IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ess/wpaper/id2785.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Eye for an Eye: Impact of Sequelization and Comparison in Advertisements on Consumer’s Perception of Brands

Author

Listed:
  • Patrali Chakrabarty
  • Bibek Banerjee

    ()

Abstract

In this paper we demonstrate that the positive effects of comparative advertising are significantly diluted when a compared-to brand retaliates. Retaliation introduces sequencing in advertisements. We therefore evaluate sequelized advertisements (both comparative and noncomparative) alongside comparative advertisements and ordinary advertisements. We show that, given no threat of comparative advertising from competitors, sequelizing a popular advertisement may be as potent as comparative advertising, in terms of improving consumers’ recall as well as preference for the sponsored brand. Furthermore, an advertisement message may be directed at core benefits (and/or attributes) that a brand promises, or at a stylized theme or storyline that use peripheral cues to indirectly convey the brand’s deliverables. We incorporate this dimension of communication focus and conclude that while comparative advertisements are more effective with objective messages, noncomparative sequelized advertisements work better with thematic or story based messages. [W.P. No. 2010-08-01]

Suggested Citation

  • Patrali Chakrabarty & Bibek Banerjee, 2010. "An Eye for an Eye: Impact of Sequelization and Comparison in Advertisements on Consumer’s Perception of Brands," Working Papers id:2785, eSocialSciences.
  • Handle: RePEc:ess:wpaper:id:2785
    Note: Institutional Papers
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.esocialsciences.org/Download/repecDownload.aspx?fname=Document12482010210.2332422.pdf&fcategory=Articles&AId=2785&fref=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    Keywords

    positive effects; comparative advertising; brand; communication focus; advertisements;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ess:wpaper:id:2785. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Padma Prakash). General contact details of provider: http://www.esocialsciences.org .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.