June 28th 2015
From Brand Placement to Product Placement:
Is Prominent Brand Logo Necessary for Product
Placement?
LI XiaoHan Eirene
10825126
Supervisor: Dr. Joris J. Ebbers
Master of Business Administration - Entrepreneurship and Management in the
Creative Industries
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Student XiaoHan Li who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it. The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Abstract
There is no consensus in product placement literature on the optimal combination of prominence and plot connection levels for an effective product placement. This study advocates it is the level of fit (congruence) resulted from the combination that contributes to the performance of product placement; and proposes to separate brand logo prominence from product prominence, in order to provide guidelines for achieving a congruent product placement.
The effectiveness of product placement that has high plot connection, high product prominence and low brand logo prominence is confirmed through a controlled experiment. Product placement with a subtle logo is found to lead to the same level of improvement in brand equity as product placement with a prominent logo.
In addition, this study draws attention to the possible negative impact of product placement on the quality of the film or TV production. The study is the first to provide empirical evidence that product placement negatively affects the artistic quality of the film/ TV, and results in a lower rating from the viewers. It also demonstrates that a win-win situation between the film/TV producer and the product company could be achieved, when the product placement is executed in the manner proposed in this study.
Table of Contents
Abstract 3
1. Introduction 6
2. Literature Review 10
2.1 The Brand Value Chain 10
2.2 Type and Effect of Product Placement 12
2.2.1 Prominence 12
2.2.2 Plot Connection 14
2.3 The Role of Fit 15
2.4 Brand Logo Prominence 18
2.4.1 Brand Awareness 20
2.4.2 Brand Image Transfer 20
2.4.3 Brand Attitude and Brand Choice 21
2.4.4 Willingness-to-Pay 23
2.5 Negative Effect of Product Placement on the Film or TV Production 23
3. Method 26 3.1 Stimuli Development 26 3.2 Procedure 27 3.3 Dependent Variables 29 3.4 Independent Variable 31 4. Results 32 4.1 Controlled Factors 32 4.2 Sample Characteristics 32 4.3 Hypothesis Testing 33 4.3.1 Recognition 33 4.3.2 Association 35 4.3.3 Attitude 37 4.3.4 Choice 38 4.3.5 Willingness-to-pay 39 4.3.6 Film Quality 41
5. Discussion and Conclusion 43
5.2 Managerial Implications 46
5.3 Limitations and Future Research 48
5.4 Conclusion 50
Acknowledgement 51
References 52
1. Introduction
Del opens up a shoebox on which a Converse logo is shown. He takes out a Converse shoe and looks at it. A close-up shot is given to the Converse shoe where its logo is clearly seen. Del puts on the shoe, and smiles in satisfaction.
Del is sitting at the kitchen table. His grandmother asks, “Boy, what is that on your feet?” Del raises one leg above the table, showing one foot wearing the Converse shoe, and answers, “Converse All Stars, vintage 2004.”
One might mistake the above for the transcript of a Converse commercial. In fact, these are scenes from the 2004 film I, Robot. The film certainly diverted a lot of audience attention to the Converse product placement, does that mean the product placement is successful? Will the consumers fall for the product placement when it is so obvious? Is it possible that, because of the blunt and disruptive nature of the product placement, the audience developed a negative attitude toward the product and the film? This paper will attempt to answer these questions, and explore a way to conduct product placement so that it will be both effective and in harmony with the film.
Product placement is “the purposeful incorporation of a brand into an entertainment vehicle” (Russell and Belch, 2005: 74). The fast-growing industry of product placement is continuously getting more attention from the academic circle, but studies on the effect of product placement are still very much limited. There is no consensus on what makes a successful product placement.
Existing literature categorizes product placements along two dimensions: prominence and plot connection (Russell, 2002; Homer, 2009; Dens, De Pelsmacker and Purnawirawan,
2012). When evaluating product placement on a single dimension, the results are commonly agreed upon. Prominence is believed to contribute to brand awareness while negatively related to brand attitude; and plot connection is found to lead to higher brand awareness and attitude. Nonetheless, when combining the two dimensions together, results of previous research are more divergent. Moreover, previous studies that researched product placement while putting the two dimensions together have indicated that product placement that improves brand awareness will affect brand attitude and brand choice towards the opposite direction (Law and Braun, 2000; Van Reijmerdal, 2009; Dens et al., 2012). There needs to be a measurement that touches upon both dimensions, to find the optimal combination of prominence and plot connection, and provide consistent guidance on the execution of effective product placement. The present study fills this gap through revealing that what contributes to product placement effectiveness is not the level of prominence and plot connection per se, but the level of fit resulted from them.
Consumers are becoming more resistant to traditional broadcast advertising (Wiles and Danielova, 2009), hence marketers are placing more focus on incorporating placements into the show, rather than presenting them as an in-your-face advertising. Multiple scholars (Russell, 2002; Bhatnagar, Aksoy and Malkoc, 2004; Dens et al., 2012) draw attention to the level of fit of a product placement, and its effect on the product. Building on these insights, this study proposes adopting “fit” as a dimension of categorizing and evaluating product placement. Fit is measured with the level of congruence. A definition of congruence is put forth to associate prominence together with plot connection, and to provide clearer conditions for successful product placement.
The present study further proposes that the appearance of a prominent brand logo is a major factor that leads to product placement to be more intrusive and less accepted by the audience. It innovates through distinguishing brand logo prominence from product prominence, and demonstrates that a product placement could still be effective even when the logo of the product is not clearly shown. Product placement with a high level of plot connection, high level of product prominence and a low level of brand logo prominence is advocated to be an optimal execution of product placement, for it reaches a high level of congruence, and is effective in influencing consumer behaviour. This study attempts to explore the effect of such product placements on brand value through a controlled experiment.
Research Question 1: For product placements that are both highly prominent and plot-connected, what effect does brand logo prominence have on brand value?
On the other hand, scholars overlooked the fact that the effect of product placement is twofold. Product placement not only concerns the placed product, but also influences the film/TV production. There is no empirical research on the effect of product placement on the quality of the film/TV, although scholars have noticed that product placements raise suspicion (Homer, 2009) and may disrupt the artistic quality of a show (Wiles and Danielova, 2009). This study fills this gap by providing empirical evidence on the negative effect of product placement from the perspective of the film or TV production where the placement occurs. Research Question 2: What effect does product placement have on the quality of the film/TV production?
This paper contributes through proposing an alternative product placement strategy. It proves that a product placement does not need to show a clear brand logo to be successful. Product placement with a subtle logo leads to the same level of improvement in brand equity as product placement with a prominent logo. Moreover, it demonstrates that there does not have to be a trade-off between attaining higher brand awareness and higher brand choice, when product placement is executed at the proposed manner.
Last but not the least, this study indicates that the congruence level of product placement should be an important consideration of film or TV producers, as product placement negatively affects the quality of the show. Nevertheless, as long as the product placement is executed at the proposed manner, a win-win situation between the film/TV producer and the product company could be achieved.
The paper will start with reviewing existing literature on brand equity and on the levels of prominence and plot connection of product placement. It will then introduce the role of fit in product placement, and the concept of brand logo prominence. Six hypotheses are formed concerning the effect of brand logo prominence in product placement on brand equity and film quality; and tested through a controlled experiment. The results of the experiment are presented in the following section. This paper will conclude with a discussion on the results, and the contributions of this study.
2. Literature Review
Firms spend large investments in advertising to build brand equity, while consumers are becoming more resistant to traditional broadcast advertising. Marketers therefore should look for marketing communication alternatives that offer cost-effective means of affecting brand knowledge and eventual sales (Keller, 1993). Product placement in film or television could be an option to complement traditional marketing tactics. Product placement is “the purposeful incorporation of a brand into an entertainment vehicle” (Russell and Belch, 2005: 74). It obscures the distinction between entertainment and advertising (Balasubramanian, 1994), thus will be less perceived as a persuasive message compared to advertising (Russell, 2002).
2.1 The Brand Value Chain
Keller and Lehmann (2003) developed the Brand Value Chain, and indicated that the value of a brand resides with consumers. They identified four stages of brand value creation: marketing programme investment, customer mindset, brand performance, and shareholder value; value created at one stage will transfer to the next stage (Figure 1).
Marketing programme investment is the starting point of the brand value creation process, it considers all kinds of marketing communications targeted at consumers, including product placement. The marketing activity will impact consumer mindset over a brand.
At the second stage, consumer mindset can be assessed in various terms, including: brand awareness, which is how much consumers recall and recognize a brand and product; brand association (or brand image), which is everything that comes to the mind of consumers when thinking of a brand; and brand attitude, which is the evaluation of a brand. The value created at the stage of consumer mindset will affect brand performance.
The third stage, brand performance is related to the way consumers react or respond to a brand. Price elasticity of a brand, and market share are examples of indicators of brand performance. In this study, consumer’s willingness-to-pay and brand choice will be measured to illustrate brand performance.
At the final stage, brand performance will affect shareholder value, for instance in stock prices.
According to the Brand Value Chain (Keller and Lehmann 2003), marketing communications will create value in consumer mindset, thus changing their behaviour and in turn the brand performance. This research will demonstrate the effect of product placement through measuring five indicators along the value chain (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Effects of Product Placement along the Brand Value Chain Product Placement • Awareness (Recall and Recognition) • Association • Attitude • Choice • Willingness -to-pay
2.2 Type and Effect of Product Placement
Multiple studies found positive effects of product placement in terms of brand awareness (Law and Braun, 2000; Russell, 2002; Dens et al., 2012), brand attitude (Dens et al., 2012), brand choice (Law and Braun, 2000), and economic returns (Wiles and Danielova, 2009; Karniouchina, Uslay and Erenburg, 2011). Such effects are moderated by the type of a placement. Past literature primarily categorized product placement along two dimensions: prominence and plot connection (Russell, 2002, Homer, 2009, Dens et al., 2012).
2.2.1 Prominence
Prominence measures to what extent the product placement is the central focus of audience attention (Gupta and Lord, 1998). In other words, how easily a product placement could be noticed by the audience. A prominent product placement is one that is obvious, as opposed to subtle.
A factor that moderates the level of prominence is the modality of product placement. Some scholars (Gupta and Lord, 1998; d’Astous and Chartier, 1999; Law and Braun, 2000) stated that a product placement can be visual (product or brand logo is visible on the screen), auditory (brand name is mentioned in the script), or a combination of both.
The level of prominence for visual placements varies with the size of the product or logo, position on the screen (whether foreground or background), duration and frequency of appearance, etc. (Bhatnagar et al., 2004; Dens et al., 2012). For example, the Chevrolet Camaro in the 2007 Transformers film is a highly prominent product placement, as the car is central to the screen repeatedly throughout the film, with the brand logo clearly shown.
Auditory placements are often of a higher prominence, compared to visual placements (Russell, 2002), although the degree depends on the context in which the brand is mentioned, and whether the brand name is repeated or emphasized (Russell, 2002). In an episode of Seinfeld, the brand name Junior Mint is mentioned in emphasis multiple times, the character is also seen holding a pack of Junior Mint. This constitutes a prominent product placement in the audio-visual modality (a combination of visual and auditory).
Findings on the effect of product placement based on the level of prominence have been consistent: prominent product placements lead to higher level of brand awareness than subtle product placements; while subtle product placements score better on other levels. Law and Braun (2000) found that prominent product placements have a greater effect on brand recall and recognition (i.e. awareness) than subtle placements. However, their study also revealed that the less prominent visual-only placements, though were least recalled, influenced consumer choice the most.
Law and Braun (2000) explained that, the measurements of brand recall and recognition are tests of explicit memory. Yet, consumer behaviour could be impacted by the exposure to a stimulus, without them being aware of the exposure (Law and Braun, 2000). Such changes in behaviour are better measured by tests of implicit memory. The performance of a product placement on influencing implicit memory (e.g. brand choice) could be uncorrelated to its performance on explicit memory (Law and Braun, 2000; Van Reijmersdal, 2009). In other words, product placements’ effect on brand awareness could be detached from the effect on other aspects.
The research conducted by Dens et al. (2012) generated similar results. They found that prominent product placement leads to higher brand recognition, while subtle product
placement leads to a more positive brand attitude. Additionally, prominent placements have been found to lead to a negative shift in brand attitude. Homer (2009) measured consumer attitude change after placement of known brands. He found that repeated prominent placement has a negative influence on brand attitude, while subtle placement has a relatively positive effect. Cowley and Barron (2008) reported that for viewers who like the TV programme, prominent placement has a negative impact on brand attitude. Consumers’ change in attitude depends on their awareness of persuasion attempts (Bhatnagar et al., 2004). The persuasion knowledge model (Friestad and Wright, 1994) implies that consumers will be less persuaded by a message, when they are aware that they are being exposed to advertising. Prominent product placements are more easily recognized as a persuasion attempt, therefore will raise counter arguing from consumers (Friestad and Wright, 1994), causing their brand attitude to shift negatively (Dens et al., 2012).
2.2.2 Plot Connection
Plot connection refers to the degree to which a product placement is integrated in the plot or storyline of a show (Russell, 1998; 2002).
The level of plot connection is determined by the role a product placement plays in a show. Placements of high plot connection contribute to the storyline, or build the persona of a character (Russell, 2002). FedEx in the film Cast Away is an example of product placement with high plot connection, as the leading character works for the delivery company FedEx, and when the company plane crashed he opened the FedEx packages looking for help to survive.
more positive brand attitude, compared to placement with weak plot connection (Dens et al. 2012). A strong plot connection will increase audience attention, as well as making the persuasion message of the product placement more relevant, resulting in better brand recognition; a highly plot-connected product placement is consistent with the context, leading to a transformation of audience perception of the brand, thus enhancing brand attitude (Dens et al., 2012).
In addition, Van Reijmersdal, Neijens and Smit (2007) found that when a product placement is integrated into the content of a show, the brand image will become more in agreement with the image of the show after repeated exposure. This suggests that product placement of high plot connection benefits from the transfer of associations from the show to the product. When a product placement is closely related to the plot of a show, the network of shared associations between the two is stronger, making it easier to activate consumer’s memory, thus improving brand recognition (Dens et al., 2012). A good fit between the plot and the product would also facilitate the transfer of positive attitudes from the show to the product, resulting in more positive brand attitude (Dens et al., 2012).
2.3 The Role of Fit
The two dimensions of prominence and plot connection interact to influence product placement effects, and should not be viewed separately when evaluating a product placement (Russell, 2002). Russell (2002) concluded that when a product placement scores either high on both prominence and plot connection, or low on both dimensions, such a placement is more persuasive and leads to greater positive brand attitude change. He explained that, when prominence and plot connection are not aligned, the product placement appears unnatural,
hence adversely affects brand attitude. However, the study of Dens et al. (2012) revealed conflicting results. They found that subtle product placement with high plot connection achieved the most positive brand attitude, because it fits better with the show and has the least obvious persuasion attempt. Yet for prominent product placement, brand attitude is low regardless of the level of plot connection.
The inconsistent results of Russell (2002) and Dens et al. (2012) suggest that the two dimensions of prominence and plot connection do not provide a winning formula for the execution of a successful product placement. However, when we look at the reasons behind both of their results, there is a common factor that contributed to better performance of a product placement: fit between the product placement and the show. It is not the combination of prominence and plot connection per se that improves or lowers brand attitude, but the fit or inconsistency resulted from the combination.
Fit has been the centre of focus of the celebrity endorsement literature. Advertising a product through a celebrity whose image is congruent with the image of the product results in higher believability of the advertiser (Erdogan, 1999), enhances the attitude towards the advertisement (Kamins, 1990), and increases brand attitude (Till and Bulser, 2000). This is achieved because fit drives the establishing of an associative link between two concepts (Till and Bulser, 2000). When a product and an endorser are perceived to fit, it is easier to establish a perceived connection between the two, which drives the effect of celebrity endorsement (Till and Bulser, 2000). A similar mechanism is expected to govern the link between product placement and its context.
Bhatnagar et al. (2004) shed light on the role of fit in the outcome of product placement. They suggested that a good fit between the actor or storyline of product placement
and the placed product facilitates the transfer of positive attitude among them. Fit also enhances the relevance of a placement, and contributes to the memorability and believability of the placement (Bhatnagar et al., 2004). Contrarily, placements with low level of fit and which seem out of place will raise suspicion, be processed negatively, and lead to lower trust in both the brand and the show (Bhatnagar et al., 2004). This impact of fit may be explained by the persuasion knowledge model (Friestad and Wright, 1994), which implies that product placement that fits well with the show and is thus less perceived as advertising will be more effective in persuading consumers.
Both the analyses of Russell (2002) and Dens et al. (2012) implied that, the combination of prominence and plot connection that generated the most fit between the product placement and the show resulted in better brand attitude, although the optimal combination is case-specific. Ergo this paper draws attention to the concept of Congruence, to measure the fit of a product placement, as an alternative dimension of categorizing product placement, in order to better understand the effect of product placement. A definition is proposed below.
Definition: Congruence
Congruence is the fit between a product placement, and the character, or storyline of the film or TV production where the product is placed.
If a product placement has a high level of congruence, then the product, or the way the product is placed, appears naturally to the show, and that it does not disrupt the harmony of the show. Different modalities of the placement of the same product may result in different
levels of congruence.
The level of congruence is affected by prominence and plot connection, however there is not a single optimal combination of the two that leads to higher congruence. Plot connection is the integration of a product placement with the storyline or character, thus by definition, high plot connection leads to high congruence. The questions remains, what level of prominence can better complement high plot connection, and enhance the overall congruence?
2.4 Brand Logo Prominence
According to existing studies, both prominent and subtle placements may be seen as congruent, depending on the context (Russell, 2002; Dens et al., 2012). Even though previous research has concluded that high prominence leads to better brand awareness but lower brand attitude, there is one question that so far has been overlooked by scholars. That is, for a single prominent product placement, which element of it contributes to the improvement of brand awareness, and which causes the decline in brand attitude?
As introduced above, multiple factors together affect the prominence level of a product placement, including: the visual or auditory modality, the size of the product and logo, the duration and repetition of the product appearance, and the mention of brand name in the script (Law and Braun, 2000; Russell, 2002; Bhatnagar et al., 2004; Dens et al., 2012). A product placement whose brand name is uttered by a character is more prominent than one with merely a product shown visually (Russell, 2002). There is reason to suspect that different prominence level of brand logo will affect the prominence level and congruence level of a product placement, and in turn the eventual performance of the product placement.
Therefore, this study will separate brand logo prominence and product prominence, to investigate the conditions for a product placement to fit with a show, and the effects of such a placement.
Brand logo prominence is the level of prominence measured only on the logo of a product placement, regardless of the prominence of the product itself, including: the visual or auditory modality of the brand logo (or brand name), the size of the logo, and the duration and repetition of the appearance of the brand logo. Similarly, product prominence is the level of prominence measured only on the product, regardless of the appearance of the brand logo.
Brand logo prominence and product prominence are uncorrelated. A product placement could be prominent on multiple accounts, and the prominence of a product placement could be affected by both brand logo prominence and product prominence. For instance, a product could recurrently appear on the screen, showing clear product features and brand logo. When the brand logo is manipulated to become subtle, one can expect the prominence level of the product placement to be lowered. Yet the product placement could remain to be prominent due to its repeated appearance and clear product features (i.e. high product prominence).
As it is explained above, high plot connection leads to high congruence. Based on the premise that a product placement has high plot connection, the present study aims to discover the level of prominence that further enhances the fit of the product placement, through investigating the effect of brand logo prominence.
2.4.1 Brand Awareness
Without a prominent logo, a product placement will be less noticeable.Hence similar to the effect of product placement prominence, brand logo prominence is expected to have a positive relation with brand awareness. In this study, brand awareness will be measured through brand recognition.
Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relation between brand logo prominence of a product placement and brand recognition.
2.4.2 Brand Image Transfer
Keller (2003) emphasized the importance of the brand-leveraging process, that is, borrowing positive associations from other entities through linking the brand to another person, place, thing, or brand. One way to achieve such transfer of associations is celebrity endorsement (Keller, 2003). Celebrities bring symbolic meanings such as status, personality, and life style to brands through endorsement (Erdogan, 1999). According to Erdogan (1999), the meaning of a celebrity comes from the roles they played in film/TV or from other careers, these meanings will then transfer to the endorsed product, and eventually to customers through consumption.
In the case of product placement, though the connection between the product and the celebrity is less strong than it is through endorsement, the product may be closely linked to the character within the film/TV, while in the meantime weakly related to the celebrity actor/ actress. Therefore, product placement will benefit from the meaning transfer from both the
film/TV character and the celebrity actor/actress.
Product placement with low brand logo prominence is expected to fit better with the character or the content of the film/TV, thus contributing to a higher level of congruence. The consistency between the character or storyline and the placed product leads to more image transfer among them (Bhatnagar et al., 2004). Thence, product placement with subtle logo will benefit from image transfer from the film/TV; and the benefit is expected to be more positive than product placement with prominent logo.
Hypothesis 2a: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to image transfer from the character to the brand, compared with no product placement.
Hypothesis 2b: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive image transfer from the character to the brand than product placement with a prominent brand logo.
2.4.3 Brand Attitude and Brand Choice
Some might be skeptical about the effectiveness of product placement with a subtle logo in influencing consumers. Without a prominent logo, the persuasion attempt of the product placement is less obvious. This is contrary to the traditional execution of product placement, which aims to show the brand name through the placement. However, even though product placement with subtle logo is less effective in raising brand awareness, a positive effect on brand attitude and brand choice can be expected.
be disassociated with the evaluation of the brand. Subtle product placements are found to result in lower brand awareness but higher brand attitude and purchase intention (Law and Braun, 2000; Dens et al., 2012), compared to prominent placements. Van Reijmersdal et al. (2007) confirmed that after viewing more episodes of a show where the product placement is integrated into the content, brand image becomes more positive regardless of viewer’s memory of the placement. These results may be explained by the distinction between implicit and explicit memory (Law and Braun, 2000; Van Reijmersdal, 2009).
The explicit memory governs consumer recall and recognition of a product, while the implicit memory influences consumer’s consideration set (Law and Braun, 2000). The implicit process is activated when product placements are subtle, because audience attention is drawn to the show, rather than the product (Van Reijmersdal, 2009). It is possible that “placements could work by priming consumers to choose the products without the consumer being aware they had been influenced in that manner” (Law and Braun, 2000: 1062). Therefore, being exposed to product placement with a subtle logo can lead to positive brand attitude and brand choice, through the influence of consumers’ implicit memory, even though such placement did not make an impression on their explicit memory.
This influence process of product placement of subtle logo on brand choice may be further related to the link between brand personality and consumer personality. The research of Aaker (1997) showed that people consume products that have the personality they possess or desire. Product placement with subtle logo benefits from the meaning transfer of both the character and celebrity, including their personalities. Consequently, subtle logo product placement will influence consumers’ brand choice, without them realising their exposure to advertising.
Hypothesis 3a: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive brand attitude, compared with no product placement.
Hypothesis 3b: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive brand attitude than product placement with a prominent brand logo.
Hypothesis 4a: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive brand choice, compared with no product placement.
Hypothesis 4b: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive brand choice than product placement with a prominent brand logo.
2.4.4 Willingness-to-Pay
Finally, as a consequence of enhanced brand awareness, brand association, and brand attitude, consumer’s willingness-to-pay is expected to increase accordingly.
Hypothesis 5a: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive willingness-to-pay, compared with no product placement.
Hypothesis 5b: Product placement with a subtle brand logo leads to more positive willingness-to-pay than product placement with a prominent brand logo.
2.5 Negative Effect of Product Placement on the Film or TV Production
is translated into economic returns through influencing consumer behaviour. Hence it is necessary to understand the effectiveness of product placement from the consumers’ perspective. However, the effect of product placement is twofold. It not only has an influence on the placed brand, but will eventually impact the show where the product is placed. We shall not ignore the negative effect product placement may have on the artistic quality of the film or TV production.
Very little attention has been paid to the possible negative impact of product placement on the film/TV production. Wiles and Danielova (2009) pointed out that product placement disrupts the quality of the art. Homer’s (2009) study also suggested that repeated prominent placement may lead to a decline in the number of audience. Therefore, product placement is a topic that not only concerns the product manager, but also the show producer. Nevertheless, no empirical study so far has directly tested the impact of product placement on the show. Further investigations of product placement from the film/TV production’s perspective is called for, to provide guidelines for producers in making placement decisions without jeopardizing the performance of their show.
Homer’s (2009) research revealed the more obvious “in your face” product placement raises suspicion and are intrusive and distracting, thereby leading to less favourable brand attitude. Even though viewer’s attitude towards the show is not investigated, it is logical to expect a negative influence on the rating of the show. Moreover, there exists a fundamental contradiction in art, where on one extreme it is made purely for the commercial pursuit of a monetary reward, while on the other it is performed for the profound aesthetic value (Bradshaw and Holbrook, 2007). Consequently, when a film/TV programme appears to be commercial, its artistic quality will drop in the mind of the audience. Nevertheless, product
placement with subtle brand logo is expected to be congruent with the show, thus less disruptive to the quality of the show. A negative relation between brand logo prominence and the show could be anticipated.
Hypothesis 6: There is a negative relation between brand logo prominence of a product placement and perceived film or TV programme quality.
3. Method
An experiment is carried out to test the effect of the appearance of logo of product placements in a film, using a between-subjects design. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three groups, where Group 1 and Group 2 are treatment groups, and Group 3 is the control group.
A short film of a little more than 5-minute long was edited from the 2011 film Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. In the edited clip, four product placements were present: Canon VIXIA-HV40 camcorder, MacBook Air laptop, Prada Saffiano handbag, and BMW 1 Series car. All of the four product placements were highly prominent, since the products were centrally placed with a clearly visible brand logo, appeared repeatedly on the screen, and the total time duration of the appearance of the products were long (Canon VIXIA-HV40: 8s, MacBook Air: 8s, Prada Saffiano: 8s, BMW 1 Series: 6s). The four product placements were all highly connected to the plot of the film as well, as all the products were used by film characters in a way that’s connected to the storyline.
3.1 Stimuli Development
Group 1: Prominent Logo Condition. Participants of Group 1 were exposed to the above-mentioned edited video clip, labelled as Video A. In Video A, the brand logo of all product placements were kept prominent: the brand logos were clearly shown repeatedly in the centre of the screen.
Group 2: Subtle Logo Condition. A Video B is modified from Video A, to be shown to the participants of Group 2. The brand logos of the four products were manipulated in Video B, so that the product placements in Video B have subtle brand logos. For each product, a
vaguely visible logo is shown briefly only once, at a small size. All other appearances of brand logos were completely masked. Keep in mind that the prominence of the product was not modified. The products thus remain central to the scene, while the brand logo on the product was covered and made subtle.
Group 3: Baseline Condition. A Video C is edited also from Video A, with the aim of showing no product placement. The scenes containing the products were cut out, where they do not change the story of the short film. In scenes where the product appearance is necessary for the storyline, apart from covering all brand logo, the duration of the product on screen was kept at minimal, which is enough for viewers to understand the story, meanwhile placing viewers’ attention on the story rather than the product. Moreover, the distinctive features of a product that attribute it to a specific brand were edited out. For instance, in a scene where the film character Ethan drives a BMW in chasing of the villain, all shots that portrait the outward appearance of the car were deleted. Therefore, from the viewer’s perspective, the character could be driving any car.
Apart from the manipulations of the product placement, the content of video A, B and C are the same.
3.2 Procedure
Participants were randomly assigned into three groups. In Group 1 and Group 2, participants were informed that their task is to evaluate the quality of a short film, and answer a few questions concerning the film. The true purpose of the experiment was not disclosed, so that the participants will place their attention on the content of the film, rather than the product placements. They were then administered to watch respectively Video A or Video B.
Immediately after watching the video, participants were asked to give the video a rating. Following the evaluation, questions on the four placed products were asked.
Since the objective of the experiment is to uncover the effect of different kinds of product placements, it is required that participants watch the entire video before answering the related questions. As the video is edited from a known film, it is possible that participants who have previously seen the film will stop watching the video in the middle. The participants were not under any supervision while answering the questions, therefore they were encouraged repeatedly during the experiment to watch the full video carefully, even though they have seen the original film. Reminders were shown on multiple pages that the video needs to be watched entirely before moving on. Apart from that, after displaying the video, participants were asked whether they have watched the whole video. In cases where the answer is “no”, the participant is directed back to the page containing the video, with an explanation that they should watch the complete video, even if they have previously watched the original film and are familiar with the story.
As the control group, the answers of Group 3 were collected without any presence of product placement. Participants in this group were first asked the same set of questions concerning the four products, prior to watching the video, to reveal their attitude towards the products without being subject to any influence. Afterwards, Video C is shown to the participants, followed by questions concerning the film. The means to instruct the participants to watch the complete video before continuing with the questions were also present. The procedure of the experiment for the three groups is visualized in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Experiment procedure of treatments
3.3 Dependent Variables
Seven dependent variables were tested during the study, five of which concerning the effect of the product placements: Awareness, Association, Attitude, Choice, and Willingness-to-pay; two concerning the quality of the film: Rating, and Commercial.
Awareness is whether viewers recall or recognize the products. Participants of the experiment were presented with a set of products, including the four placed in the video and four other products not included in the video. The products were shown with both a picture and the name of the product. Participants were asked to select the products which they recognize. The four other products that did not appear in the video were exhibited to lower the chance of the participant realizing the true purpose of the experiment, and consciously connecting the products to the video.
Association is whether the image of the film characters transfer to the brand of the products used by the characters. The four brands placed in the short film were each used by one character in the film (Canon – Jane; Apple – Benji; Prada – Sabine; BMW – Ethan). The brand image of each is compared to the image of the respective character. Participants were asked to describe both the brands and the characters through choosing from a list of 13
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Video of Prominent Logo Video of Subtle Logo Video with No Product Placement Questions on Short Film Questions on Products Questions on Short Film Questions on Products Questions on Products Questions on Short Film
characteristics. The order in which the 13 words appeared on the list is set at random for each participant, to control for possible biases. The study then compared to what extent the qualities attributed to the brands were in agreement with the characters.
The participants from Group 3 described the four brands before watching the video, therefore were not in any way influenced by the video, hence their answers exhibit the characteristics that the brands possess, despite of product placement. It is logical to expect these characteristics to also appear in the answers of Group 1 and Group 2, which answered the questions after watching a video containing product placement. The exhibition of such characteristics may not be attributed to the effect of product placement. For this reason, these characteristics were excluded from the analysis, to enhance the internal validity of the experiment. A detailed description of the procedure will be explained in the next section.
Brand image transfer is a process that could happen along two directions, both from the character to the product brand, and from the product to the character (Keller, 2003). To avoid any influence product placement might have on the image of the character, only Group 3 participants who watched a video without product placement were asked to determine the qualities of the film characters.
Attitude is the extent to which participants like a brand. For each of the four products placed in the short film, participants were asked to express how much they like the brand on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the participant does not like the brand at all, and 10 being the participant likes the brand very much.
Choice is when confronted with products from two different brands, which one participants are more likely to purchase. Participants were presented two different products of the same category, of which one is included in the video and the other is not. The two
products are of the same price range, and the popularity of the two product brands are similar. Participants indicated which product they are more likely to choose.
Willingness-to-pay is the maximum value consumers are willing to spend on a product. For all of the four products, participants were asked to indicate how much they are willing to pay for a product directly in numerical terms in euro.
Rating is the rating of the video on its quality. Immediately after watching the short film, participants were asked to rate the video on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is the lowest rating, and 10 is the highest rating. Participants were asked specifically to rate the short film based on the video that they have just watched, but not on the original film from which the video is edited.
Commercial measures to what extent the participants consider this film to be a commercial product, as opposed to a film that pursues artistic quality. It is also measured on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being a purely commercial film, and 10 being a film that pursues quality in the form of the art. It is also reminded to the participants that their answer should be based on the video, rather than the original film.
3.4 Independent Variable
The experiment manipulation, i.e. prominent logo condition, subtle logo condition, baseline condition, was coded as a grouping variable, consisting of all participants and an indication of which manipulation they were assigned to: Group 1=prominent logo condition; Group 2=subtle logo condition; Group 3=baseline condition.
4. Results
4.1 Controlled Factors
In order to find possible effects of different types of product placements, it is crucial that the experiment participants were exposed to the desired manipulations. Therefore, during the experiment, participants were repeatedly instructed to watch the entire video carefully before answering the questions. In addition, at the end of the experiment, participants were asked to indicate the percentage of the video that they have watched. For Group 1 and Group 2, all responses that indicated a percentage other than 100% were considered invalid responses. In Group 3, participants first answered questions about the four products, to reveal their attitude towards the product without being subject to any influence. A video without product placement is shown to the participants at the end, after which they were asked film-related questions only. Therefore, for Group 3, all answers concerning the products were considered valid; while the film-related answers have excluded those that did not watch the video 100%. Moreover, the videos used during the experiment were edited from a known film, where the form of product placements was modified. Therefore, it is important that the participants were not recently exposed to the product placements in the original film. The respondents that have watched the original film within the past three months were excluded.
4.2 Sample Characteristics
A total of 148 responses were gathered during the experiment. After controlling for validity according to the above-mentioned methods, answers from 111 respondents were valid for the analyses on the effects of product placement (NG1=35, NG2=37, NG3=39), and 105 (NG1=35, NG2=37, NG3=33) were considered for the film-related analyses. The average age of the
participants is 24.6, and 38.1% of them are male (Table 1). Table 1. Sample age and gender across groups
4.3 Hypothesis Testing
All statistical analyses were done using SPSS.
4.3.1 Recognition
After watching the short film, participants were asked to indicate whether they recognize the products which were placed in the film. When recognition is reported, the response is coded as 1, and otherwise 0. To test whether a difference exists between the proportions of people that recognized the products among groups, the Chi-square statistic is tested using a contingency table.
The effects of product placement being discovered in this research should be generalizable, rather than only applicable to certain products. Thus, the responses on all four products were considered together. The Chi-square test did not find significant differences between the three groups (N=444, p= .063, > .05). However, the product MacBook Air has reported a 95.5% recognition rate across all groups (Table 2). It is probable that its recognition was not affected by the product placements, because the product is already
Average Age Gender
Group 1 25.3 35.3% Male
Group 2 24.6 40.5% Male
Group 3 24.0 38.4% Male
known to the participants. Therefore, a second Chi-square test is conducted on the other three products only, which showed significant evidence that recognition is not independent from group treatment (N=333, p=.040, < .05). Although, the Chi-square test does not tell where the differences lie between treatments.
Table 2. Recognition rate of products across groups
As recognition is given the value 1, and no-recognition is given the value 0, a one-way ANOVA including a post hoc test is carried out to further investigate the differences in recognition among the three groups. Results showed that product placement with prominent logo significantly improved (p= .033, < .05) product recognition (excluding MacBook Air) of Group 1 (N=105, M= .58), compared to Group 3 (N=117, M= .41) which was exposed to no product placement. As expected, there is no significant improvement (p= .481, > .05) in recognition in Group 2 (N=111, M= .50), compared to Group 3. However, there is no significant difference (p= .502, > .05) between Group 1 and Group 2 either. Brand logo prominence of a product placement does not seem to have a significant impact on product recognition. H1 is thus not supported, brand logo prominence is not positively related to brand recognition.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Canon VIXIA-HV40 40.0% 32.4% 20.5%
MacBook Air 97.1% 97.3% 92.3%
Prada Saffiano 54.3% 43.2% 38.5%
4.3.2 Association
Each of the four product placements in the short film were used by a film character (Canon – Jane; Apple – Benji; Prada – Sabine; BMW – Ethan), the brand image of each product is thus compared to the respective character, to uncover whether the image of the character has influenced the image of the brand.
Participants were given a list of 13 characteristics, and asked to describe each of the four brands through choosing all that apply from the list. The 13 characteristics are: adventurous; boring; boundless; brave; copycat; dumb; exciting; geek; good-looking; smart; stylish; trustworthy; unreliable. The frequencies of which each characteristic is chosen for each brand are recorded by group.
The participants of Group 3 were not influenced by any product placement, therefore their descriptions reflect the real characteristics of the brands. For each product, the top N characteristics reported by Group 3 that have an accumulated frequency that constitutes more than 60% of the total accumulated frequency are considered the innate characteristics of the brand (Table 3). In other words, such characteristics exist regardless of product placement. Table 3. Innate characteristics of four brands (determined from Group 3)
Canon Trustworthy Good-looking Stylish Apple Stylish Good-looking Trustworthy
Prada Stylish Good-looking —
Participants of Group 3 were also asked to describe the four characters in the film, through choosing from the same list of qualities. However, for each film character, the innate characteristics of the respective product were excluded from the analysis. For instance, one of Canon’s innate characteristics is “trustworthy”. Even if participants from Group 1 and Group 2 also find Canon trustworthy, there is not enough evidence to conclude it to be a result of the product placement. Thus in the analysis of the characteristics of Jane, “trustworthy” is disregarded.
Again, the frequencies of chosen characteristics are calculated for each film character. The top N characteristics whose accumulative frequency constitutes more than 60% of the total accumulated frequency were determined as the major qualities of the character (Table 4). These major qualities are then studied to show whether product placements with subtle logo had an impact on brand image.
Table 4. Major qualities of four film characters (determined from Group 3)
Every time a participant indicates that a brand has the characteristic of a major quality of the respective film character, the answer is coded as 1, otherwise it is coded as 0. The frequencies that participants find same characteristics in the brand as in the respective film character are compared between the 3 groups (Table 5). A Chi-square test showed significant evidence (N=1221, p= .000, < .05) that participants from different groups found the brand
Jane Smart Brave Adventurous
Benji Geek Smart —
Sabine Exciting Unreliable Smart
images differently. To see where the differences lie, a one-way ANOVA is run. As predicted, participants from both Group 1 (N=385, M= .19, p= .000, < .05) and Group 2 (N=407, M= . 18, p= .001, < .05) found the brand images much more in accordance with the film characters, compared to Group 3 (N=429, M= .09). H2a is strongly supported, product placements with a subtle logo benefited from image transfer from the character to the product. On the contrary, no significant difference (p= .942, > .05) was found between Group 1 (N=385, M= .19) and Group 2. H2b is not supported, image transfer for product placements with prominent brand logo and subtle brand logo did not differ from each other.
Table 5. Accumulated frequency of reported brand image in agreement with the character across groups
4.3.3 Attitude
Brand attitude measures how much participants like a brand on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is the minimum score and 10 is the maximum. The scores on brand attitude (Table 6) are tested through a one-way ANOVA, to see whether differences exist among the three groups. No significant difference is found in this case (N=444, p= .081, > .05). Neither H3a nor H3b are supported. Product placement with subtle logo did not lead to significant changes in brand attitude compared with no product placement; neither did it perform more positively than product placement with prominent logo.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
Canon-Jane 33 20 13
Apple-Benji 16 25 13
Prada-Sabine 5 7 4
Moreover, when looking at the four products included in the film separately, no clear relation between product placement and brand attitude was shown. In the cases of Canon and Prada, Group 1 and Group 2 both reported lower brand attitude than Group 3; while the opposite was found in the cases of Apple and BMW. A further discussion of these findings will follow in the next section.
Table 6. Average brand attitude of four brands across groups
4.3.4 Choice
The rate of brand choice for each product across groups is shown in Table 7. Brand choice is coded as 1 and 0, where 1 represents the participant will choose to buy the product which was placed in the film over another product, and 0 means the participant will not choose the placed product.
The Chi-square test showed significant support that brand choice is not independent of group treatment (N=444, p= .011, < .05). A one-way ANOVA including a post hoc test is conducted to show the differences between groups. Group 2 (N=148, M= .63) reported significant (p= .049, < .05) improvement in brand choice compared to Group 3 (N=156, M= . 49). H4a is marginally supported, product placement with subtle brand logo led to higher brand choice, compared to no product placement. However, no significant difference (p= . 975, > .05) is found between Group 1 (N=140, M= .65) and Group 2. The product placements
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
Canon 6.75 6.78 7.03
Apple 7.88 7.59 7.31
Prada 5.41 5.66 5.93
with prominent logo shown to Group 1 significantly improved brand choice (p= .019, < .05) compared to Group 3. H4b is not supported, product placement with subtle logo did not perform more positively than product placement with prominent logo.
Table 7. Rate of brand choice across groups
4.3.5 Willingness-to-pay
Since the four products placed in the short film have different price ranges, the willingness-to-pay for each product is tested separately. In some cases, participants have indicated a willingness-to-pay of 0 euro. The analysis of willingness-to-pay is based on the assumption that the participant is buying the product. A willingness-to-pay of 0 means that the participant will not choose to purchase the product, which is an implication of brand choice measured in H4. Consequently, the analysis did not include the answers of 0, but only considered those that have an actual willingness-to-pay. An overview of the average willingness-to-pay for each product of the three groups is given in Table 8.
For the Canon camcorder, the Levene statistic showed that the data is normally distributed (p= .087, > .05), hence the differences among the 3 groups were tested through a one-way ANOVA, which turned out significant (N=107, p= .021, < .05). Group 2 (N=37, M=320.41) showed significantly higher (p= .048, < .05) willingness-to-pay for Canon
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Canon VIXIA-HV40 85.7% 83.8% 66.7%
MacBook Air 80.0% 59.5% 53.8%
Prada Saffiano 62.9% 75.7% 59.0%
camcorder than Group 3 (N=37, M=200.03). Group 1 (N=33, M=324.09) reported similar results as Group 2 (p=1.000, > .05). The willingness-to-pay of Group 1 for Canon is significantly higher (p= .047, < .05) than Group 3.
The data on willingness-to-pay of MacBook Air is also normally distributed (p= .234, > .05), hence a one-way ANOVA is tested. Group 1 (N=34, M=843.53) reported significant difference (p= .022, < .05) from Group 3 (N=38, M=631.39), while Group 2 (N=36, M=666.67) did not significantly differ from neither Group 1 (p= .077, > .05) nor Group 3 (p= .955, > .05).
In the case of Prada Saffiano, the Levene statistic showed that the data is skewed. Therefore, the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test is carried out, which showed significant differences among the groups exist (N=105, p= .006, < .05). Post hoc Mann-Whitney tests are conducted to reveal how the groups differ, and the results are compared to the adjusted p-value after performing a Bonferroni adjustment. The results confirmed that Group 2 (N=36, Median=315.00, MR=43.38) reported significantly higher (p= .005, < .017) willingness-to-pay than Group 3 (N=36, Median=125.00, MR=29.63). However, no significant difference (p= .990, > .017) is found between Group 1 (N=33, Median=300.00, MR=35.03) and Group 2 (MR=34.97). Group 1 (MR=41.70) also reported significant improvement in willingness-to-pay (p= .008, < .017), compared to Group 3 (MR=28.86).
Finally, the Levene statistic showed that the data on willingness-to-pay of BMW 1 Series is also non-normally distributed (p= .015, < .05). Therefore, the Kruskal-Wallis test is again conducted. There exist significant differences among the groups (N=104, p= .002, < . 05). The post hoc Mann-Whitney tests revealed significant difference (p= .010, < .017) between Group 2 (N=34, Median=22500.00, MR=43.78) and Group 3 (N=39,
Median=15000.00, MR=31.09), while showed no significant difference (p= .596, > .017) between Group 1 (N=31, Median=25000, MR=34.29) and Group 2 (MR=31.82). Significant difference (p= .001, < .017) also exist between Group 1 (MR=44.56) and Group 3 (MR=28.29).
Table 8. Average willingness-to-pay of four products across groups
Therefore, H5a is supported for all cases but the MacBook Air. The group that was exposed to product placement with subtle logo revealed significantly higher willingness-to-pay than the group that was not exposed to product placement. While H5b is not supported, the level of logo prominence does not seem to affect willingness-to-pay.
4.3.6 Film Quality
Film quality is considered on two accounts: the rating of the film, and how commercial the film is considered by the viewers. After watching the short film, participants from all 3 groups (N=105) were asked to give the video a rating on the quality of the film, measured on a scale of 1 to 10. Following the rating, participants also expressed to what extent they believe this short film is a commercial product. The second account is also measured on a scale of 1 to 10.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Canon VIXIA-HV40 (mean) 324.09 320.41 200.03 MacBook Air (mean) 843.53 666.67 631.39
Prada Saffiano (median) 300 315 125
The differences in the average of rating among the 3 groups (Table 9) were tested through a one-way ANOVA. To test the assumption of homogeneity of variance, the Levene statistic was measured (p= .166, > .05), and equal variance has not been violated. The ANOVA test found that there are significant differences between groups (F=10.471, p= .000). The post hoc test confirmed that the mean of Group 1 (N=35, M=4.89, SD=1.811) differs significantly from that of both Group 2 (N=37, M=6.59, SD=1.674, p= .000, < .05) and Group 3 (N=33, M=6.21, SD=1.431, p= .005, < .05), while no significant difference (p= . 658, > .05) is found between Group 2 and Group 3.
The same tests were conducted to compare the means of the commercial-artistic score of the 3 groups (Table 9). The ANOVA test showed that highly significant differences exist among groups (F=15.087, p= .000, < .05). Specifically, the score of Group 1 (N=35, M=3.14, SD=2.046) is significantly lower than both Group 2 (N=37, M=5.65, SD=2.085, p= .000, < . 05) and Group 3 (N=33, M=5.36, SD=2.162, p= .000, < .05). The score between Group 2 and Group 3 does not differ significantly (p= .851, > .05).
Table 9. Average rating and commercial score across groups
The results on both accounts confirmed H6, and showed that product placements that present a prominent logo lead to a lower quality of the film. Meanwhile, the same product placements without showing a clear logo do not have a negative effect on the quality of the film.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
Rating 4.89 6.59 6.21
5. Discussion and Conclusion
This study found that, for product placements that are both highly prominent and plot-connected, product placements with a subtle logo have consistently performed as well as product placements with a prominent logo in improving brand equity.
Even when a product placement does not show a prominent logo, product recognition was not significantly lowered. Meanwhile, product placements with subtle logo significantly improved brand image association, brand choice, as well as consumer willingness-to-pay of the placed products. These results henceforth proved that prominent logo is not a necessary element of an effective product placement.
The only result that did not turn out as expected was brand attitude. The product placements neither with nor without prominent logo seemed to have any effects on brand attitude. The reported brand attitude of the four brands in the experiment did not show consistent patterns across groups. This could be due to the fact that all four product brands tested during the research are very well-known brands, participants have a strong attitude towards the brands already, which is unlikely to be swayed through watching a five-minute video. Even so, brand image of known brands in the consumers’ mind could be more easily altered than brand attitude, since brand image is not a fixed set of associations. New meanings or image of a brand could be constantly created, through establishing new links between the brand and the desired associations (Keller, 2003). This explains why positive brand image transfer occurred also when the four brands are well-known.
Brand choice and willingness-to-pay are brand equity reflected through a specific product of a certain brand. Therefore, even for a known brand, product placement has been found effective when the product is not widely recognized. One product that showed results
that diverged from the others during the experiment is the MacBook Air. As the product has an extremely high recognition rate (95.5%), product placement did not show effect on its recognition, neither did it on its willingness-to-pay. Again, the viewer’s familiarity with the product, existing attitude towards it, and knowledge of the product’s price might have lead to the product placement to be less effective.
Overall, the four products in the experiment reported similar results. This implies that the execution of product placement with a subtle logo could be generalizable to different product categories, and that the outcome of the product placement is more satisfactory when the product is not very widely known.
Product placements with a subtle logo did not yield to better results than those with a prominent logo as anticipated. A few factors might have led to this. Firstly, since the videos used in the experiment were edited from an existing film, the brand logos needed to be masked in order for the logos to appear less prominent. However, the presence of these masks might have diverted viewer’s attention to some extent, thus also disrupted the overall congruence level of the product placements. Secondly, the experiment could only show a video that is five-minute long, the impression that the four products could make on the viewers are limited, so that the difference in the congruence level between Video A and Video B may be too small to make a detectable impact. Thirdly, considering the short length of the videos and the fact that the four brands are known, the persuasion power of the product placements in the video could not be comparable with a real film or TV, and product placements of less known products.
Nonetheless, the negative effect product placements with a prominent logo have on the quality of the film demonstrates meaningful implications. This study proved that film
quality is the casualty of product placement. More specifically, it is the appearance of prominent logo that engenders the damage. A way to avoid this pitfall has also been provided. Low logo prominence can increase the congruence level of prominent product placements, henceforth preserving the quality of the film/TV, in the meantime achieving the same level of efficacy in improving brand equity.
5.1 Theoretical Contributions
Prominence and plot connection are two primary parameters in studying the effect of product placements. Albeit fruitful research on product placement performance along either one of the two dimensions exists, there has been no consensus on what the optimal combination of the two is. Furthermore, the few studies that did put prominence and plot connection together illustrated that there is a trade-off between attaining higher brand awareness (explicit memory), and accomplishing better outcomes on other levels (implicit memory) (Law and Braun, 2000; Van Reijmersdal, 2009; Dens et al., 2012). The present study is a step forward in discovering the optimal type of product placement, in terms of plot connection and prominence levels.
Building upon the conflicting findings of previous research (Russell, 2002; Dens et al., 2012), this study revealed that what contributes to product placement effectiveness is not the level of prominence and plot connection per se, but the level of fit resulted from it. The notion of congruence is proposed to measure the level of fit.
To facilitate finding the right combination of prominence and plot connection that leads to a higher level of fit of a product placement, the study further proposed separating brand logo prominence from product prominence of product placement. It illustrated that a
