorveld, 2011; Tang, Wang, Newton 2007) and identifies what is known about the positive effects of the integration of ads used in multiple media campaigns. Within studies on cross-media effectiveness an initially distinction should be made between experimental studies and field studies. The experimental studies have been investigated the effectiveness of combining multiple media in a campaign in comparison to single media campaigns or repeated situations, while participants are forcefully exposed to these combinations of advertising campaigns and then several measures of individual reactions are measured. Influential papers on cross-media effects have focused on the effect of combining multiple offline media, such as the combination of TV and radio ( Edell & Keller, 1989), radio and print (Stammerjohan, Wood, Chang, & Thorson, 2005) TV and print (Tang, Newton & Wang, 2007). More precisely, Edell &Keller (1989) conducted the earliest study of the combination of the cross-media. For the combination of TV and

(13)

12 Print , Edell & Keller (1989) did not find an effect on cognitive responses, between the mixed media condition and single medium condition, while for some measures it was found that the single medium condition performed better compared to cross-media condition. On the other hand, Tang. et al. (2007) found that the coordinated use of TV commercials and print ads did produce a positive effect on cognitive and affective responses than repeated exposure to one medium. The above studies have demonstrated that cross-media conditions have a positive effect on cognitive responses while Tang. et al. (2007) found a positive effect also in affective responses.

In spite of the aforementioned results only a limited number of studies examines the possible cross-media effectiveness between online and offline media. Specifically, only for studies examines the cross-media synergy between online and offline media (Chang and Thorson, 2004; Dijkstra et al., 2005; Havlena, Cardarelli & Montigny; Voorveld et al. 2011). The study of Chang and Thorson (2004), showed that one exposure to the combination of TV and Web led in more positive results in people’s attention, message credibility and produced positive thoughts compared to a repeated exposure to the same medium. In this perspective, Dijkstra et al. (2005) found that exposure of individuals to the combination of TV, print and Websites produced a superior effect on brand attitudes and purchase intentions than exposure to single media . The results are contradicting as the single exposure to TV ad had a significant effect on cognitive responses (Dijkstra et al. 2005). Adding to these findings, Voorveld et al. (2011) confirmed that synergy effects occurs through psychological process when combining multiple media in one campaign than using repeatedly the same medium. Therefore, the results are not always consistent but based on the aforementioned experimental studies there is a positive effect when

(14)

13 cross-media campaigns are used compared to single media campaigns or repeated campaigns.

2.2.3 Field studies

It is interesting to report the results of field studies comparing cross-media campaigns with single media campaigns. The field study of Naik and Raman (2003) showed some evidence that using cross-media campaigns is an effective way of reducing the financial cost of advertising. The case study of Havlena, Cardarelli and DeMontigny ( 2007) on package food was based on the respondent-level frequency approach. The main results showed that the coordinated use of print ads, TV commercials and Internet advertisements ( e.g. banners, pop ups) did induce synergy on all common brand variables. Futhermore, banners and pop ups have a complementary role to the synergistic effects as they have little effect on the advertising campaign when they are combined with TV commercials. This result can be explained by the different modalities that each medium represents and will be discussed further in the analysis.

It should be concluded that cross-media advertising campaigns are more effective than single-media advertising campaigns. A plethora of theoretical explanations can explain in depth why synergy effects occurs between different media and which factors underling these effects. In the next section will discuss the theoretical explanations for the existence of cross-media’s synergy.

(15)

14 2.2 Theoretical explanations for cross-media synergy

Besides the complementary role of traditional media and online media in marketing advertising campaigns, there are several theoretical explanations for why psychological mechanisms should affect reactions to advertising. This section will discuss the possible explanations and the underling mechanism for the occurrence of synergy and will help us understand the effect of these mechanisms in consumer’s reactions.

2.2.1 Forward encoding

When people exposed to cross-media campaigns forward encoding effect is present (Edell & Keller 1989; Dijkistra 2002;Voorveld et all 2011). Forward encoding occurs when advertisement presented in the same medium (repeated condition) or in a different medium. Academic studies showed that the advertisement in one medium can direct the consumer’s interest in the advertisement in the second medium . (Edell & Keller 1989; Dijkistra 2002;Voorveld et all 2011). In other words, the first ad arouses the curiosity of consumers and perhaps consumers are self-motivated and interested to process the second advertisement medium (Edell & Keller 1989; Dijkistra 2002;Voorveld et al. 2011). As Voorveld et al. (2011) claimed the motivation is higher when the second advertisement is presented in a different medium than the first medium. As a result, forward encoding effect seems to increase brand recall (Edell & Keller 1989; Dijkistra 2002;Voorveld et all 2011). However, when the second advertisement is exactly the same there is a lack of interest and consumers are not motivated to proceed the message such as in the repeated conditions (Voorveld et al. 2011). Thus, the study of Voorveld et al. (2011) found cross-media effects, examining TV and Websites, as combining more than one medium

(16)

15 campaign had more positive attitudes towards advertising than using repeated advertising.

2.2.2 Image transfer

The second psychological process that explains why cross-media campaigns can be more effective in terms of cognitive, affective and conative responses is the image transfer. Voorveld et al. (2011) examined the image transfer process, which means that when consumers exposed to the advertisement in the second medium retrieve from the memories clues or information from their exposure to the first advertisement. This psychological process was first investigated by Edell & Keller (1989) and it was so-called radio replay. Surprisingly, both of the two studies found no significant effect as, Image transfer was not more prevalent when people were exposed to the cross media condition when compared to the repeated media conditions. Hence, there is not sufficient evidence for the effect of image transfer in cross-media campaigns.

2.2.3 Credibility/Multiple source perception

The third psychological process that was tested in Voorverld et al. (2011) was multiple source perception, which means that the credibility of the source enhances the effectiveness of the advertised message. According to Voorveld et al. (2011) when consumers are exposed to multiple media in a campaign they could perceive these media as independent sources of information. Because messages from independent sources are considering more convincing and credible (Dijkistra 2002;Voorveld et al. 2011), multiple source perceptions can enhance the persuasive potential of a message. To stand out this process, Voorveld et al. (2011) adopted the economic signaling theory of (Nelson 1974)

(17)

16 that supports that when individuals have the perception that advertising is expensive the brand equity is higher. In other words, consumers have the perception that the use of multiple media in one campaign or the repetition of the same campaign is expensive and as a matter of facts the advertised product is a high-equity brand. Thus, cross media conditions and repetitions conditions are more effective than single medium conditions because of the multiple source perception. In line with this, Voorveld et al. (2011) confirmed this assumption as multiple source perception was highest in the cross media condition compares to repeated condition improving the results of purchase intention and attitude towards the brand. Thus, it should be concluded that this psychological process is effective especially for behavioral responses.

2.2.4 Variation

The Variation theory explains also why cross-media campaigns have more positive effects than single media campaigns. The first variation theory, the encoding variability theory, (Stammerjohan, Wood, Chang & Thorson (2005) refers to when consumers are exposed to a variety of media that contains the same message, the copied message will be encoded in a more complicated way into the memory of consumers. Because of the complex form of the encoding, the message is processing stronger in human brain and in this complex way of encoding, have a positive impact on memory of consumers and can lead to positive affective responses. In other words, complicated encoding of the message in the human brain is an implicit process that can enhance in a more unconscious way the brand recall and attitude towards advertising. This process occurs only on cross-media conditions because exposure to same message from a variety of media can result in complex encoding and not a single media exposure or repeated exposure to the same

(18)

17 medium (Stammerjohan, Wood, Chang & Thorson (2005). The second variation theory refers to the repetition variation theory. The repetition variation theory according to Stammerjohan, Wood, Chang & Thorson (2005) demonstrates that “when individuals are exposed to a message in varied media instead of being exposed to a message in the same medium repetitively, this results in more positive affective reactions”. In agreement with the repetition variation theory, the Differential Attention Hypothesis (Unnava & Burnkrant, 1991) suggests that when people see a message repeatedly the inattention of people will be increased. On the other hand, the when people exposed to a message in varied media or to the same message in multiple media people pay more attention to the message. In addition to, Dijkistra (2002) pointed out that the different media complement each other in an advertising campaign to reach the communication goals. To sum up, all the aforementioned theories that exposure to a campaign which uses two or more different media results in more positive consumer responses than repeated advertising. In the next section we will discuss the complementary role of the media that are used in this study and the differences and similarities between their modalities. Also, we will justify the choice of the specific medium and this will let us formulate our hypothesis.

2.3 Modalities and Consumer’s Responses

Through time the modalities of different media change on people’s live demand responses. As (Dijkstra 2002) pointed out , “modality refers to the mode of presentation (i.e., text, audio, picture, and video) corresponds to the human senses used for processing the presented material “. Each of these mode of presentation stimulates different sense, such as vision, hearing, taste etc. (Dijkstra 2002; Jacoby, Hoyer & Zimmer, 1893; DeFleur, Davenport, Cronin & DeFleur, 1992). Prior research (Edell, 1988; Edell and

(19)

18 Keller, 1989; Jacoby, Hoyer and Zimmer, 1983; Kisielius and Sternthal, 1984) has mostly focused on examining the different modalities and the effect that can have these modalities on the possible outcomes of various variables, such as brand recall and recognition, comprehension, evaluations and attitude, intentions and choices. Hence, each sensory mode may have a different effect on people’s reaction because of the different information-processing effect of each medium (Dijkistra 2002; Edell 1988). This effect can be direct, influencing the cognitive reactions or indirect affecting cognitive reactions (Edell 1988; Dijkistra 2002). The Elaboration model can explain the effect on different effect on people’s reactions. The ELM model conceives two routes of persuasion, the central and the peripheral (Petty, Cacioppo & Schumann, 1983). As Petty, Cacioppo & Schuman (1983) demonstrated, consumers process information either centrally or peripherally when a persuasive message is used. The central route of persuasion refers to cognitive, rational arguments and is likely to predominate under high elaboration condition while in the peripheral route of persuasion the information is processed though external cues when the involvement is low (Petty, Cacioppo & Schumann, 1983). For example, according to the (ELM), within high elaboration processing (central route) people engage in issue-relevant information through strong arguments within a message. However, if people lack of ability or motivation to perform information processing activities, they are leading to low elaboration processing (peripheral route) whereby external cues such as humor or endorser convey the way people evaluate the message and change attitude. This model concentrates on the desire of the consumer to process information in a persuasive message and argues the main determinants for changing attitudes and achieving persuasion. It is argued that cognitive and affective responses have an direct effect on consumer’s behavior (MacInnis and

(20)

19 Jaworski, 1990b).In the current study these variables are brand recall and recognition, brand and ad attitude and purchase intentions.

2.4 Similarities and Differences between Print Media and SNS.

As we mentioned above, different media stimulate different sense (Edell, 1988). When comparing print with SNS advertising we can observe both differences and similarities in their modalities. Concerning the similarities between Print and SNS, a common characteristic is that the modality of print and SNS is mainly textual and because of this similarity (Dijkistra, 2002) maintains the view that we cannot find psychological different between the two media. Another common aspect of medium characteristics is the control over the medium (Dijkstra et al., 2005). Medium control refers to the control over the flow and the speed of the information which is dissimilated. The domination of pacing depends on either the sender or the receiver of the presented information (Dijkstra et al., 2005). Based on existing literature (Van Raaij, 1998) two dominant categories of media can be differentiated (retrieval and delivery). Based on this distinction, both print and SNS are internally paced because people “dominate” their exposure to their medium (Dijkstra et al., 2005).As Dijkistra et al. (2005) pointed out, when consumers are having control over the outcome, is more likely the advertising to be less perceived as less irritated and therefore may result in positive cognitive and affective consumers responses. Prior research demonstrates that the larger the number of sensory modes, the more effective communication (Jacoby, Hoyer & Zimmer, 1893) As a result, the combination of Print and SNS may result in more positive communication effects.

(21)

20 Concerning the differences between Print and SNS, the first and main difference can be detected in the delivery vehicle (paper versus computer). The different way of reading is a significant characteristic that we have to take into account in our study when we are discussing print media vs. online media. In particular, Hoque and Lohse (1999) found in their study that people have to put more effort into reading on-line text while Muter and Maurutto (1991) concluded that people read 41% slower on a computer screen in comparison to people who read a paper text. We can assume that there are different points in the way people process the information. Muter and Maurutto (1991) also found that traditional paper media are perceived to be more effective in advertising compared to online media. However, to be critically of this result, the study was conducted at a time where online media were infant yet and the interaction of people with computer was at a basic level. This evidence should be re-examined to understand how people process the information when read a text or article in different media.

A second significant difference between Print and SNS is that the first medium is based on text and static visual (Dijkstra et al., 2005; Jacoby, Hoyer & Zimmer, 1983) while SNS advertising combine visual and audio sensory modes. SNS campaigns are by far more interactive than Print ad. The Dual Process Model (Liu & Shrum, 2009), analyzes under certain circumstances, interactivity might either enhance or inhibit persuasion. Simply defined, interactivity is the “degree to which two or more communicating parties can act on each other, on the communication medium, and on the messages, and the degree to which such influences are synchronized” (Liu & Shrum, 2002, p. 54; Voorveld, Neijens & Smit, 2011) The main argument of The Dual Process Model (Liu & Shrum, 2009), is that high involvement triggers central processing and actual use of interactivity. Thus, highly experience users are able to work with interactivity and use it to enhance

(22)

21 their central processing of information and giving them more control. On the other hand, less experienced users suffer from the added cognitive load and consider it as inhibition of the use. Hence, consumers who are experienced users can play a game and simultaneously browse the advertised information. As a matter of fact the interactivity can play a dominant role in persuasion of a SNS advertising (Van Noort, Antheunis & Van Reijmersdal, 2012). Another difference based on recent literature (Van Noort, Antheunis & Van Reijmersdal, 2012) is that SNS mainly focused on social connections among members of the social network and they can be either offline & pre-existing or online & newly created. Contrary, a print ad is offline and pre-existing while it requires less active consumers than Web due to differences in the delivery mechanism (Dijkstra et al., 2005). Print appears superior in comprehension among the existing media (Jacoby, Hoyer & Zimmer, 1983) but this evidence does not automatically prove that print can be superior media in an advertising campaign. In particular, the study of DeFleur, Davenport, Cronin and DeFleur (1992) stand out as a rare example where Print media and Online media enact the same modality and thus, stand in need for related cognitive processing. An experiment was conducted and subjects were exposed to news stories showed by one of the four media (television, newspaper, radio and computer) to demonstrate the relatively level or recall for each of the four media. The researches pointed out that respondents recall more news topics when they were exposed to newspapers or computer than when they were exposed to television or radio. Actually the results for computer and newspapers were similar , indicating lack of difference between these two media. Another laboratory experiment comparing a text only form of a website with multimedia form of the same site didn’t found any significant difference in audience recall (Berry, 1999). Thus, examining the different media characteristics (modality and

(23)

22 control) can be inferred that the pattern of results are nuanced but it seems that when different modalities can be integrated, information processing is facilitated. The use of two media instead of one single medium a communication message can produce more positive consumer responses (Chang & Thorson, 2004; Dijlistra et al. 2005; Voorveld et al. 2011; Voorveld et al. 2012).

Hence, based on the aforementioned literature the below hypothesis is formulated:

H1: Media campaigns consisting of ads in two different media ( Print and SNS) will have

a more positive effect in cognitive and affective and behavioral responses than media campaigns that use only one medium(Print or SNS).

2.4 Perceived Persuasive intent

Although we have already discuss the different psychological mechanism that affecting the online consumer's behavior when they exposed to cross-media campaign there is one more factor that dramatically can influence consumer’s behavior. In the current media landscape consumes have personal knowledge and experience about tactics used by persuasive messages. Simple defined, persuasion knowledge “is the personal knowledge about the tactic used in persuasion attempts” (Friestad & Wright 1994, p.1). This knowledge helps them identify how, when, and why marketers try to influence them” (Friestad & Wright 1994, p.1; Panic, Cauberghe & De Pelsmacker, 2013). Most of the studies of persuasion knowledge focused on the influence of persuasion knowledge among children (Robertson & Rosster, 1974). The Persuasion Knowledge Model describes three types of persuasion knowledge (agent, tactic, and topic) analyze how

(24)

23 people use or hide this knowledge when they receive persuasive messages (Friestad & Wright 1994). According to the Persuasion Knowledge model (Friestad & Wright 1994), the reason why consumers use the persuasion knowledge is that they are motivated to hold valid attitudes. To maintain these values they have to judge information and eventually to use this knowledge to gain insights about persuasion tactics. Therefore, individuals try to cope with persuasive attempts in a campaign to have a control over the advertiser’s attempts to convince consumers to buy a product. The prominent factors that significantly contribute to the development of persuasion knowledge are the cognitive skills and the experience with persuasion and advertisers. The cognitive development starts at early childhood (Clark & Delia,1976) and over that period until adolescence, children have limited processing memory capacities and are distracted quite easily (Van Reijmersdal, Rozendaal &Buijzen, 2012). The meta-analysis of Wellman, Cross & Watson (2001) explains how children develop a “theory of mind”. According to this theory children develop a theory about their environment and a sense of their internal representations (eg. beliefs, values, desires). Theory of mind occurs when children understand that their desires cannot correspond to reality and thus, they try to add a belief by developing a cognitive capacity to predict a future behavior (McAlister & Cornwell, 2009). In others words, it is not only the ability to develop metal thoughts but also to incorporate these thoughts into a future behavior. Thus, individuals obtain persuasion knowledge effortful and rational while over time this knowledge becomes less effortless and implicit (Friestad & Wright 1994). When consumers recognize a persuasive attempt then a “change of meaning” will occur. Then, the consumers will alter the way of thinking over the persuasion attempt and his/her persuasion knowledge will be activated towards the persuasion attempt. Eventually, when consumers’ understand the persuasive

(25)

24 intent of advertisers to make them persuade to sell a product (Robertson & Rossiter, 1974) will react negatively.

Based on the aforementioned literature on persuasion knowledge (Friestad & Wright 1994) we propose that the personal knowledge of individuals about the persuasive intent of advertising campaign is a crucial factor that explains the effectiveness of SNS campaigns. Recently academic findings pointed out that non-traditional new strategies of advertising such as sponsorship, advergames, brand placement , edu-education, experience marketing and mobile advertising are not perceived as persuasive attempts compared to traditional advertising strategies (Moyer‐Gusé2008; Panic, Cauberghe & De Pelsmacker, 2013; Van Reijmersdal, Neijens & Smit, 2005; Van Reijmersdal, Rozendaal, & Buijzen, 2012). The first reason why the persuasive intent is not recognized is that the persuasive intent is integrated into the context. Most of these advertising formats are likely to go unnoticed and not explicitly processed. According to Moyer‐Gusé (2008) people who watch a TV show are more likely to be seeking entertainment than education. When an Education-Entertainment message is induced people attend to more salient, entertaining parts of the TV show and that moment they have insignificant cognitive capacities to understand the persuasive intent of the message. Thus, the boundaries between the context and the commercial intent in many cases are disputed (Panic et al. 2013; Raney, Arpan, Pashupati & Brill, 2003). The second reason why the persuasive intent cannot be easily acknowledge is that the new advertising formats are more interactive (Panic et al. 2013; Van Reijmersdal et al.2012). Therefore, compared to traditional advertising formats consumers are not passive recipients of a persuasive message (Van Reijmersdal et al. 2012). For example, web users have partial control by

(26)

25 searching and navigating Web content and even posting and customizing their preferences. they can Similarly with the above literature, SNS are rather interactive like advergames and are integrated in the advertising campaign Van Noort, Antheunis & Van Reijmersdal, 2012). Thus, we propose that SNS campaigns belong to non-traditional new advertising and thus, will be less recognized as persuasive compared to traditional advertising.

Furthermore, in SNS, recipients share and even forward advertising messages, driven by social norms and their desire to acquire a social acceptable behavior in the social network (Subramani & Rajagopalan, 2003). The experimental study of Van Noort, Antheunis & Van Reijmersdal (2012) discussed that a message from a “strong tie” should be considered more valuable. More precisely, SNS members who receive a marketing campaign from a “close friend” they evaluate more positive the brand and the campaign and is more possible to forward the campaign to their connected others. Also, the closeness of the relationship of the “tie strength” determinates the perceived persuasive intent. Consequently, individuals consider SNS advertising campaigns less persuasive when they have a social connectedness with the sender of the message, and thus, are more persuaded by it and are more inclined to forward the campaign to their social connections. The persuasive intent is hidden within SNS advertising and individuals didn’t recognize easily the source or the sender or the advertisement. This means, that the real sender is not appeared in the SNS advertising and for this reason recipient cannot distinguish the persuasive intent which is integrated into the campaign.

(27)

26 Adjusting the literature based on persuasion knowledge to the influence of cross-media, it can be expected that, when a coordinated SNS and Print campaign is used, the effectiveness of the campaign will be greater than using only SNS or only Print campaign. As it is mentioned above, the persuasive intent of this novel form of advertising is not easily recognized, more reduced compared to traditional media campaign and thus, and thus, people tend to acknowledge the persuasive role of adverting in Social Networks. To line with this, Matthes, Schemer & Wirth (2007) have showed that the hidden nature of product placement makes them more attractive and in this way the recipients of the message in many cases do not recognize the persuasive attempt of advertisers. Contrary, when viewers recognize the persuasive intent of the advertising they have negative evaluation for the advertised product and they can even counter-argue it. According to the Persuasion Knowledge Model (Friestad & Wright 1994), consumers cope with different ways when they are exposed to an advertising message. For Instance, consumers with high persuasion knowledge will more likely to be skeptical of persuasive communication and resistant to persuasive messages. In opposition to, when the persuasive message will appear as an entertainment form whereas the advertising intent will be hidden or less obvious due to interactivity of the advertising platform the consumers may consumers choice to hide their knowledge about the advertising tactics. This can happen as the distinguishing the lines between advertisements and entertainment is not always visible. Hence, we expect more positive SNS campaign responses compared to print ad campaign, where the advertising intent is highly recognized. Similarly, we suppose that persuasive intent indirectly affects campaign responses. In other words, when subjects have low degree of persuasion knowledge is more likely to be influenced in affective and cognitive responses by the combination of SNS and print ad in an

(28)

27 advertising campaign, via persuasive intent. Hence, the following hypothesis is formulated:

H2a) The perceived intent for an advertising campaign incorporating SNS and Print is lower, than for an advertising campaign entering only Print advertising or brand pages on SNS, and thus, will lead to greater influence in affective and conative responses.

H2b) Understanding the source of an advertisement which incorporating SNS and SNS is

more difficult ,than for an advertising campaign entering only Print advertising or brand pages on SNS, and thus, will lead to greater influence in affective and conative responses.

Based on the aforementioned hypotheses, our conceptual model is depicted as follow (see Fig. 1):

Fig1. Conceptual Model

Single Media VS. Cross - media Persuasive Knowledge Cognitive Affective Behavioral responses

(29)

28 3. Method Section

3.1 Design

The study aims at testing the cross-media effect, examining Print advertising and brand pages on Facebook. The main assumptions are that the combination of Print-SNS media in an advertising campaign is more effective on consumers’ recall of the brand, brand attitude, ad attitude and purchase intention than choosing a single medium in an advertising campaign ( Print or SNS). Furthermore, the persuasive intent was included as mediator to understand the role of persuasive knowledge in adverting. To test the hypotheses, the study used a quantitative research design and an online experiment was conducted The study had 1 factor design consisting of two cross-media conditions (Print-SNS and Print) and two single-medium conditions (Print-Print and SNS-SNS). The reason why two cross-media conditions instead of one were chosen was to exclude the possible effect of media sequence (Voorveld et al. 2011) . The mediator, persuasive knowledge, will be measured, but not manipulated. The independent variable will be manipulated by randomization of exposure to the cross-media condition or the single-medium condition.

3.2 Participants

First, a snowball procedure was applied to obtain convenience sample. The target population for the current experiment consisted of internet users both men and women aged 18 to 35 years old. There were no geographical specifications. The participants were

(30)

29 recruited with an online request thought their personal social network sites (e.g. Facebook). The social network site that was chosen was Facebook, since this format is more universal adapted. Also this study has a heterogeneous sample and for this reason the Facebook was the more convenient use of social network site. An e-mail version contained the same request was distributed and flyers were dispersed around the campus of the University of Amsterdam. Furthermore, individuals approached by the researcher at the faculty libraries of UvA that are located on different locations in the city center. A link in both request redirected them to the online experiment (qualtrics). Taking part in the experiment was voluntary and the participants did not receive any incentives. A total of 186 respondents participated in the experiment, of which 121 participants successfully completed the questionnaire (57 male and 65 female). Four participants reported awareness of the product and advertisement used in the experiment; these participants were excluded from the original data set because participants should be unfamiliar with ad. The participation number in each group were 37 for Print single condition (30.6%),16 SNS (13.2%), Print+SNS cross media condition 25 (20.7%) and SNS+Print 43 (35.5%). The sample was consisted of at least 25 respondents for the three of four conditions. The specific amount of participants was needed according to the guidelines for appropriate sample sizes, being 50 respondents per cell (APA, 2012). However, for the SNS single condition the number of participants was significantly lower because of the dropdown rate at this condition. The age of the participant 19 to 41, and the average age is 28.3 (SD = 5.3). We intended to approach a range of ages and especially young people (Mage = 28.3). The reason why we included the above ages is that the target for SNS is mostly young adults. Moreover, we included education level from primary school to PhD. The level of education varied from “primary school” to “master’s degree” and was normally

(31)

30 distributed (Skewness = -0.69, Kurtosis = 0.29, SD = 1.12). The majority of respondents have obtained a higher education (2.5% have a PhD, 33.1% have a master degree, 33.1% have a bachelor degree) , slightly less than 20% had attended HBO (19%) and only a small minority of the participants have competed the secondary education participants (12.41%). The participants are from 21 countries, 64.5% (n = 78) are from Greece, 6.6 % (n = 8) are Dutch, 5.0% (n = 6) are Australian, 3.3 (n = 4) are from Germany, and the rest are from other countries, for example United Kingdom, Italy, China, Cyprus, France, Poland, Spain, Lithuania, Bangladesh, Portugal etc. (n = 25) .Moreover, most of the participants’ had excellent 39.7% (n = 48) and high-level of English language 33.9% (n = 41), some participants had moderate language skills 23.2% (n = 28) and few participants had low level of English skills 0.8% (n =1). Amongst the 121 valid participants, 21.5% earn less than 5.000€ per year (n = 26), 24.8% earn between 10.000€ and 15.000€ (n = 30) and 11.6% earn more than 50.000€ per year (n = 14).

3.3 Experiment stimuli

To test participants’ responses in a real environment an existing brand was selected. All participants were exposed to a new campaign from the coffee brand Nescafé Frappé Coffee. The coffee is a low risk product and participants could have different level of involvement with the advertised product. The advertisements were in English. The Print ad was an existing article from the “STiR Tea & Coffee Industry International Magazine” that was edited. There was a thematic congruency between the article of the magazine and the product of the study as thematic congruency have impact on brand recall ( Moorman et al. 2007).

(32)

31 The Facebook page was developed by the researcher of this study. The Facebook page was designed to be similar with the original page of Nescafé Frappé Coffee because one of the aims of the research was to test the mediating role of persuasive knowledge of a SNS campaign. For this reason, a coffee quiz was created to support and justify the entertainment and interactive role of SNS campaign. Moreover, there was also congruency between the Facebook campaign and the quiz application on Nescafé Frappé Facebook Page. The quiz was created by the researcher of the study. The Facebook campaign invited users to play a quiz on Nescafé Frappé Facebook Page and test their knowledge about coffee. Participants could play the quiz with their own pacing. Before starting the quiz participants could leave their personal information or they had the chance to participate anonymously. The quiz was consisted of seven questions. After submitting their answer in one question, participants could see if they had scored right or wrong. At the end of the questions, the results on their knowledge about coffee were showing to participants depends on their responses. In the same page participants could post the quiz on their timeline, could invite friends to play the quiz and could share the quiz. After exposure to the campaign participants have to fill in a questionnaire.

3.4 Procedure

The link to the questionnaire was sent out by several ways, by sending to master students of communication by university email, on SNS sites such as Facebook or twitter by personal or group messages. The survey link also was posted on forums and Facebook groups. Participants performed the experiment in their own environment and in their own

(33)

32 pace but there was a timing in all the conditions to avoid collecting respondents who hadn’t see the material.

Each participant was randomly assigned to one of the four media conditions. In total four conditions were evaluated (Print single, SNS single, Print+SNS, SNS+Print). The two cross-media condition included two advertisements (print advertisement and Nescafé Frappé Facebook page). The advertisements were the same but the sequence of the ad was different. The two other conditions contained a single-medium (print ad only and Nescafé Frappé Facebook page only). In all the experimental conditions, there was countdown timer of 45 seconds, after carefully calculation of the required time to read the material.

Participants were told a that the study was conducted to design an advertisement concerning their drinking habits, so that they were not aware of the research goal. If respondents were not coffee drinkers, there was an option to choose and to end up the survey. All participants received the same link, while the four conditions were randomized by the software that created questionnaire (qualitrics). On SNS condition ( Single SNS and the two cross-media conditions), participants were asked to click on the given link, play the quiz and after to return back and fill in the rest of the survey. The link was redirecting them on the Nescafé Frappé coffee quiz application, whereby the could play the quiz.

The online questionnaire consisted of separate parts. The first part included the welcome message and informed consensus procedure. The second part contained background information, such as age, gender, education, nationality, level of English, which allowed

(34)

33 comparing groups of respondents. In the third part of the questionnaire the experimental stimulus was presented, so the modified advertisement was shown. After exposure to the ads the participants were exposed to the different measures (cognitive, affective and behavioral responses of consumers). The last part, was consisted from the covariates variable. At the end of the survey all participants were asked to help sharing the link to their acquaintances. The aim of the study was also briefly explained. The questionnaire is cited in appendix 4.

3.5 Measures

Cognitive responses

Two aspects of brand memory were taken into consideration. Free recall

Free recall (EV= 1.15) ; R2= .58; Μ= 0.74; SD= 0.43, was measured through one item derived from (Moorman et. al. 2007). Respondent were asked with an open-question "Which brand advertising was made? The measure was coded into a dichotomous variable (0 was coded the correct brand, and 1 all the other brands.)

Aided recall

Aided recall Μ=0.99; SD= 0.09, was measured through one item and is based on the recognition of the brand exposed in the stimuli (Moorman et. al. 2007). Participants were

(35)

34 provided with a choice between a list of ten brands and were asked to indicate which brand was displayed in the campaign.

Affective responses

Attitude toward the brand

Attitude toward the brand (EV= 2.9; R2= .74), α = .88; Μ= 4.93; SD= 1.47, was measured through four items on a seven-point scale and was derived from Chang & Thorson (2004). Respondents were asked on a seven-point semantic differential scale to indicate perceived likeability, perceived interest and perceived attractiveness (bad/good, not appealing/appealing) of the advertised product.

Attitude toward the campaign

Attitude toward the campaign (EV= 3.1; R2= .61), α = .84; Μ= 4.96; SD= 1.22, was measured through the same four items on a seven-point scale adapted from Chang & Thorson (2004). Respondents were asked to indicate what they thought of the advertising campaign. One more item was added to the scale derived from Edell & Keller (1998) “confusing/clear and the final scale were a five items on a seven-point semantic differential scale.

Conative responses Purchase intention

(36)

35 Behavioral intention (EV= 1.8; R2= .90), α = .89; Μ= 4.76; SD= 1.75 was measured through two-item seven-point semantic scale and is derived from the five-point scale adopted by Voorveld, Neijens and Smit (2011). The scale included an item concerning purchase likeability and an item regarding the recommendation of the product towards friends (word-of mouth intention). The scale was measured on a seven-point scale (very likely/very unlikely).

Persuasion Knowledge

Two factors of conceptual persuasion knowledge were measured. The scale included an item that was based on understanding the source and an item concerning the persuasive intent of the SNS campaign (Van Reijmersdal, Rozendaal & Buijzen, 2012).

General understanding of the source

Understanding the source in general was measured by asking the respondents who they think was the creator of the SNS campaign. Participants were provided with a choice of multiple creators and were asked to choice between the choices. The correct response was coded as 1(first) and the other options (wrong) were coded as 0 (Van Reijmersdal, Rozendaal & Buijzen, 2012).

Perceived persuasive intent

Perceived persuasive intent was measured through one item on a seven-point scale and is focused on the respondents’ perception about the perceived persuasive intent of the advertising campaign. The scale was derived from (Rozendaal, Buijzen, and Valkenburg 2010; Van Reijmersdal et al. 2010). The item was formulated as a statement.

(37)

36 Respondents could score their (dis)agreement with the statement: ‘This campaign is created to persuade’ on a seven-point semantic scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 7(totally agree).

Control variables

Eight covariates were examined on their possible influence on the response toward the advertisement and the campaign.

Product Involvement

Product involvement (EV= 3.1; R2= .61), α = .84; Μ= 5.21; SD= 1.21 was measured was measured though five items on a seven-point semantic differential scale derived from McQuarrie & Munson (1992). The Revised Personal Improvement Inventory by McQuarrie & Munson (1992) has been widely examined and has been used several times in previous academic research (Bian & Mountinho, 2009). Respondents were asked to indicate their perceived importance, perceived relevance, perceived interest, concerns and to what extent the product matters to them.

Brand Familiarity

Familiarity with the brand was measured through one item on a seven-point scale through a seven -point scale ( 1 = very familiar , 7 = not familiar at all) and was derived from Keller (1987).

(38)

37 Familiarity with the ad, one additional item, was supplemented and was derived from Voorveld et al. (2011) to measure the familiarity with the advertisement. Respondents could also either respond with yes or no when they were asked if they have seen the advertisement of the advertised product before Voorveld et al. (2011).

Print Usage

Print usage was measured though one items seven point scales and was created by the researcher. The scale included an item concerning the frequency of reading print magazines. and an item regarding the frequency of logging into Facebook.

Facebook usage

Facebook usage was measured though two items five point scales derived from Junko (2012). The scale included an item concerning the estimated time spent on Facebook and an item regarding the frequency of logging into Facebook. To estimate the frequency of Facebook usage respondents were asked to calculate the time spent on Facebook. The response categories were 1(1 hour), 2(2hours), 3(3 hours), 4 (hours), 5 (more than 4 hours). Respectively, the response categories for the frequency of check into Facebook were 1( none), 2(more than 1 time), 3( more than two times), 4(more than 4 times) and 5(more than 8 times). Participants were asked to estimate the avarage number of times they logged in Facebook in a daily basis and the day before (yesterday).

(39)

38 Frequency of SNS usage was measured through a seven -point scale ( 1 = very irregular , 7 = very frequently ) adopted by Van Noort, Antheunis & Van Reijmersdal (2012). SNS experience

SNS experience was measured through two items on a seven-point scale derived from Van Noort, Antheunis & Van Reijmersdal (2012). The scale included an item concerning familiarity with SNS (not at all/very familiar) and an item asking whether or not they were members SNS (yes/no).

General attitude toward the campaign

General attitude toward the campaign (EV= 1.6; R2= .80), α = .75; Μ= 4.52; SD= 1.56 was measured through two-item seven point semantic scale derived from Voorveld (2011). The two items were measured through dimensions of credibility and amusement (Smit & Neijens (2000; Voorveld, 2011) and they were used to describe a more broaden attitude of the respondents towards the advertising.

Previous exposure to the campaign

Previous exposure to the campaign was measured though one item. The participants were asked about previous exposure to the campaign and could respond with either yes or no. Finally a number of socio -demographic factors included also as control variables, such as age in years, nationality, gender, education level and level of English language.

(40)

39 3.6 Manipulation check

The manipulation of the study was whether or not the participants were put in the cross-media condition or a single-medium condition. Respondents were instructed to read an advertisement or watch a video that was displayed when they accepted the invitation to participate in the online experiment. The participants were randomly assigned to the four conditions. For this reason, no specific items measured.

4. Results

The aim of this report was to analyze and interpret the findings of the data concerning the effectiveness of using cross media campaigns compared to single media campaigns. A two-way ANOVA was utilized to test the aforementioned hypotheses. The main research goal was to compare the effectiveness of the single media versus cross media (Print ad only, SNS page only and Print and SNS ad in one campaign) and to examine possible synergetic effects.

To test if the socio-demographics variables could use as covariate or if they play an important role chi-square test was used. The chi-square analysis indicated that older and younger were distributed equally in the cross-media and single media condition, χ2 (1, N = 121) = .277, p = .611. A chi-square analysis indicated that highly educated and lower educated were distributed equally in the cross-media and single media condition χ2 (1, N = 121) = .151, p = .628. A chi-square analysis was also run for the gender and showed that women and men were not distributed equally in the cross-media and single media condition χ2 (1, N = 121) = .253, p = .611. This can be explained easily because there

(41)

40 was an equal presentation in our sample of female (n=64) and male (n=57). In the two single media conditions female population was slightly more (n=27) than male population (n=26). In line with this, in the cross-media condition female population (n=37) was more than male population (n=31). For this reason, we the social-demographics variables didn’t used as covariates. In addition , a two-way ANOVA was run among our conditions of our independent variables ( SNS single, Print Single- SNS-Print, Print-SNS) to test if there was an effect of condition on our covariates. The groups didn’t differ significantly and didn’t included in the analysis. Last, a bivariate correlation analysis was executed to see if there was a relationship between our control variables and our dependents, but the analysis showed that there was not significant correlations between the dependent variables ( aided recall, free recall, brand attitude, ad attitude and purchase intention). Therefore, we didn’t have to control for these variables in our analysis.

The effectiveness of cross-media campaign compared to single media campaign on consumers’ behavior.

The first hypothesis, assumes that a cross media campaign is more effectiveness than by a single media campaign concerning the responses of consumers (cognitive, affective, conative). To test the first hypothesis a logistic regression Model was conducted on our independent variables and on dependent ( free recall). The reason why this methods was executed, is that both variables( independent and dependent) are nominal. In our case, aided recall was not influenced by the different medium condition, as recall didn’t differ significantly (β=0.63, t=4.5, p= .65). The different media combinations explained a significant part of the variance in scores on free recall R2= .044, F (1, 204) =2.75 p=.654. For the aided recall a logistic regression Model was conducted. The results indicated that

(42)

41 there was no significant difference between cross and single media conditions on aided recall(β= -0.81, t= -.88, p= .380), R2= -.002, F (1, 101) =7.78 p=.380. An possible explanation can be that there was no significant difference of the number of corrected items (aided and free recall).

A two-way analysis of variance was conducted to test for possible interaction effects between the independent variables and the dependent variable (brand attitude).Conditions were included in the analysis as fixed factors; brand attitude served as dependent variable. Results showed that there was a significant main effect overall between conditions. Leven’s Test showed that the error of variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups F (1, .392) =.759. The results showed that the difference between cross-media and single media on participant’s brand attitudes was significant F (1, 2.11) =4.00 p=.09. For the both cross-media the mean was higher. Specifically, The brand attitude was much higher in the Print-SNS condition (M= 5.66 SD= 1.27) even than SNS-Print (M= 4.43 SD= 1.56). The brand attitude was lower in SNS-Print Single condition (M=4.95 SD= 1.25) and even lower on SNS-Print condition (M= 4.43, SD= 1.53.) Thus, cross-media have an main and higher effect than single media on brand attitude.

Concerning the attitude towards the ad, a two-factor analysis of variance was conducted to test for possible interaction effects between the independent variables and the dependent variable. Leven’s Test showed that the error of variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups F (1, 117) =.774. Results showed that there was no a significant main effect overall between conditions F (1, 121) =2.12 p=.100. Ad attitude is again higher on Print+SNS (M= 5.46 SD= 1.07) and SNS single condition M= 5.11 SD= 1.39) than SNS+Print (M= 4.76 SD= 1.29) and single Print (M= 4.78 SD= 1.12). Concerning purchase intention, a two way ANOVA analyses was conducted. Leven’s

(43)

42 Test showed that the error of variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups F (1, 117) =.582. The output of the ANOVA showed that showed that there was no a significant main effect overall between conditions F (1, 117) =3.102 p=.193. Purchase intention was higher on Print-SNS (M= 5.34 SD= 1.61) And SNS-Print ( M=4.81, SD= 1.81) than Print Single (M= 4.48 SD= 1.64) and SNS single (M= 4.31 SD= 1.85). Based on the aforementioned results we can say that the hypothesis is partially accepted because there was on main effect on brand attitude and rejected on cognitive and conative responses, as there are no significant differences to indicate that cross-tools campaign can perform better than a single medium campaign.

The perceived intent for an advertising campaign incorporating SNS and Print is lower, than for an advertising campaign entering only print advertising, and thus, will lead to greater influence in affective and conative responses.

To test the hypothesis that included a mediation an linear regression was conducted between our independent ( SNS and Print recoded variable) and brand attitude. Brand attitude was not influenced the different medium condition, as brand attitude didn’t differ significantly (β= -0.26, t=-2.69, p= .789). The different media combinations explained a significant part of the variance in scores on brand attitude R2= .26, F (1, 147) =0.72 p=.789. A second regression was carried between the independent variable on mediator ( persuasive intent). Again the media conditions didn’t have a significant effect on persuasive intent (β= -0.66, t=-.675, p= .501). The third regression didn’t executed as there was an significant effect of independent variable on dependent variable and on independent variable on mediation.

The effectiveness of cross media campaigns vs. single medium campaigns on cognitive, affective and behavioral responses : the mediation role of persuasive knowledge

campaigns on cognitive, affective and behavioral responses:

The mediation role of persuasive knowledge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS