臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在產品種類繁多、市場競爭激烈的今日，廣告一直被視為行銷上致勝的利器，然而，企業對廣告投資的一再加碼，卻使得消費者逐漸對充斥於生活中的廣告感到疲乏與厭倦，因此，具有巧妙偏離(artful deviation)特性的隱喻廣告成為近幾十年來廣告中常用的表現手法之一。

本研究之主要目的欲探討不同隱喻廣告類型之廣告效果。使用2*2*2*2 的4因子實驗設計，探討不同「隱喻廣告類型(關係相似型隱喻廣告與實質相似型隱喻廣告)」分別在「產品涉入程度(高/低)」、「認知需求(高/低)」與「來源可信度(高/低)」的情況下所形成之「廣告效果(廣告態度、品牌態度與購買意願)」。資料收集以班為單位從銘傳大學桃園校區第一類組非設計相關科系之大學部一年級的班級中選取施測班級並進行問卷調查，共計發出400份問卷，並將回收之310份有效問卷以T檢定與變異數分析等方式進行資料分析。

根據研究結果建議廣告主或企劃人員使用隱喻廣告時，在設計上(1)務必使消費者能夠理解；(2)應該適物適人，即以整體隱喻廣告而言，使用於高涉入度產品或針對高認知需求消費者，將更有機會形成較佳的廣告效果；而以不同隱喻廣告類型而言，使用於低涉入度產品或針對低認知需求消費者時使用「實質相似型隱喻廣告」，則更有機會形成較佳的廣告效果；(3)操弄隱喻廣告的偏離程度，可影響消費者對廣告主來源可信度的注意程度，即低來源可信度廣告主使用「實質相似型隱喻廣告」，較有機會躲過消費者對低來源可信度廣告主之批判，而高來源可信度廣告主使用「關係相似型隱喻廣告」，則較能引起消費者對高來源可信度廣告主的贊同。

In the present market of fierce competition, and various of products, the advertisement has been considered as an key winning instrument on marketing. Nevertheless, the consistent increasing investment on the advertisement from intersperses wearies consumers. Therefore, the metaphor advertising, with its characteristic of artful deviation, has become one of the most frequently applied techniques in the advertisement.

The main purpose of the present study intended to explore the effects of different metaphor advertising types. A 2*2*2*2 of 4 factors experimental design was used. The analyses were conducted in terms of product involvement, need for cognition (NFC), and source credibility. The effects of advertisements, including attitude toward the advertisement (Aad), attitude toward the brand (Ad), and purchase intention (PI), were explored under the application of metaphor advertising of relational comparison type and metaphor advertising of literal similarity type. The data were collected through questionnaires from the freshman classes with social science background in Taoyuan campus, Ming Chuan University. 400 questionnaires were provided and acquired a total of 310 valid samples. These data were further analyzed using T-test and ANOVA.

The results of the present study suggested that when the advertiser and planner use metaphor advertisement, firstly, the consumer’ comprehension of the advertisement is essential. Secondly, the metaphor advertisement is most efficient in promoting high involvement products or to high NFC consumers. In terms of the effects of different metaphor advertisements, metaphor advertising of literal similarity type is more efficient in promoting low involvement products or to low NFC consumers. Thirdly, the level of deviation influences consumers’ degrees of attention on the source credibility of an advertiser. In other words, when the advertisers of low source credibility apply metaphor advertising of literal similarity type, they have higher chances to avoid the criticism from consumers. When the advertisers of high source credibility apply metaphor advertising of relational comparison type, they have higher opportunity to earn the approval from consumers.

論文題目………………………………………………………………I
論文口試委員審定書…………………………………………………II
誌 謝…………………………………………………………………III
中文摘要………………………………………………………………IV
英文摘要………………………………………………………………V
目 錄…………………………………………………………………VII
圖目錄…………………………………………………………………IX
表目錄…………………………………………………………………X
第壹章 緒論
第一節 研究動機…………………………………………………1
第二節 研究目的…………………………………………………6
第三節 研究流程…………………………………………………7
第貳章 文獻探討
第一節 隱喻廣告…………………………………………………8
第二節 推敲可能性模式…………………………………………27
第三節 涉入理論…………………………………………………38
第四節 認知需求…………………………………………………51
第五節 來源可信度………………………………………………56
第六節 廣告效果…………………………………………………62
第參章 研究方法
第一節 研究架構…………………………………………………69
第二節 研究問題與研究假設……………………………………72
第三節 變項之操作性定義、操弄手法與衡量方式……………73
第四節 研究設計…………………………………………………80
第五節 分析方法…………………………………………………92
第肆章 結果分析
第一節 問卷信度與效度的分析…………………………………94
第二節 問卷回收狀況與基本資料………………………………100
第三節 假設驗證…………………………………………………101
第伍章 結論與討論
第一節 研究結果與討論…………………………………………125
第二節 研究結論…………………………………………………130
第三節 研究限制與建議…………………………………………133
參考文獻………………………………………………………… 138
附錄
附錄A：預試實驗廣告……………………………………………153
附錄B：第一次預試問卷…………………………………………162
附錄C：第二次預試問卷…………………………………………174
附錄D：正式實驗報導……………………………………………187
附錄E：正式實驗廣告……………………………………………190
附錄F：正式問卷…………………………………………………199

中文部分
2006全球大趨勢編輯部(2005)。數字看世界：產業篇。天下雜誌特 刊，89-92。
Arnould, E., Price, L., & Zinkhan, G. (2003)。消費者行為(初版)(陳智凱譯)。台北市：麥格羅•希爾。(原著出版年：2002)
Foxall, G., Goldsmith, R., & Brown, S. (2004)。消費者心理學(一版) (江定宇、盧邦祥、陳至芸等譯)。新加坡：亞洲湯姆生國際。(原著出版年：1996)
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2002)。行銷學原理(四版)(方世榮譯)。台北市：台灣東華。
Kotler, P., Leong, S. M., Ang, S. H., Tan, C. T.(1998)。行銷管理：亞洲實務(初版)(謝文雀譯)。台北市：華泰。(原著出版年：1996)
O’Shaughnessy, J., & O’Shaughnessy, N. J. (2006)。廣告說服力(呂奕欣譯)。台北縣：韋伯文化國際。(原著出版年：2004)
方雅青(2006年2月)。快樂廣告─好笑轉動眼球經濟。管理雜誌，308，138-139。
田中洋、丸岡吉人(1993)。新廣告心理(初版)(蔡焜霖譯)。台北市：朝陽堂文化。(原著出版年：1991)
白明勝(1995)。投入程度、認知需求對廣告說服效果之影響─ELM模式之實證研究。國立政治大學國際貿易研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
何瑞芳(2000)。隱喻式廣告效果之研究。私立世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
別蓮蒂(2004)。優勢與平位比較性廣告之策略運用即溝通效果。管理學報，23(1)，47-62。
吳萬益、林清河(2000)。企業研究方法。台北市：華泰。
李幼蒸(1997)。語義符號學：意義的理論基礎(初版)。台北市：唐山。
李坤遠(1996)。訊息涉入、廣告主可信度，廣告訴求方式與廣告溝通效果關係之研究。國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
李岳(2003)。網路廣告理解研究。國立台灣大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
李怡萱、陳慧芬、謝亦欣(2002)。電視競選廣告隱喻之研究─以2001年立委選舉為例。發表於2002年國立政治大學廣告系「第十屆中華民國廣告暨公共關係學術與實務研討會」。
周文賢(2002)。多變量統計分析：SAS/STAT使用方法(上)(下) 。台北市：智勝文化。
邱皓政(2000)。社會與行為科學的量化研究與統計分析。台北市：五南。
徐達光(2003)。消費者心理學：消費者行為的科學研究(第一版)。台北市：台灣東華。
高泉豐(1994)。認知需求的概念與測量。中華心理學刊，36(1)，47-62。
動腦雜誌編輯部(2006)。網路、活動、夾報逆勢殺出。動腦雜誌，358，20-30。
時報廣告執行委員會(2003)。時報廣告獎創意精選─平面得獎作品集。台北縣：視傳文化。
張玉佩(2000)。當認同遇到隱喻：談隱喻在認同塑造的運作。新聞學研究，64，73-101。
張志豐(1995)。訴求客觀性對消費者態度之影響─以大學生為例。國立中興大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
張春興(2003)。心理學原理(初版)。台北市：台灣東華書局。
陳佳蓓(1999)。幽默廣告類別與廣告效果。私立世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
曹雅芳(2005)。比較性廣告之廣告效果─以產品涉入與認知需求為干擾變項。私立東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
許安琪(2001)。整合行銷傳播引論：全球化在地化行銷大趨勢(初版)。台北市：學富文化。
郭大仕(1997)。廣告訴求對消費者認知與態度的影響─以大台北學生為例。國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳心怡(1997)。推薦試廣告對不同涉入度產品之廣告效果。國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
黃芷晴(2005)。隱喻廣告說服力與廣告主可信度探討。國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
黃俊英(1996)。行銷研究─管理與技術(第五版)。台北市：華泰。
黃深勳、鄭自隆、戚栩遷、黃明蕙、郭文耀、漆梅君等人(1998)。廣告學(初版)。台北市：國立空中大學。
黃慶萱(2002)。修辭學(增訂三版)。台北市：三民。
楊中芳(1994)。廣告的心理原理(二版)。台北市：遠流。
詹弼勝(2005)。內文對隱喻廣告說服效果的影響。國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
漆梅君(2001)。透視消費者：消費行為理論與應用(初版)。台北市：學富文化。
樊志育(1990)。廣告效果研究。台北市：三民。
鄭麗玉(1993)。認知心理學(初版)。台北市：五南。
鄧育仁與孫式文(1999)。廣告裡圖象隱喻的構圖原則：一個認知取徑的分析。廣告學研究，14，95-130。
鄧智元(2001)。當隱喻碰上廣告創意：隱喻廣告創意實踐研究。私立世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市
盧司堃(1994)。意識形態廣告之溝通效果分析─FCB模式與廣告態度中介模式之實證。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
賴艾如(2003)。平面廣告中隱喻之基底域與目標域相似性類型探討。私立銘傳大學設計管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
蕭湘文(1998)。廣告創意(初版)。台北市：五南。
羅俊拔(1993)。訊息來源可信度與訊息極端性對消費者態度改變之影響。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。

英文部分
Ahluwalia, R., & Burnkrant, R. E. (2004). Answering questions about questions: A persuasion knowledge perspective for understanding the effects of rhetorical questions. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 26-42.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Anand, P., & Sternthal, B.(1989). Strategies for designing persuasive message: Deductions from the resource matching hypothesis. In P. Cafferata, & A. Tybout(Eds.), Cognitive and Affective Responses to Advertising(pp.135-159). Lexinging, MA: Lexington Books.
Anand, P., & Sternthal, B.(1990). Ease of message processing as a moderator of repetition effects in advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(August), 345-353.
Anderson, J., & Thompson R. (1989). Use of an analogy in a production system architecture. In V. Stella, & O. Andrew(Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning(pp. 267-297). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Applbaum, R. F., & Anatol, K. W. E. (1972). The factor structure of source credibility as a function of the speaking situation. Speech Monographs, 39(1), 216-222.
Arora, R. (1982). Validation of an S-O-R model for situation, enduring, and response components of involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(November), 505-516.
Axsom, D., Yates, S. M., & Chaiken, S. S. (1987). Audience response as a heuristic cue in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psycchology, 53(1), 30-40.
Bailey, J. R., & Strube, M. J. (1991). Effects of need for cognition on pattetns of information acquisition. Society for Consumer Psychology Proceeding, 4, 231-236.
Baker, M. J., & Churchill, G. A. (1977). The impact of physically attractive models on advertising evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(November), 538-555.
Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Mertz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(1), 563-576.
Bettman, J.R. (1979). An iinformation processing theory of consumer choice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor. In A. Ortony(ed.), Matephor and Thought(pp. 19-34). UK: Cambridge University Press.
Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2001). Consumer behavior(10th ed.). New York : The Dryden Press.
Bloch, P. H., & Richins, M. L. (1983). A theoretical model for the study of product importance perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 47(Sumer), 69-81.
Boozer, R. W., Wyld , D. C., & Grant, J. (1991). Using metaphor to create more effective sales messages. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 8(2), 59-66.
Bowers, J. W., & Phillips, W. A. (1967). A note on the generality of source credibility scales. Speech Monographs, 34(1), 185-186.
Caballero, M., & Solomon, P. (1984). Effects of model attractiveness on sales response. Journal of Advertising, 13 (1), 17-23, 33.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need of cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(3), 306-307.
Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.F., & Morris, K.J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 805-818.
Carroll, J. M., & Mack, R. L. (1985). Metaphor, computing systems, and active learning. Man-Machine Studies, 22, 39-57.
Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 210-224.
Cohen, A., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. (1955). An experimental investigation of need for cognition. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 291-294.
Colley, D. (1961). Defining advertising goals for measured advertising results. NT: Prentice Hall.
Coulter, K. S., & Punj, G. N.(2004). The effects of cognitive resource requirement''s availability, and argument quality on brand attitudes: A melding of elaboration likelihood and cognitive resource matching theories. Journal of Advertising, 33(4), 53-64.
Crano, W. D. (1970). Effects of sex, response order, and expertise in conformity: A dispositional approach. Sociometry, 33 (September), 239-252.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302.
Day, G. S. (1970). Buying attitudes and brand choice. NY : The Free Press, New York.
DeSarbo, W. S., & Harshman, R. A. (1985). Celebrity-Brand Congruence Analysis. In J. H. Leigh, & C.R. Martin (Eds.), Current Issues and Research in Advertising(pp.17-52.). Ann Arbor, MI: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan.
Durand, J. (1987). Rhetoric figures in the advertising image. In J. Umiker-Sebeek(Ed.), Marketing and Semiotics: New Directions in the Study of signs for Sale(pp. 295-318). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Engel, J. F., & Blackwell, R. D. (1982). Consumer behavior. New York: Dryden Press.
Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D., &. Miniard, P. W. (1993). Consumer behavior (7th ed.). Fort Worth: The Dryden Press.
Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I.(1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Forceville, C. (1996). Picturial metaphor in advertising. London and New York: Routledge.
Foss, S. K., Foss, K. A., & Robert T. ( 1991). Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric (2th ed.). Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland.
Gentner, D. (1982). Are scientific analogies metaphors? In D.S. Miall (Ed.), Metaphor: Problems and perspectives (pp. 106-132). Atlantic Highlands, HJ: Humanities Press.
Gentner, D.(1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical transfer. In S. Vosniadou, & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning(pp.199-124). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gentner, D., & Markman A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56.
Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., & Forbus, K. D. (1993). The role of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 524-575.
Gentner, D., & Toupin, C. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277-300.
Giffin, K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin, 68(2), 104-120.
Goldberg, M. E., & Hartwick, J. (1990). The effects of advertiser reputation and extremity of advertising claim on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 151-170.
Goldsmith, R. E., Lafferty, B. A., & Newell, S. J. (2000). The impact of corporate and celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and brands. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 43-54.
Goldstone, R., Medin, D., & Gentner, D. (1991). Relational similarity and nonindependence of features in similarity judgments. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 222-262.
Greenwald, A. G., & Leavitt, C. (1984). Audience involvement in advertising: Four levels. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 581-592.
Gregan-Paxon J. & John, D. R. (1997). Consumer learning by analogy: A model of internal knowledge transfer. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(3), 266-284.
Hahha, N. & Wozniak, R. (2001). Consumer behavior (1th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hill.
Haugtvedt, C. P., & Petty, R. E. (1992). Personality and persuasion: need for cognition moderates the persistence and resistance of attitude changes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 308-319.
Haugtvedt, C. P., Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Steidly, T. (1988). Personality and Ad effectiveness: Exploring the utility of need for cognition. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 209-212.
Hausman, C. R. (1989). Metaphor and art: Interationism and reference in the verbal and nonverbal arts. N.Y.: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Holyoak, K. (1984). Analogical thinking and human intelligence. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence(pp. 199-230). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Holyoak, K. & Thagard, P. (1989). A computational model of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou, & A. Ortony(Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning(pp.242-266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horai, J.M., Naccari, N., & Fatoullah, E. (1974). The effects of expertise and physical attractiveness upon opinion agreement and liking. Sociometry, 37 (4), 601-606.
Houston, M. J. & Rothschild, M. L. (1978). Conceptual and methodological perspectives in involvement. In S. Jain(Ed.), Research Frontiers in Marketing: Dialogues and Directions(pp. 184-187). Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. K., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1969 ). The theory of buyer behavior. New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc
Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. (1989). The theory of buyer behavior. New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hupfer, N., & Gardner, D. (1971 ). Differential involvement with products and issues: An exploratory study. In D. M. Gardner, & C. Park(Eds.), Proceedings: Association for Consumer Research(pp. 262-269). MD: Association for Consumer Research.
Joseph, B. W. (1982). The credibility of physically attractive communicator: A review. Journal of Advertising, 11(3), 15-24.
Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. M. (1985). Physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser: A social adaptation perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(4), 954-961.
Kaplan, S. J. (1990). Visual metaphor in the represtation of communication technology. Criticism studies in mass communication, 7, 33-47.
Kelamn, H., & Hovland, C. (1953). Reinstatement of the communicator in delayed measurement of opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48(1), 327-335.
Keller, K. L. (1998). Strategic brand management. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Krugman, H. E. (1965). The impact of television advertising: Learning without involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(Fall), 349-356.
Laczniak, R. N., Muehling, D. D., & Grossbart, S. (1989). Manipulating message involvement in advertising research. Journal of Advertising, 18(2), 28-38.
Lafferty, B. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (1999). Corporate credibility’s role in consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions when a high versus a low credibility endorsers is used in the ad. Journal of Business Research, 44(2), 109-116.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphor we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lastovicka, J. L., & Bonfield, E. H. (1982). Do consumer have brand attitude? Journal of Economic Psychology, 2, 57-75.
Lastovicka, J. L., & Gardner, D. M. (1978). Low involvement versus high involvement cognitive structures. Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 87-92.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(February), 41-53.
Leviage, R. J., & Steiner, G. (1961). A model for predictive measurement of advertising effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 25(October), 59-62.
Leigh, J. H. (1994). The use of figures of speech in print ad headlines. Journal of Advertising, 23(2), 17-33.
Lutz, R. J., MacKenzie, S. B., & Belch, G. E. (1983). Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: determinants and consequences. Advances in Consumer Research, 10, 532-539.
Lürzer W. (2003). Lürzer’s Int’l Archive, 5, 69.
Lürzer W. (2004). Lürzer’s Int’l Archive, 1, 89.
Lürzer W. (2004). Lürzer’s Int’l Archive, 3, 77.
MacCormac, E. R. (1985). A cognitive theory of metaphor. Cambridge: MIT Press.
MacCormac, E. R. (1990). A cognitive theory of metaphor. Cambridge & London: The MIT Press.
MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. J. (1989). Examination of the structural antecedents of attitude toward the Ad in an advertising pretesting context. Journal of Marketing, 53(April), 48-65.
Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness and supporting arguments on persuasion: A case of brain over beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 235-244.
Mantel, S. P., & Kardes, F. R. (1999). The role of direction of comparison, attribute-based processing, and attitude-based processing in consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 335-352.
Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology, 113, 501-538.
Martin, B. A. S. Lang B. & Wong S. (2003). Conclusion Explicitness in Advertising: The Moderating Role of Need for Cognition(NFC) and Argument Quality(AQ) on Persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 57-65.
McCroskey, J. C. (1966). Scales for the measurement of ethos. Speech Monographs, 33(1), 65-72.
McGinnies, E., & Ward, C. D. (1980). Better liked than right: Trustworthiness and expertise as factors in credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(3), 467-472.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(4), 424-438.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive, experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer research, 26(1), 37-54.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (2003). Visual and verbal rhetorical figures under directed processing versus incidental exposure to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 579-587.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. (2005). Indirect persuasion in advertising: How consumers process metaphors presented in pictures and words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7-20.
Medin, D., Goldstone, R., & Gentner, D. (1993). Respects for similarity. Psychological Review, 100(2), 254-278.
Mills, J., & Aronson, E. (1965). Opinion change as a function of communicator’s attractiveness and desire to influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(2), 173-177.
Mills, J.,& Harvey, J. (1972). Opinion change as a function of when information about the communicator is received and whether he is attractive or expert. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(1), 52-55.
Mitchell, A. A. (1981). Dimensions of advertising involvement. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 25-30.
Mitchell, A. A., & Olso, J. C. (1981). Are product attitude belifs the only mediators of advertising effects on brand attitudes? Journal of Marketing Research, 18(August), 318-322.
Mittal, B. (1983). Understanding the bases and effects of involvement in the consumer choice process. (Doctorral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1982). Ann Arbor, M: University Microfilms International.
Morgan, S. E., & Reichert, T. (1999). The message is in the metaphor: Assessing the comprehension of metaphor in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 1-12.
Mothersbaugh, D. L., Huhmann, B. A., & Franke, G.. R. (2002). Combinatory and separative effects of rhetorical figures on consumers’ efforts and focus in Ad processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (1), 589-602.
Nicholas, R. (1984). Art role synecitics. Massachusetts: David Publications.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
Ortony, A., & Reynolds, R. E. (1978). Metaphor: Theoretical and empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 85(5), 919-943.
Ottati, V., Rhoads, S., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). The effect of metaphor on processing task: A motivational resonance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 8(4), 688-697.
Park, C. W., & Mittal, B. (1985). A theory of involvement in consumer behavior: Problems an issues. In: J. N. Sheth (ed.), Research in Consumer Behavior(pp. 201-232), 1. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Park, C. W., & Young, S. M. (1983). Types and levels of involvement and brand attitude formation. Advances in Consumer Research, 10, 320-324.
Patzer, G. L. (1983). Source credibility as a function of communicator physical attractiveness. Journal of Business Research, 11(2), 299-241.
Perelman, C. (1979). The new rhetoric and the humanities: Essays on rhetoric and its applications. Boston, MA: Reidel.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, M. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (J. Wilkinson, & P. Weaver Trans.). South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Peter, J. P. & Olson, J. C. (1999). Consumer behavior and marketing strategy (5th ed.). New York : McGraw-Hill.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion : Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T.(1986). Communication and persuasion-central and peripheral route to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Petty, R. E.,Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D.(1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Juurnal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.
Petty, R.E., & Wegener, D.T. (1998). Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: Implications for scrutiny of persuasive message. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(5), 227-240.
Phillips, B. J. (1997).Thinking into it: Consumer response of complex advertising images. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 77-87.
Phillips, B. J. (2000). The impact of verbal anchoring on consumer response to image Ads. Journal of Advertising, 29(1), 15-24.
Pieters, R.& Wedel, M. (2004). Attention capture and transfer in advertising: Brand, pictorial, and text-size effect. Journal of Marketing, 68(April), 36-50.
Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2002). The development, change, and transformation of rhetorical style in magazine advertisements 1954-1999. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 1-13.
Ratchford, B. T. (1987). New insights about the FCB grid. Journal of Advertising Research, 27(4), 24-39.
Ray, M. L. (1973). Marketing communications and the hierarchy-of-effects. In P. Clarke(Ed.), New Models for Mass Communication Research(pp.147-176). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Read, S. J., Cesa, I.L., Jones, D. K., & Collins, N.L. (1990). When is the federal budget like a baby? Metaphor in political rhetoric. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 5(3), 125-149.
Reeves, L., & Weisberg, R. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115(3), 381-400.
Richins, M. L., & Bloch, P. H. (1986). After the new wears off: The temporal context of product involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(2), 280-285.
Robertson, T. S. (1976). Low-commitment consumer behavior. Journal of Advertising Research, 16(2), 19-24.
Roehm, M. L., & Sternthal, B. (2001). The moderating effect of knowledge and resources on the persuasive impact of analogies. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(2), 257-272.
Ross, J. A. (1973). Influence of expert and peer upon negro mothers of low socioeconomic status. The Journal of Social Psychology, 89, 79-84.
Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2000). Consumer behavior (7thed.). New Jersey : Prentice Hall.
Schultz. D. E., Martin, D., & Brown, W. P. (1984). Strategic advertising campaigns. Chicago: Crain Books, Division of Crain Communications, Inc.
Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in advertising: the need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 252-273.
Sherif, M., & Cantril, H. (1947). The psychology of ego-involvement. New York: John Wiley, & Sons, Inc.
Sheth, J. N., Venkatesan, M. (1968). Risk reduction process in repetitive consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 5(August), 307-310.
Slama, M. E., & Tashchian, A. (1985). Selected socioeconomic and demographic characteristics associated with purchasing involvement. Journal of Marketing, 49(Winter), 72-82.
Simpson, E. K., & Kahler, R. C. (1980-81). A scale for source credibility, validated in the selling context. The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 12(Fall/Winter), 17-25.
Singh, S. N., Rothschild, M. L., & Churchill, G. A. (1988). Recognition versus recall as measures of television commercial forgetting. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(February), 72-80.
Smith, S.M., & Petty, R.E. (1996). Message framing and persuasion: A message process analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 257-268.
Sopory, P., & Dilard, J. P. (2002). The persuasion effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 382-419.
Spears, N. (2003). On the of time expression in promting product benefits: The metaphoric and the literal. Journal of Advertising, 32(2), 33-44.
Steadman, M. (1969). How sexy illustrations affect brand recall. Journal of Advertising Research, 9(February), 15-19.
Sternberg, R. J. (1977). Component processes in analogical reasoning. Psychological Review, 84(4), 353-378.
Tom, G., & Eves, A. (1999), The use of rhetorical devices in advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 39(4), 39-43.
Toncer, M., & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer responses to tropes in print advertising. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55-64.
Traylor, M. B. (1981). Product involvement and brand commitment. Journal of Advertising, 21(6), 51-56.
Vaughn, R. (1980). How advertising works: A planning model. Journal of Advertising Research, 20(5), 27-33.
Vaughn, R. (1986). How advertising works: A planning model revisited. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(1), 57-66.
Ward , J., & Gaidis, W. (1990). Metaphor in promotional communication: A review of research on metaphor comprehension and quality. Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 636-642.
Wagner, L. C. (1968). Advertising and business cycle. Journal of Marketing, 8(October). 124-135.
Whaley, B. B., & Barrow, A. S. (1993). Analogy in persuasion: Translator''s dictionary or art? Communication Studies, 44(fall), 239-253.
Whitehead, J. L. (1968). Factors of source credibility. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 54(1), 59-63.
Winston, P. (1980). Learning and reasoning by analogy. Communications of the ACM, 23(12), 689-703.
Wright, P. (1973). Cognitive processes mediating acceptance of advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 10(February), 53-62.
Wynn, G. W. (1987). The effects of a salespersons’ credibility on other salespersons and sales managers. In J. M. Hawes, & G. B. Glisan(Eds.), Developments in Marketing Science, 10 (pp. 353-358).Bal Harbour, FL: Academy of Marketing Science.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341-352.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1986). Conceptualizing involvement. Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 4-15.
Zhang, Y. & Buda, R. (1999). Moderating effects of need for cognition on responses to positively versus negatively framed dvertising messages. Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 1-15.