Congruence and Incongruence in Thematic Advertisement–Medium Combinations: Role of Awareness, Fluency, and Persuasion Knowledge

Claas Christian Germelmann, Jean-Luc Herrmann (), Mathieu Kacha () and Peter Darke
Additional contact information
Claas Christian Germelmann: Universität Bayreuth [Deutschland] = University of Bayreuth [Germany] = Université de Bayreuth [Allemagne]
Jean-Luc Herrmann: CEREFIGE - Centre Européen de Recherche en Economie Financière et Gestion des Entreprises - UL - Université de Lorraine
Mathieu Kacha: CEREFIGE - Centre Européen de Recherche en Economie Financière et Gestion des Entreprises - UL - Université de Lorraine
Peter Darke: York University [Toronto]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: We suggest that thematic ad–medium congruency versus incongruency evokes distinct effects on consumer evaluations through different underlying mechanisms. Specifically, we propose congruency largely has positive effects on consumer evaluations due to a relatively automatic fluency process, whereas incongruency evokes a more conscious and negative persuasion knowledge (PK) process that leads to negative evaluations. Study 1 showed that consumers were more attentive to incongruence than congruence, particularly when the ad–medium combination was presented with other ads or materials. Studies 2A and 2B confirmed that congruency led to positive evaluations through perceived fluency, whereas incongruency led to negative-PK thoughts involving manipulative intent and more negative evaluations. Studies 3A and 3B provided causal evidence for the role of PK by showing that positive PK attenuated the negative effects the incongruency tactic had otherwise. Overall, these findings suggest the common practice of directly comparing congruent and incongruent media tactics confounds two very different processes. Managerial implications for advertising and media marketing are discussed.

Date: 2020-03-14
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Published in Journal of Advertising, 2020, 49 (2), pp.141-164. ⟨10.1080/00913367.2020.1745110⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03031674

DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2020.1745110

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().