Master thesis
What is the influence of loyalty on attitude towards the
advertisement, and attitude towards the brand?
University of Groningen
Tim Hegeman
S2612429 23-6-2015
Supervisor: D. Trampe
2
Table of content
Introduction ... 3 Theoretical framework ... 7 Conceptual model ... 12 Method ... 13 Procedure ... 14 Selection of stimuli... 15 Sample ... 16 Design ... 16 Measures ... 17 Control measures ... 18 Results ... 19 Sample characteristics ... 19 Manipulation check ... 20 Correlation ... 21Hypothesis 1: Relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the brand... 22
Hypothesis 2: Relationship between loyalty, attitude towards the brand and advertisement type ... 23
Hypothesis 3: Relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the advertisement ... 24
Hypothesis 4: Relationship between loyalty, attitude towards the advertisement and advertisement type ... 25
Additional analysis... 26
Discussion ... 29
Managerial implications ... 31
Recommendations for future research ... 32
Conclusion ... 33
3
Introduction
Firms spend more and more money on their marketing activities. In 2014 firms in the US spent over $179 billion on paid media, the expectation is that this expenditure will rise by approximately 15.5% in 2015 (CMO council, 2015). This is caused to a great extent by the worldwide competition due to declining information and transportation costs, consumers can get products just as easy from the other side of the globe (Baldwin, 2006).
We see marketing activities as ways to ‘Develop and manage a network of relationships with other entities to identify, reach and satisfy customers in ways that otherwise would be impossible’ (Srivastava et al., 1999). Firms use all kinds of marketing activities to stay ahead of the competition by acquiring new customers and retaining the existing customers. However, according to research it is more costly to acquire new customers than retaining current customers, while retaining the existing customers is more profitable in the future (Riechheld & Sasser, 1990). To retain the existing customers firms need to create loyalty towards the brand, due to the worldwide competition satisfaction about a brand isn't enough anymore (Reichheld, 1996).
So marketers are not only trying to gain the attention of new customers but, even more important, marketers are trying to attain loyalty from customers towards their product or service. The loyalty towards a brand is not only considered equal to repeat purchases but also leads to, for example, positive word-of-mouth recommendations (Dick & Basu, 1994). Obviously such findings encourage firms to build and maintain brand loyalty among customers (Jensen & Hansen, 2006).
4 reinforces preferences for current brands rather than stimulate brand switching (Tellis, 1998). So an advert is not only good for brand exposure and gaining attention, but it can influence the loyalty towards a brand in a positive way.
To attain the loyalty of the consumers towards their brand marketers try to create
humorous commercials because this is believed to be more beneficial for the firms. Humour is seen as “the psychological state characterized by the appraisal that something is funny, the positive emotion of amusement, and the tendency to laugh” (McGraw et al., 2012). When a humorous commercial appeals to the consumers, these consumers will have a more positive attitude towards the brand. Consumers with a more positive attitude towards the brand are more likely to use the products or services that the firm is offering compared to customers with a negative attitude towards the brand (Warren & McGraw, 2013). However not every commercial which is intended to be funny is actually perceived like that by the public. In the Netherlands there is an ‘award’ called the ‘Leaden Lion’. This ‘prize’ is awarded by the consumer program Radar, to the most annoying commercial of the past year.
Obviously no company wants to win this. Every year there are mixed feelings regarding the nominees, some people think the commercial is funny others however are irritated by it. Even the marketers admit sometimes that the ‘most irritating ad’ was intended to be funny. So trying to add humour is not easy and is by no means a guarantee for a better commercial (Weinberger & Gulas, 1992). However if the humour in an advertisement appeals to the public this enhances attitudes toward the brand (Eisend, 2009). This means that consumers will think more positive about the brand and are more willing to use the product or service.
5 particular advertising stimulus during a particular exposure occasion" (Mitchell and Olsen, 1981). However if consumers show a negative attitude towards the advertisement it does not necessarily mean that the consumers change their attitude towards the brand. The winner of the ‘Leaden Lion’ proves this statement. In 2011 and 2012 the Dutch public voted the commercial of the online fashion shop Zalando as the most annoying commercial of the year. Consumers showed negative attitudes towards this advertisement, but at the end of 2013 the net turnover of the company grew by 50% and according to the International Apparel Federation (IAF) Zalando accounts for a major part of the increase of the internet sales channel in the Netherlands (IAF, 2014). Surely, there are many different reasons why consumers continue to buy products at Zalando even though they do not like the
commercial, however it is a sign that a negative attitude towards the advertisement does not necessarily have to result in a negative attitude towards the brand. We believe that this has to do with loyalty. Loyal customers are already a consumer of the product or service; as such they also have a higher intention to buy the brand compared to alternatives, regardless of their attitude towards the advertisement (Oliver, 1999).
This implies that loyal consumers have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to less loyal consumers. Therefore this study argues that the response towards the brand after seeing a humorous or irritating advertisement differs for loyal customers compared to less loyal customers. Given the fact that marketers attempt to attain the loyalty of
customers, as such brand loyal customers might retain positive attitudes towards the brand even though their attitudes towards the advertisement are negative. Furthermore, attitudes towards the brand and the advertisement may be more positive of loyal customers in
comparison to those of less loyal customers. Therefore this research seeks to address the following question:
6 This study will build on extensive literature on brand loyalty, which will show the importance of this construct for firms. Brand loyalty will lead to repeat purchases, more positive
attitudes towards the brand, and favourable word of mouth (e.g. Dick & Basu, 1994;
Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001; Oliver, 1999). This study will also build on literature on humour in advertising. Humour can be a powerful tool to get consumers attention and convince them to use the product or service that is offered in the advertisement. When a humorous advert appeals to the public, this will have a higher, more positive influence on the attitudes towards the brand compared to irritating advertisements (e.g. Eisend, 2009; McGraw et al., 2012; Warren & McGraw, 2013; Weinberger & Gulas, 1992). However, this study will provide a different point of view, meaning that we not only look at humorous advertisements, but also consider advertisements that are perceived as annoying or irritating. In this research we see irritation towards an advertisement as “the negative, impatient, and displeasing feeling of individual consumers caused by various forms of advertising stimuli” (Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985). Because if a advertisement evokes feelings of irritation, what influence does that have on the attitudes of the consumers towards the brand, and what role does loyalty play in this relationship?
Previous research showed that loyal consumers tend to be more forgiving towards the brand compared to non-loyal consumers (Trampe et al., 2014). However it is unclear if loyal
customers forgive a firm for making an irritating commercial. The conclusions of this
7 Concluding, this research can be a great help for managers to see how loyal and less loyal consumers respond to a humorous or irritating commercial.
This study is structured as follows. After this introductory chapter, chapter two will provide a theoretical framework, which will lead to the conceptual model of this study. In chapter three the methodology will be explained further, followed by the results of this study. The fifth chapter will provide discussion of the most important findings of this study. The last chapter will provide the conclusion, managerial implications and guidance for further research.
Theoretical framework
Marketers want to attract and maintain loyal customers for the company. That is why “the central thrust of marketing activities of a firm is often viewed in terms of development, maintenance, or enhancement of customers’ loyalty towards its products or services” (Dick & Basu, 1994).
For a firm the loyal customers are, in the long run, the most profitable and have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to non-loyal customers (Riechheld & Sasser, 1990). The attitude towards the brand is seen as “an individual’s internal evaluation of the brand” (Mitchell & Olson, 1981). A good example of a company with, as it seems, loyal customers is the German web shop Zalando. As mentioned in the introduction this firm won the “Leaden Lion” in 2011 and 2012 but still managed to increase their market share in all the important markets they are competing in (Zalando, 2014). There can be many reasons why people still buy products from this online shop but we believe that the loyalty from the consumers towards the company Zalando is the one of the key factors. Although the
8
Loyalty
Loyalty towards a brand is not to be confused with satisfaction with the brand. For example in the automobile industry, 85% to 95% of customers report that they are satisfied, but only 30% to 40% return to the previous brand or model (Oliver, 1999). Because of the importance of loyalty there has been a lot of research into this phenomenon, which leads to many different definitions. For this research we are using the most common definition, which states that loyalty towards a brand is: “A deeply held commitment to re-buy or re-patronize a preferred product/service consistently in the future, thereby causing repetitive same-brand or same same-brand-set purchasing, despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behaviour” (Oliver, 1999).
This definition consists of two aspects of loyalty; on the one hand there is the behavioural side, which is more focussed on the amount of repeat purchases of the consumer
(Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). This can occur due to, for example lower costs, lack of substitutes or just convenience (Suh & Yi, 2006).
On the other hand there is the attitudinal loyalty. This is based on underlying attitudes that drive behaviour of a certain customer (Jacoby, 1971). These attitudes are important for the long-term loyalty of the customer (Lau & Lee, 1999). So if a customer shows positive
attitudes towards the brand, this drives positive behaviour towards the brand. These positive attitudes will make the brand trustworthy and will lead to a higher involvement (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). Eventually customers become loyal and recommend the product or service to friends and relatives (Lau & Lee, 1999). Summarizing, if consumers are brand loyal they show “a greater commitment towards the brand because they perceive some unique value that no alternative can provide” (Jacoby & Chestnut 1978; Pessemier 1959).
9 customers goes down’ (Riechheld, 1992). There are also other loyalty-related marketing advantages, such as favourable word of mouth and greater resistance among loyal
consumers to competitive strategies (Dick & Basu, 1994). This leads to the first hypothesis:
H1. Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to customers who are less loyal.
Advertisement type
Loyalty can be influenced by direct experiences such as good customer service, but not all brand experiences are the same. Brand experiences vary in valence; some are more positive and more intense than others (Brakus et al., 2009). However, direct experiences are not the only factor in influencing the loyalty of customers, indirect experiences, such as advertising, are just as influential as direct experiences in the creation of loyalty (Berger & Mitchell, 1989). This is why advertising is a common, widely used, way to build and maintain loyalty (Tellis, 1998). In this research we use the following definition of advertising/advertisements: “Advertising is a means of communication with the users of a product or service.
Advertisements are messages paid for by those who send them and are intended to inform or influence people who receive them” (AA, 2015). The influence of an advertisement will be higher if it appeals to the public. Previous research showed that an advertisement that includes humour is believed to be more appealing to the public (Warren & McGraw, 2013). We have seen that “the greater the unexpected deviation from normally expected
occurrences, the greater the humour response” (Nerhardt, 1970). However to create a humorous advertisement that appeals to all consumers is almost impossible because of the fact that humour is a multifarious concept that is affected by a wide variety of factors (Weinberger & Gulas, 1992). Although there have been many researches into the
phenomenon of humour in advertisements the underlying nature of humour is yet to be resolved (Spotts et al., 1997). Especially because of the many influences a humorous
10 to the desired goal, type of humour, medium, placement and audience, many factors are involved and increase the risk of misfortune (Weinberger & Gulas, 1992).
When an attempt to create a humorous advertisement backfires, why do consumers find it irritating? This process may depend on both commercial- and individual attributes (Fennis & Bakker, 2001). Commercial attributes are factors that include the use of ‘contrived, phony or overdramatized situations in advertisements’ (Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985). In contrast, factors such as ‘good casting and story lines; the creation of a light, happy mood; and attempts at amusement’ appear to reduce the irritation (Fennis & Bakker, 2001). Individual attributes are the individual differences between customers. Like stated before everyone has a
different sense of humour, the same applies for irritation. The level of irritation depends on the motivation to pay attention and to evaluate the advertisement (Fennis & Bakker, 2001).
Attitude towards the brand
When a commercial provokes negative feelings, does this also mean that customers stop purchasing the product or service, and change their attitude towards the brand? To answer this question it is interesting to review research into ‘firm transgressions’. Transgressions are defined as ‘violations of relationship-relevant norms, and refer to the breaches of the
11 situational factors (Oliver, 1999). The example of Zalando also showed that an irritating advertisement does not have to lead to a negative attitude towards the brand. Loyal consumers also tend to be more forgiving towards the brand compared to non-loyal
consumers (Trampe et al., 2014). So although loyal consumers might see the advertisement as irritating, they can still show a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to less loyal customers.
However If the humour in the advertisement does appeal to the public this will enhance the positive attitudes towards the brand (Eisend, 2009). This leads to the second hypothesis:
H2. Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards the brand despite an irritating or humorous advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal.
Attitude towards the advertisement
If a commercial is perceived as irritating by the public, the consumer will show a more negative attitude towards the advertisement compared to when the commercial is perceived as funny/humorous (Fennis & Bakker, 2001). But does the attitude towards the advertisement differ for loyal and less loyal customers? We believe that loyalty does have an influence on the attitude of customers towards an advertisement. When a consumer is loyal towards a brand the motivation to pay attention and to evaluate the advertisement of this brand might be different compared to a less loyal customer. Meaning that their judgement of the advertisement might be framed in a positive way. This opinion is strengthened by the findingthat consumers in close relationships with the brand are more willing to forgive firms transgressions (Mattila, 2001). This would imply that loyal customers might judge the
advertisement more positively when compared to less loyal customers. This leads to the next hypothesis:
12 To examine this relationship more in depth we want to examine if the type of advertisement has an influence on this relationship. In this case the type of advertisement is either an irritating advertisement or a humorous advertisement. We believe that customers who are more loyal, respond more positively to a humorous advertisement of a brand which they prefer compared to less loyal customers, especially because an advertisement reinforces preferences for current brands (Tellis, 1998). However, as previously explained in the introduction, including humour in an advertisement can also backfire. This is most likely to happen when commercials provoke harmful negative feelings (Warren & McGraw, 2013). However do all consumers respond the same to this? Again customers differ in their sense of humour but in addition to that loyal consumers tend to be more forgiving towards the brand that created the advertisement compared to less loyal consumers (Mattila, 2001). Therefore we believe that loyal consumers will respond more positive towards an irritating
advertisement compared to less loyal customers. Therefore the fourth hypothesis is:
H4. Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards an irritating or humorous advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal.
Conceptual model
This study examines if loyal customers respond differently to a humorous or irritating commercial. Does loyalty have an influence on the attitude towards the brand and the attitude towards the advertisement? In the theoretical framework we have seen that many firms use advertising to build and maintain loyalty towards a brand (Tellis, 1998). The research question is formulated as follows:
To what extent does brand loyalty influence attitude towards the advertisement and attitude towards the brand and does this differ for a humorous or irritating commercial?
13 study; the first variable is the attitude towards the advertisement. The second dependant variable is the attitude towards the brand. The conceptual model is drawn below (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Conceptual model
Method
This study used experimental research to test the hypotheses mentioned in the paper, and therefore followed a 2 (brand loyalty: more loyal or less loyal towards a brand) x2
(advertisement type: humorous or irritating advertisement) experimental between subjects design. The stimulus that was used in this research is the type of advertisement (humorous vs. irritating). Respondents were exposed to only one condition and were not allowed to repeat the experiment. All participants were randomly assigned to one of the two
conditions. Respondents are asked about their loyalty towards the brand, so they cannot be randomly assigned to a loyalty condition.
14
Procedure
This experiment was conducted online where participants were asked to watch two parts of a TV show with a commercial break in-between and answer a few questions regarding what they saw. The TV show was included to hide the true purpose of the study; in this way respondents are not biased because they are unaware of the aim of the study.
At the beginning respondents are told that they are going to see a fragment of the Dutch talk show, De Wereld Draait Door (DWDD). In this talk show a journalist explained how bankers in London live and think. This item is chosen because it has no connection with the
broadcasted commercial. The respondents are notified that the TV show is interrupted by a commercial, and that the researcher is interested in their opinions about the TV show and the commercial. After that respondents were asked to provide his or her demographics. Next, the respondents had to indicate how loyal they are towards several brands to disguise the aim of the study; among the brands is the advertised brand. This is the beer brand Heineken for the respondents in the ‘humorous’ condition, and the beer brand Amstel for the respondents in the ‘irritating’ condition. When this was completed, all participants began watching the same Dutch TV show (DWDD). After 2 minutes the video is interrupted by a commercial break. The participants were randomly assigned to see an irritating
advertisement or a humorous advertisement. After the commercial the participants get to see another minute of the TV show. Immediately after the video the respondents have to fill out a questionnaire regarding their attitude towards the advertisement and their attitude towards the brand. In order to not give away the purpose of the study several questions about the TV show were included.
15 study the participant is thanked for their cooperation and debriefed about the purpose of the study.
Selection of Stimuli
The aim of the study is to examine if loyal customers respond differently to a humorous or irritating advertisement compared to less loyal customers. The response is measured in attitude towards the advertisement and attitude towards the brand. To do so we need two types of respondents; loyal consumers and consumers who are less loyal towards the brand. The questionnaire is entirely in Dutch, therefore two Dutch commercials are chosen. The two brands are chosen because these are “attribute brands”; brands which are built around reputation and not actual products (Vrontis, 1998). Such brands imply quality, price and innovation rather than specific items. The potential credibility of a brand is so high that companies can launch brand extensions onto existing markets; Heineken Cold-filtered and Amstel Radler are other examples of brand extensions that penetrated the competitive beer market without any difficulty (Vrontis, 1998). So because these two beer brands are so strong, we expect that there are many loyal customers for both beer brands.
The ‘annoying’ commercial is the nominee for the 2011 ‘Leaden Lion´ (the most irritating commercial of the year) from Amstel, a well-known beer brand in The Netherlands. Nominees ‘Leaden Lion’ 2011: http://www.radartv.nl/lodenleeuw/2011/
The funny commercial is from the beer brewer ‘Heineken’, which is also a well-known beer brand in The Netherlands. This commercial won the ‘Golden Loekie’ in 2009, which means it was voted as the best, funniest commercial of the year.
Winner ‘Golden Loekie’ 2009: http://www.welovereclame.nl/gouden-loeki/historie
16 from using brands from different industries. The advertisements chosen for the present study are the following:
Humorous advertisement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIutgtzwhAc Irritating advertisement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHYe5xJFabE
Sample
The final sample consists of 215 subjects who participated in the study. A number of 109 subjects only partially filled in the questionnaire because the questionnaire was not
compatible with several types of mobile phones. That is why we left these respondents out of the data to keep it as clean as possible. The data sample consists of 106 completed questionnaires. Within this sample there are 51 males and 55 female respondents with a total average age of 37,25 years.
Design
This study used experimental research to test the hypotheses mentioned in the paper, and therefore followed a 2 (brand loyalty: more loyal or less loyal towards a brand) x2
(advertisement type: humorous or irritating advertisement) experimental between subjects design. In this design respondents are randomly assigned to the type of advertisement, which is either humorous or irritating. Respondents can only take part in one condition, in this way respondents are not biased because they are unaware of the aim of the study. The respondents were equally distributed with 53 respondents per advertisement.
Loyalty
More Less
Advertisement
Humorous Irritating
17
Measures
Demographics
Respondents are asked to fill out their gender, age, their highest level of education and their native language. This information is used to control if there are differences between the groups in terms of demographics.
Loyalty
The loyalty towards the brand construct was measured by a seven-item Behavioural Loyalty Scale with minor adaptations (Zeithaml et al., 1996). The measure consisted of five
behavioural items; respondents indicated their likelihood of engaging in each behaviour on a 7-point scale (1 = very unlikely, 7 = very likely). Amongst others, respondents are asked how likely it is that they recommend the brand to others or how likely it is that they will buy the brand in the upcoming period. When analyzing the results, the five scores have to be brought back to one variable. To see if this is possible, an internal consistency reliability analysis has to be conducted. This reliability test computes a Cronbach’s alpha, which is a value ranging from 0 to 1. The sum variable may be computed if the value is above 0,7. SPSS shows a Cronbach’s alpha of α = 0,89 for the loyalty towards the brand, which is above 0,7. This means that the five variables may be transformed into one ‘loyalty’ variable (Leliveld & Hillemans, 2012).
Attitude towards the brand
To assess the attitudes towards the brand a published scale was used which asked participants to indicate how they feel about the product using seven-point semantic
18 Attitude towards the advertisement
Attitude toward the advertisement was measured with a previously used seven-point
semantic-scale (Machleit & Wilson, 1988). Respondents have to indicate how they feel about the advert by scoring the advert on seven differing criteria, including how
unfavourable/favourable, good/bad and well produced/poorly produced; the advertisement was according to them. After the questionnaire an internal consistency reliability analysis is conducted to see if we can transform the mean of the scores into one variable. The
Cronbach’s alpha of the attitude towards advertisement was α = 0,92. This means that the variables can be brought back to one variable.
Control Measures
DistractionEach participant was asked to answer a one 7-point semantic differential scale anchored by not at all distracted and very distracted. This control measure was included to see if the participant experienced a level of distraction while taking part in the study.
Involvement with the product category
As one of the control variables, involvement with the product category is measured. Therefore using a previously published seven-point semantic-scale (Zaichkowsky, 1994). Respondents were asked to give their opinion about how important/unimportant or how appealing/unappealing the product category ‘beer’ is to them. To see if we can transform the means into one variable an internal consistency reliability analysis is conducted. The Cronbach’s alpha of the involvement with the product category was α = 0,87, this is higher than α = 0,7. This means that the ten items are transformed into one ‘involvement with the product category’ item (Leliveld & Hillemans, 2012).
General attitude towards advertising
19 not perform as well as the ads claim’. To see if we can transform the means into one variable an internal consistency reliability analysis is conducted. The Cronbach’s alpha of the general attitude towards advertising was α = 0,59. Even after deleting items the Chronbach’s alpha would not raise above α = 0,7. Therefore general attitude towards advertising is left out of the analysis.
Results
Sample characteristics
The final sample consists of 106 respondents. From this sample 51.9% were female and 48.1% were male respondents. The average age of the respondents was 37.25 years as indicated in Table 2. Gender Female 51,9% Male 48,1% Age Minimum 15 Maximum 70 Average 37.25 SD 16.41 Age distribution 15-20 6,6% 21-30 50% 31-40 6,6% 41-50 6,6% 51-60 16% 61-70 14,2%
20 (MAVO/VMBO)
Senior General Secondary (HAVO) 7,5% Pre-university (VWO) 4,7% Senior Secondary Vocational (MBO) 15,1% Higher Professional (HBO) 35,8% University (WO) 24,5% Other 2,8%
Table 2: Sample characteristics
In the condition with the humorous advertisement the majority of the respondents were females, in the condition with the irritating advertisement the majority were males. The average age of the respondents in the condition with the irritating commercial is slightly higher (see Table 3).
Gender Average Age
Female Male
Humorous advertisement 32 21 35.68
Irritating advertisement 23 30 38.83
Total 55 51 37.25
Table 3: Distribution across conditions
Manipulation check
The manipulation in this study was the type of advertisement the respondents got to see. To analyse if manipulation worked, a one-way ANOVA is conducted. This analysis is chosen because there is one nominal independent variable, which is the advertisement type, and an interval dependent variable, which is attitude towards the advertisement. We want to see if the respondents have a significantly more positive attitude towards the humorous
21 ANOVA was significant, F (1,104) = 4,66, p= 0,03. This means that the attitude towards the humorous advertisement (M= 4,50, SD=1,56) is significantly higher compared to the attitude towards the irritating advertisement (M=3,90, SD=1,28). For more details see Table 4.
Attitude towards the humorous advertisement
Attitude towards the irritating advertisement
Attitude towards the advertisements
Male M=4,89, SD=1,21 M=3,99, SD=1,22 M=4,36, SD=1,28
Female M=4,24, SD=1,72 M=3,78, SD=1,38 M=4,05, SD=1,59
General M=4,50, SD=1,56 M=3,90, SD=1,28 M=4,20, SD=1,45
Table 4: Distribution attitude towards the advertisement
Correlation
In order to analyze if the variables correlate with each other, a correlation test is conducted for all variables included (See Table 5). Later on in this chapter we will test the hypotheses, for now this correlation analysis gives us an indication if the concepts of interest are related or not. If concepts are related, a correlation can also tell us if the relationship is positive or negative.
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5
1. Loyalty 2,51 1,50
2. Age 37,25 16,41 0,32**
3. Attitude towards the advertisement
4,20 1,45 0,23* -0,42**
4. Attitude towards the brand
3,83 1,18 0,67** -0,32** 0,31**
5. Gender 1,52 0,50 -0,04 0,01 -0,11 0,01
6. Involvement with the product category
3,22 0,91 0,28** -0,13 0,17 0,28** -0,36**
* = p < 0,05 ** = p < 0,01
22 When we analyze the results we see that there is a significant positive relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the advertisement r=0,23, p= 0,02. There is also a positive relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the brand r=0,67, p=0,00. This would implicate that the more loyal the customers are, the more positive their attitude towards the advertisement and attitude towards the brand will be. However both relationships are significant, the correlation between loyalty and attitude towards the brand (r=0,67, p=0,00), is higher than the correlation between loyalty and attitude towards the advertisement. There is also a significant positive relationship between attitude towards the brand and attitude towards the advertisement (r= 0,31 p=0,00). This means that if the attitude towards the advertisement is more positive, the attitude towards the brand will increase as well. Age has a significant relationship with loyalty, attitude the brand and attitude towards the advertisement. Involvement with the product category has a significant relationship with loyalty (r=0,28, p=0,00) and attitude towards the brand (r=0,28, p=0,00). In this correlation table we also see that gender only has a significant relationship with the control variable, involvement with the product category. In the additional analysis we will explore these relationships more in depth.
Hypothesis 1: Relationship between loyalty and attitude towards
the brand
Now that we have seen that there are correlations between the different variables, we are going to analyze these relationships more in depth. The first hypothesis is as follows: H1. Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to customers who are less loyal.
23 section of this chapter. This linear regression analysis was significant R² = 0.44, F(2,103) = 43,30, p = 0,00. As we expected we see a positive relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the brand (B=0,79, p=0,00). It is shown that consumers who are more loyal to the brand will have a more positive attitude towards the brand. Therefore this hypothesis is supported. The distribution of loyalty is shown in Table 6.
Loyalty brand of humorous advertisement Loyalty brand of irritating advertisement Male M=3,16, SD=1,58 M=2,16, SD=1,39 Female M=2,80, SD=1,63 M=1,95, SD=1,05 General M=2,94, SD=1,61 M=2,07, SD=1,25
Table 6: Distribution Loyalty towards the brand
Hypothesis 2: Relationship between loyalty, attitude towards the
brand and advertisement type
To analyze if the advertisement type has an influence on this relationship we constructed another hypothesis. This hypothesis will examine the effect of advertisement on the relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the brand. The hypothesis is as follows: H2. Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards the brand despite an irritating or humorous advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal.
24 the brand B=-0,17, p=0,36. That means that loyal customers will have a more positive
attitude towards the brand despite the commercial compared to less loyal customers.
To analyze this more in depth we are looking at the respondents who viewed the humorous advertisement. We see that loyal respondents have a significantly more positive attitude towards the brand compared to less loyal customers B=0,44, p=0,00. The same goes for the irritating commercial. The loyal customers who viewed the irritating commercial have a significantly more positive attitude towards the brand compared with less loyal customers B=0,53, p=0,00. This once more proves that this hypothesis is supported. The distribution across attitude towards the brand is shown in Table 7.
Attitude towards brand of humorous advertisement
Attitude towards brand of irritating
advertisement
Attitude towards the brand
Male M=4,47, SD=1,17 M=3,36, SD=1,12 M=3,82 SD=1,25
Female M=3,91, SD=1,23 M=3,73, SD=0,98 M=3,84, SD=1,12
General M=4,13, SD=1,22 M=3,52, SD=1,06 M=3,83, SD=1,18
Table 7: Distribution attitude towards the brand
Hypothesis 3: Relationship between loyalty and attitude towards
the advertisement
Loyal customers have a more positive attitude towards the brand, but do they have a more positive attitude towards the advertisement? To examine this, the following hypothesis is tested:
25 There are two variables in this relationship. Loyalty is an interval variable and in this case the independent variable. The dependent variable is attitude towards the advertisement, which is also an interval variable. To see if there is a relationship between these two variables a linear regression is conducted. Age is also included in this model, more on this in the
additional analysis. We see that the linear regression analysis is significant R² = 0.19, F(2,102) = 11,73, p = 0,00. On the contrary to what we expected we see that there is no significant relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the brand B=0,10, p=0,26. This means that loyal customers do not have a significant more positive attitude towards the brand compared to less loyal customers. The hypothesis is therefore not supported. The distribution across attitude towards the advertisement is shown in Table 8.
Attitude towards the Heineken advertisement
Attitude towards the Amstel advertisement
Attitude towards the advertisements
Male M=4,89, SD=1,21 M=3,99, SD=1,22 M=4,36, SD=1,28
Female M=4,24, SD=1,72 M=3,78, SD=1,38 M=4,05, SD=1,59
General M=4,50, SD=1,56 M=3,90, SD=1,28 M=4,20, SD=1,45
Table 8: Distribution attitude towards the advertisement
Hypothesis 4: Relationship between loyalty, attitude towards the
advertisement and advertisement type
To examine if the advertisement type has an influence on this the relationship the next hypothesis will be tested. This hypothesis is as follows:
H4. Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards an irritating or humorous advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal.
In this relationship we have three different variables which are; attitude towards the
26 variables. To see if there is a relationship between the three variables, a multiple regression is conducted. This is the correct test because there are two independent variables, loyalty which is an interval variable and type of advertisement, which is a nominal variable. The dependent variable, attitude towards the advertisement, is also an interval variable (Leliveld & Hillemans, 2012). In this multiple regression analysis we take age into account because the correlation test showed that age has an influence on all three variables. This multiple
regression analysis was significant R² = 0.21, F(3,102) = 8,86, p = 0,00.
However when we examine the relationship between loyalty and attitude towards the advertisement we see that there is no significant relationship B=0,59 p=0,53 between these two variables. Furthermore the type of advertisement does not have a significant
relationship with attitude towards the advertisement B=-0,44, p=0,10. This means that customers who are more loyal towards a brand do not have a more positive attitude towards the advertisement despite the type of advertisement, compared to less loyal customers. Therefore this hypothesis is not supported.
Additional analysis
The correlation table showed some interesting correlations between variables. Here we are exploring these relationships further to see if they are significant.
Relationship between gender and involvement with the product category
27 Gender
Involvement with the product category
Male M=3,56, SD=0,49
Female M=2,90, SD=1,09
General M=3,22, SD=0,91
Table 9: Distribution involvement with the product category
Relationship between loyalty and involvement with the product category
To examine this relationship further a linear regression analysis is conducted. Both variables are interval variables in this case. The dependent variable is involvement with the product while the independent variable is loyalty in this case. This linear regression is significant R² = 0.08, F(1,104) = 8,74, p = 0,00. This means that the more loyal the customers are, the more involved they are with the product category B=0,17, p=0,00.
Relationship between attitude towards the brand and involvement with the
product category
Here we also conduct a linear regression to examine this relationship. Involvement with the product is the dependent variable and attitude towards the brand is the independent variable. Both variables are interval variable. This linear regression is significant R² = 0.08, F(1,104) = 8,79, p = 0,00. This means that more positive the attitude towards the brand of a customer is, the more involved the customer is with the product category B=0,02, p=0,00.
Relationship between age and loyalty
28 linear regression was significant R² = 0.11, F(1,51) = 5,99, p=0,02. The linear regression for the beer brand Amstel was also significant R² = 0.09, F(1,51) = 5,00, p=0,03. So for both beer brands we see that the older the consumers get, the less loyal they will be towards the brand.
Relationship between age and attitude towards the advertisement
To analyze this relationship another linear regression is conducted with age as the
independent variable and attitude towards the advertisement as dependent variable. Both variables are interval variables. We see that this analysis is significant R² = 0.18, F(1,104) = 22,14, p= 0,00. Because this is a negative correlation, it means that the older the consumers get, the more negative their attitude towards the brand will be B=-0,37, p=0,00.
Relationship between age and attitude towards the brand
The last correlation that is found is between age and attitude towards the brand. To analyse this, a linear regression is conduct with age as independent variable and attitude towards the brand as dependent variable. Both variable are interval variable. This linear regression analysis was significant R² = 0.10, F(1,104) = 11,69. The older the consumer gets, the more negative the attitude towards the brand will be B=-0,02, p=0,00.
Number Hypothesis Result
H1 Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to customers who are less loyal
Supported
H2 Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards the brand despite an irritating or humorous
advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal.
29 H3 Customers who are more loyal will have a
more positive attitude towards an
advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal.
Not supported
H4 Customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards an irritating or humorous advertisement compared to
customers who are less loyal.
Not supported
Table 10: Results
Discussion
After conducting al the analyses, we come to the conclusions of this study. This chapter starts with a review of each hypothesis. After this the conclusions and implications are discussed.
First of all the influence of loyalty on the attitude towards the brand is analyzed. As stated in the first hypothesis it is assumed that loyal customers have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to less loyal customers (Suh & Yi, 2006). This assumption is proved to be true. Customers who are more loyal have a more positive attitude towards the brand. Therefore the first hypothesis is supported.
30 showed that when loyal customers view an irritating advertisement, they would still have a more positive attitude towards the brand compared to customers who are less loyal. Therefore loyal customers are still inclined to purchase products from the brand in spite of these situational factors (Oliver, 1999).
The third hypothesis states that customers who are more loyal will have a more positive attitude towards an advertisement compared to customers who are less loyal. We believed that when a consumer is loyal towards a brand the motivation to pay attention and to evaluate the advertisement of this brand might be different compared to a less loyal
customer. Meaning that their judgement of the advertisement might be framed in a positive way. This hypothesis is not supported, meaning that loyalty has no significant influence on attitude towards the advertisement.
The last hypothesis analyses the response of loyal and less customers towards two different types of advertisements. Here we also see that loyalty has no influence on the attitude towards the advertisement. It makes no difference if the advertisement is irritating or humorous, loyalty does not play a role in the attitude towards the advertisement.
One of the most important findings of this study is that loyalty does provide a ‘buffer effect’ (Tax et al., 1998). Meaning that if customers are loyal they ‘forgive’ the brand for creating an irritating advertisement. This also explains the previously mentioned example of Zalando. Many customers judged this advertisement as irritating, but a possible reason why
31 The last unexpected finding of this research is that age has a negative relationship with loyalty. This means that when customers get older, they get less loyal towards the brand. This can be a reason to aim the commercials at younger customers because they are more likely to show loyalty towards the brand.
Age has also a negative relationship with attitude towards the advertisement and attitude towards the brand, so the older the customers get, the less positive their attitude towards the advertisement and their attitude towards the brand will be. Another reason to aim the advertisement at younger customers to attract and maintain the loyalty, of this target group, towards the brand (Riechheld & Sasser, 1990).
Managerial implications
This research showed that creating loyalty is very important for managers. Even if a loyal customer has a negative attitude towards the advertisement, the attitude towards the brand is still more positive compared to less loyal customers. This finding is important because it implicates that if a commercial does not appeal to the public, the loyal customers will retain the same (positive) attitude towards the brand. It can help to explain the success Zalando achieved despite running an advertisement that is perceived as irritating. With the online retailer still managing to increase their market share (Zalando, 2014). For managers these findings can be used to help when deciding whether nor not to invest in humorous
advertising. As an irritating advertisement can also benefit the organisation through brand awareness for example, whilst not damaging the attitudes towards the brand held by loyal customers. However this study can also be seen as a motivation to try and create a
32 For managers it is also important to know that loyal customers are not biased when they judge an advertisement. The less loyal customers do not have a different attitude towards the advertisement compared to loyal customers. This could mean that less loyal customers are just as receptive to the advertisement compared to loyal customers. Managers can use this to attain the loyalty of the less loyal customers. Especially because we have seen that customers would become more loyal to a brand after seeing a commercial (Jensen &
Hansen, 2006). When an advertisement appeals to the less loyal customers this could result, in the long run, in loyalty towards the brand. This is what every manager want because loyal customers are the most profitable customers for the firm (Riechheld & Sasser, 1990).
Another important finding is the influence of age on loyalty, the findings of this study implicate that younger customers are more loyal towards the brand compared to older customers. Previous researches showed that loyal consumers have a higher intention to buy the brand (Oliver, 1999). Therefore managers should aim their advertisements more towards younger customers, because there is larger change of success in this target group.
Recommendations for future research
For this study, Heineken and Amstel are the two products that were analyzed. These two products are both beer brands. In general, we have seen that males are more involved with this product category compared to females. Although there were no significant differences in loyalty towards the brand between males or females, it is recommended to pick a unisex brand. For example a sports brand like Nike or Adidas could be a good suggestion to use in the next study. Gender will probably not play a role in the involvement with the product category.
The next interesting point for further research could be to see the change in attitude towards the brand after seeing a humorous or irritating commercial. In this study the attitude towards the brand is only measured after the commercial. When this is also
33 the brand. Now we assume that the statement made in a previous research that ‘humor in the advertisement enhances the positive attitudes towards the brand’ is true (Eisend, 2009). The last interesting option for further research is to delve deeper into the influence of age on loyalty. This research showed that younger respondents showed more loyalty towards the brand. It would be interesting to see if this statement holds in a more extensive study into this relationship.
Conclusion
This study concludes with the most important findings. These are that loyal consumers keep their positive attitude towards the brand whether they like the advertisement or not. The next important finding is that loyal customers are not biased when they judge an
34
References
Aaker, D. A., & Bruzzone, D. E. (1985). Causes of irritation in advertising. The journal of marketing, 47-57.
Aaker, J., Fournier, S., & Brasel, S. A. (2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer research, 31(1), 1-16.
Aaker, D. A., & Stayman, D. M. (1990). Measuring audience perceptions of commercials and relating them to ad impact. Journal of Advertising Research.
Alden, D. L., Hoyer, W. D., & Lee, C. (1993). Identifying global and culture-specific dimensions of humour in advertising: A multinational analysis. The Journal of Marketing, 64-75.s review, 71(2), 64-73.
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1998). Experimentation in social psychology.
Baldwin, R. (2006). Globalisation: the great unbundling(s). Economic Council of Finland, 20(2006), 5-47.
Berger, I. E., & Mitchell, A. A. (1989). The effect of advertising on attitude accessibility, attitude confidence, and the attitude-behaviour relationship. .Journal of Consumer Research, 269-279.
35 Bruner, G. C. (1998). Standardization & justification: do AAD scales measure up?. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 20(1), 1-18.
Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1981). Designing research for application. Journal of consumer research, 197-207.
Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. Journal of marketing, 65(2), 81-93.
Chung, E., & Beverland, M. (2006). An exploration of consumer forgiveness following marketer transgressions. Advances in Consumer Research, 33, 98.
Dick, A. S., & Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 22(2), 99-113.
Eisend, M. (2009). A meta-analysis of humor in advertising. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 191-203.
Fennis, B. M., & Bakker, A. B. (2001). " Stay Tuned: We Will Be Back Right after These Messages": Need to Evaluate Moderates the Transfer of Irritation in Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 15-25.
Fournier, S., & Yao, J. L. (1997). Reviving brand loyalty: A re-conceptualization within the framework of consumer-brand relationships. International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 14(5), 451-472.
36 Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of consumer research, 404-420.
International Advertising Association. (2015). Retrieved April 16, 2015, from http://iaauk.london/.
International Apparel Federation (IAF). (2014, April 23). Retrieved April 19, 2015, from http://iafnet.eu/.
Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R. W., & Fisher, W. A. (1978). A behavioural process approach to information acquisition in nondurable purchasing. Journal of Marketing Research, 532-544.
Lau, G. T., & Lee, S. H. (1999). Consumers' trust in a brand and the link to brand loyalty. Journal of Market-Focused Management, 4(4), 341-370.
Leliveld, M., Hillemans, J. (2012), SPSS Guide, Groningen, Rijksuniversiteit
Machleit, K. A., & Wilson, R. D. (1988). Emotional feelings and attitude toward the
advertisement: The roles of brand familiarity and repetition. Journal of Advertising, 17(3), 27-35.
Mattila, A. S. (2001). The effectiveness of service recovery in a multi-industry setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 15(7), 583-596.
McGraw, A.P., Warren, C., Williams, L., & Leonard, B. (2012). Too close for comfort, or too far to care? Finding humour in distant tragedies and close mishaps. Psychological Science, 25, 1215 - 1223.
37 advertising success. In Conference of the American Academy of Advertising. Waco, TX: Baylor University, Norfolk, VA.
Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?. Journal of Marketing Research, 318-332.
Møller Jensen, J., & Hansen, T. (2006). An empirical examination of brand loyalty. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 15(7), 442-449.
Nerhardt, G. (1970). Humor and inclination to laugh: Emotional reactions to stimuli of different divergence from a range of expectancy. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 185-195.
Oliver, R. L., Rust, R. T., & Varki, S. (1997). Customer delight: foundations, findings, and managerial insight. Journal of Retailing, 73(3), 311-336.
Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty?. the Journal of Marketing, 33-44.
Pessemier, E. A. (1959). A new way to determine buying decisions. The Journal of Marketing, 41-46.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in experimental social psychology, 19, 123-205.
Porter, M. E. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard business review, 86(1), 25-40.
38 Shum, M. (2004). Does advertising overcome brand loyalty? Evidence from the
breakfast‐cereals market. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,13(2), 241-272.
Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising,26(2), 53-66.
Spotts, H. E., Weinberger, M. G., & Parsons, A. L. (1997). Assessing the use and impact of humor on advertising effectiveness: A contingency approach.Journal of advertising, 26(3), 17-32.
Srivastava, R. K., Shervani, T. A., & Fahey, L. (1999). Marketing, business processes, and shareholder value: An organizationally embedded view of marketing activities and the discipline of marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 168-179.
Tax, S. S., Brown, S. W., & Chandrashekaran, M. (1998). Customer evaluations of service complaint experiences: implications for relationship marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 60-76.
Tellis, G. J. (1988). Advertising exposure, loyalty, and brand purchase: A two-stage model of choice. Journal of marketing research, 134-144.
The Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) Council™ Website. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from http://www.cmocouncil.org/
Trampe, D., Konuş, U., & Verhoef, P. C. (2014). Customer Responses to Channel Migration Strategies Toward the E-channel. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(4), 257-270.
39 Warren, C., & McGraw, A. P. (2013). When Humour Backfires: Revisiting the Relationship Between Humorous Marketing and Brand Attitude. Paper submitted for publication. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Weinberger, M. G., & Gulas, C. S. (1992). The impact of humour in advertising: A review. Journal of Advertising, 21(4), 35-59.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of advertising, 23(4), 59-70.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioural consequences of service quality. the Journal of Marketing, 31-46.
