To what extent is humour used in advertising effective compared to other advertising techniques?

Weinberger and Gulas (1992) explore how, whilst there is an increasing use of humour in advertising, there is not much evidence exploring the effect of this tactic. It could be assumed that the use of humour could aid a business in their likeability factor and serve to be more memorable yet it could be argued that humour does not persuade, and might not actually help the business, instead making the audience not take them seriously.

Riecken and Hensel (2012) discuss how humour draws attention but can be difficult to use successfully in advertising, in terms of resulting in a purchase. One of the main reasons humour is used in advertising is because it is considered to improve the recall rates of the adverts; Hansen et al (2009) found that the use of humour increased memory of the actual advert but was not successful in the recall of the brand. In this way, it could be considered that the advertisement is not effective for the company yet it may be argued that if the advert is remembered, it could lead to peer discussion which may result in increased brand awareness.

Although humour is useful for being attention grabbing of its target audience, the same could be said for the use of the fear appeal. The fear appeal is where the advertisers using a negative consequence if the product is not purchased to motivate a consumer buying (Williams no date). Williams (no date) continues to discuss why the fear appeal is as effective in recall as it is centred on the viewer’s emotional wellbeing, and the effectiveness of this appeal is shown through the increased use by advertisers. It would appear that in comparison to the fear appeal, the humour appeal is not as effective as perhaps it first appears. On the other hand, Mukherjee and Dubé (2012) raise issues with using the fear appeal in advertising; they argue that the increased fear arousal induced by the advert may result in the viewer becoming defensive and so, not having high recall of the advert because of the negative feelings it invokes. In this way, a humour appeal could be far more successful. 

Mukherjee and Dubé (2012) continue to explain that the use of fear and humour in an advert combined can result in a higher level of arousal overall, resulting in more attention being paid.

Weinberger (1995) would support this view that the use of humour can sometimes be misdirected; he argues that humour should never just be amusing, although this could create a likeability factor for the product and brand. This is because Weinberger (1995) feels that the target audience might miss the advertising message if they are purely just amused, and so, this would make the advertising ineffective. This could be compared to other advertising tactics, such as comparative adverts where the direct comparison between two products could ensure the target audience will not miss the main message as comparison adverts appeal to a viewer’s more logical side rather than their emotional, like in the use of humour appeal. Ash and Wee (1983) argue that comparative adverts are useful but could result in consumers feeling more negative towards the original brand because of comparing them.

A contributing factor to how effective humour is might depend on the media used for the advertisement. As Weinberger (1995) explores, there is no evidence to prove which media is more suited for humorous advertising although expectations are towards television over other media. Another factor Weinberger (1995) discusses is the product type and whether it is high involvement or low involvement. As humour draws more attention, he believes that it is best suited for low involvement products that otherwise might be missed. Zhang (1996) supports the use of humour for low involvement products after explaining the lower the cognition needed, the more effective the advert is. He continues to expand that the initial attitude to the brand also is a supporting factor to how well the humour is received; an advert that makes the audience laugh will promote a good response to the brand so in this way humour can aid the audience’s response to the brand.

Kelly and Solomon (1975) explore that the direction of humour when used in advertising is pivotal to how well received the advert is; it appears that the humour needs to be related to the product for it to be enjoyed rather than just with the view of being funny. Expanding this further, it could be argued that humour is subjective and is affected by the viewer’s cultural background and what they personally find humorous. In this way, it could be considered that using humour is risky as the target audience might find it amusing to them personally, and so have a negative view of the brand. An example of subjective humour could be a sexist advert; Groza and Cuesta (2011) research that opinions of using sexism as a source of humour range from viewing it as not harmful and funny to being extremely offensive. In this way, trying to harness humour could result in being harmful to the brand as a whole. On the other hand, Ouidade (2012) argues that the more risky an advert is perceived, the higher the audiences arousal level; resulting in a higher level of attention and recall.  Based on this, using humour in advertising might be useful due to increased arousal level it could result in.

Overall, there are positives and negatives to the use of humour in advertising. There are various factors that influence the effectiveness of humour, such as the individual differences of the audience, cultural factors and the involvement of the product. In comparison to other advertising tactics, such as comparison or the use of fear, advertising could be argued to be both more and less effective, again depending on the surrounding factors.  In conclusion, using humour in advertising would appear to be increasing, appearing to be considered popular, but the rate of effectiveness for a business can vary so should be considered in depth before being used.

                                                                                                                                                       
References

Ash, S. Wee, C. (1983) Comparative Advertising: a Review With Implications For Further Research (online) Advances in Consumer Research 10 370-376 available from: http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=6143 [accessed 14/05/2015]

Groza, N. Cuesta, J (2011) Sexist humour in advertising: just a joke or marketing strategy? (online) International Journal of Arts and Technology 4 (1) 61 – 73 available from: http://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=37770 [accessed 14/05/2015]

Hansen, J.  Strick, R. Baaren, V Hooghuisy, M Wigboldus, D. (2009) Exploring memory for product names advertised with humour (online) Journal of Consumer Behaviour . 8: 135–148 available from: http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jochim_Hansen/publication/227603195_Exploring_memory_for_product_names_advertised_with_humour/links/0912f5035e6b5323be000000.pdf [accessed 14/05/2015]

Kelly, J. Solomon, P. (01/07/1975) Humor in television advertising (online) Journal of advertising 4 (3) 31 available from: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.worc.ac.uk/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=af758789-4519-4539-8e92-13d130737f69%40sessionmgr4004&vid=1&hid=4212 [accessed 14/05/2015]

Mukherjee, A. Dubé, L. (26/03/2012) Mixing emotions: The use of humor in fear advertising (online) Journal of Consumer Behaviour 11 (2) 147–161 available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.proxy.worc.ac.uk/doi/10.1002/cb.389/abstract [accessed 14/05/2015]

Ouidade, S (2012) Taboo advertising (online) Journal of marketing theory and practice 20 (4) 407 – 422 available from: http://mt6qm6wx6p.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Taboo+advertising&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+marketing+theory+and+practice&rft.au=Sabri%2C+Ouidade&rft.date=2012&rft.pub=Assoc&rft.issn=1069-6679&rft.eissn=1944-7175&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=407&rft.epage=422&rft.externalDocID=734804156&paramdict=en-UK [accessed 14/05/2015]

Riecken, G. Hensel, K (01/07/2012) Using Humor in Advertising: When Does it Work? (online) Southern business review 37 (2) 27 available from: http://mt6qm6wx6p.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using+Humor+in+Advertising%3A+When+Does+it+Work%3F&rft.jtitle=Southern+Business+Review&rft.au=Glen+Riecken&rft.au=Kyle+Hensel&rft.date=2012-07-01&rft.pub=College+of+Business+Administration%2C+Georgia+Southern+College&rft.issn=0884-1373&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=27&rft.externalDocID=2790045261&paramdict=en-UK [accessed 14/05/2015]

Weinberger, M. Gulas, C. (12/1992) The impact of humor in advertising: A review (online) Journal of Advertising 21 (4) 35 available from: https://blackboard.worc.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/pid-472872-dt-content-rid-589454_1/courses/BUSM2619_AS.14-15/Humor%20in%20ad%2C%20a%20review.pdf [accessed 14/05/2015]

Weinberger, M (01/05/1995) The use and effect of humor in different advertising media (online) Journal of advertising research 35 (3) 44 available from: http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.worc.ac.uk/ehost/detail/detail?sid=b7d8f3f0-9506-4b67-a6f9-ba374e85a0ee%40sessionmgr4004&vid=0&hid=4212&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWF0aGVucyZzaXRlPWVob3N0LWxpdmU%3d#db=bth&AN=9508093631 [accessed 14/05/2015]

Williams, K (no date) Fear appeal theory (online) Research in Business and Economics Journal available from: http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11907.pdf [accessed 14/05/2015]

Zhang, Y (01/09/1996) The effect of humor in advertising: An individual-difference perspective (online) Psychology & marketing 13 (6) 531 available from: http://mt6qm6wx6p.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The+effect+of+humor+in+advertising%3A+An+individual-difference+perspective&rft.jtitle=Psychology+%26+Marketing&rft.au=Zhang%2C+Yong&rft.date=1996-09-01&rft.pub=Wiley+Periodicals+Inc&rft.issn=0742-6046&rft.eissn=1520-6793&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=531&rft.externalDocID=10218689&paramdict=en-UK [accessed 14/05/2015]

Social Psychology: The “Halo Effect” and “Solidarity” in advertising

Leiss et al (1986) talks about the importance of advertising for a business, and how advertisers have to look at different methods in order to be most effective, especially in an ever changing world with more and more competition for the audience’s attention. Social psychology, as reported by Snyder and DeBono (1985), is used by advertisers as a tool to reach and persuade their audience through appealing to their psychology. Different theories, such as the ‘Halo Effect’ and a focus on ‘Solidarity’ are amongst those advertisers try to use to their advantage.

The Halo effect comes from social psychology, which according to WikiNoticia (2011) was first investigated by Edward Thorndike in 1920. WikiNoticia goes on to define the halo effect as basing a whole opinion on somebody based purely on a good first impression. For example, because somebody is attractive looking, we naturally associate other positive traits to them, such as intelligence. Root (no date) explains how advertising use this theory in order to make their product more attractive; there are two main routes which are celebrity endorsement or using a brands good name in order to promote, also known as Umbrella Branding. An example of umbrella branding, according to CMA (2013) would be the Virgin Enterprise that does holidays, airlines and megastores. Hilpern (2006) explores the idea of using celebrity endorsement in order to achieve the halo effect; it would appear that celebrity endorsement is increasingly used in the hope that the affection for the star will in turn rub off onto the product advertised. Using celebrity endorsement does have its risks, as Hilpern (2006) explains, if the celebrity is involved in a scandal then the negative feelings toward the celebrity could also follow the company but she concludes, the majority of the time making use of the halo effect results in profit for both the company and celebrity. 

Image One

These print adverts, shown above (image one) used in February of this year are celebrity endorsed with a popular actress named Jennifer Lawrence and are a perfect example of the halo effect. This is because they have used a popular actress that stars in a recent popular film trilogy and is held high in public opinion, as according to Gritten (2013), Jennifer Lawrence is ranked 3^rd out of 100 most valuable stars. Because the viewers have a positive images of Jennifer Lawrence, arguably caused by her attractiveness (Reported by Davidson (2015) to be ranked 3^rd out of 100 sexiest women) and likability, they transfer this to Dior’s brand, the company of the items she is advertising.

Another social psychology theory used in advertising is the solidarity approach. O’Shaughnessy and O’shaughnessy (2004) discusses how with using this approach, accepting a brand will equate to group solidarity, which in term will help the consumer’s perception of worth. Rosenthal (no date) reflects this through relating why solidarity adverts appeal to so many to Maslow’s hierarchy needs where self-esteem is featured; the feeling of unity furthers the self-esteem.  Advertisers are attempting to harness this, which could also potentially border on peer pressure as the consumer is feeling pressured to adopt the brand in order to feel accepted. 

For example, the Skechers 2015 advert, as shown above, shows group solidarity that would appeal to the consumer’s self-esteem if they could be part of it. The advert shows different types of healthy young males and females doing high intensity sport with the only link between them all being the Skechers shoes. Because the shoes are the only link, it creates the impression of a solidarity group which the target audience would want to be part of, which should increase sales. To further this appeal, attractive actors are used, which could also relate to the Halo effect. The drawback of this advert could be that using attractive actors would make the target audience disengage as they could potentially feel it is unattainable to be a part of that group, and so damaging to their self-esteem.

Both of these theories from social psychology are effective when coupled with advertising but in different ways. Where-as the halo effect works more towards an aspirational want if nothing else, solidarity advertising is more inviting and inclusive to order to attract the consumer. In conclusion, coupling the use of social psychology and advertising is an astute move on the advertiser’s part, and is something that will be increasingly used.

                                                                                                                                                                  

References

Apatoff, A. (2013). See Jennifer Lawrence's First Campaign Ads for Miss Dior. [online] PEOPLE.com. Available at: http://stylenews.peoplestylewatch.com/2013/02/22/jennifer-lawrence-miss-dior-handbags-ad/ [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

CMA, (2013). Increase Marketing Power with Umbrella Branding. [online] The-cma.org. Available at: http://www.the-cma.org/about/blog/increase-marketing-power-with-umbrella-branding [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Davidson, R. (2015). Michelle Keegan beats Kendall Jenner and Jennifer Lawrence to be crowned FHM's Sexiest Woman In The World 2015. MailOnline. [online] Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3057688/Michelle-Keegan-crowned-FHM-s-Sexiest-Woman-World-2015.html [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Gritten, D. (2014). The rise of Jennifer Lawrence - Hollywood's most charismatic leading lady. The Telegraph. [online] Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/10463628/The-rise-of-Jennifer-Lawrence-Hollywoods-most-charismatic-leading-lady.html [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Hilpern, K. (2006). The halo effect: The pros and cons of celeb endorsement. The Independent. [online] Available at: http://The halo effect: The pros and cons of celeb endorsement [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Leiss, W., Kline, S. and Jhally, S. (1986). Social communication in advertising. Toronto: Methuen.

O’Shaughnessy, N. and O’Shaughnessy, J. (2004). Persuasion In Advertising. 1st ed. [ebook] London: Routledge. Available at: http://kczx.hnu.cn/G2S/eWebEditor/uploadfile/20111015235118_954896539669.pdf [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Root, G. (n.d.). Halo Effect in Advertising. [online] Small Business - Chron.com. Available at: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/halo-effect-advertising-11909.html [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Rosenthal, R. (2014). 5 Psychological Tactics Marketers Use To Influence Consumer Behavior. [online] Fast Company. Available at: http://www.fastcompany.com/3032675/hit-the-ground-running/5-psychological-tactics-marketers-use-to-influence-consumer-behavior [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

skechersgermany, (2015). TV Spot 2015 - SKECHERS Sport für Frauen und Männer mit Skechers Memory Foam. [video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NllJ22DCWk8 [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].

Snyder, M. and DeBono, K. (1985). Appeals to image and claims about quality: Understanding the psychology of advertising. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), pp.586-597.

WikiNoticia, (2011). Halo effect. [online] En.wikinoticia.com. Available at: http://en.wikinoticia.com/lifestyle/psychology/79895-halo-effect [Accessed 30 Apr. 2015].