The Perception of Offensive Advertising - Literature review Example

The perception of offensive advertising: A British study Literature Review The history of advertising is one of ever-constant change and development (Pincas & Loieau, 2008). Advertising began in public spaces with wall paintings and merchants using their voices to attract and inform their customers. As the years went on and technology improved, advertising became common in print and posters, reaching a wider audience. With the introduction of such mediums as radio, television and the internet, advertising has been able to develop and become more prevalent within society, reaching vast audiences, making the advertisement industry a highly lucrative and big business (Waller, 1999; Pincas & Loieau, 2008). Advertisements are means through which information regarding products can be communicated to consumers and these advertisements have a great impact on consumer behaviour, brand loyalty and switching (Lundstrom & Sciglimpaglia, 1977; Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985; Well, et. al., 1992; Kirkpatrick, 2007; Pincas & Loieau, 2008; O’Guinn, Allen & Semenik, 2009; Stroebe & Fennis, 2010). In light of this, much research has been conducted in order to investigate the effects and perceptions of offensive advertisements (Lundstrom & Sciglimpaglia, 1977; Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985; Boddewyn, 1991; Well, et. al., 1992; Ford, LaTour & Lundstrom, 1995; Kirkpatrick, 2007; Pincas & Loieau, 2008; O’Guinn, Allen & Semenik, 2009; Stroebe & Fennis, 2010). This literature review will present current research and theories on offensive advertisements in a critical and objective manner, highlighting strengths and limitations of evidence in this area. Barnes and Dotson (1990) argued that offensive television advertising is a multidimensional phenomenon but that there is very little empirical research into this area. Barnes and Dotson conducted an exploratory study of offensive television advertising and found two distinct dimensions to this phenomenon: Offensive Products and Offensive Execution. The authors claimed that Offensive Products refers to products or services that violate social norms whereas Offensive Execution is the control that advertiser has on the presentation of these products/services and the themes that these advertisers use to communicate information about the product. Thus, in this literature review, offensive products and services are those that do not conform to social or ethical norms, such as, cigarettes or condoms for example. In addition to this, offensive execution will be referred as offensive advertisements that depict sexism, racism and scenes of sexual or violent nature in relation to the products/services. The characteristics of an advertisement can influence consumer/audience concepts relating to the product (Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985; O’Guinn, Allen & Semenik, 2009). For example, a questionnaire study of 292 consumers by Treise et. al. (1994) found that consumers often perceive that many advertisements abuse ethical norms, which influences consumer beliefs regarding the product and that such violations can influence their consumer behaviour in relation to switching brands. Moreover, in an Australian study by Waller (1999) surveyed people’s attitudes of the advertising of products and the reasons for which these individuals perceived these advertisements as offensive. It was found that characteristics of the advertisement or the product itself resulted in consumers viewing these as offensive. In this sense, it has been argued that attitudes regarding advertisements influence attitudes towards brands/products (Muehling, 1987). Norris and Colman (1993) conducted a study wherein 90 participants were required to watch a series of television programmes that were segmented with advertisements for unfamiliar brands and then respond to a questionnaire about these advertisements. It was found that the participants’ responses were positively correlated with television programmes that had an impact and were challenging, and that there was a negative correlation when these television programmes were dull and uninteresting. For this reason, this study is high in usefulness, as it demonstrates the possibility that advertising is more effective during prime time, exciting programming and has great use for advertisers and media channels. However, a problem with this study is that correlation does not imply causality, and so further research is needed in order to find a casual reason for this. It is the case that offensive advertising can be detrimental to brand credibility and consumer spending (Sweeney & Swait, 2008). Empirical research found that brand credibility serves as a means of attracting and sustaining consumer business whilst reducing/preventing switching behaviour (Sweeney & Swait, 2008). As such, advertisers should avoid offensive advertising in order to secure consumer spending and loyalty. In this sense, one would think that offensive advertising would occur less in the industry but the opposite is in fact the case. One of the most prevailing themes which causes such controversy on this issue is that of sexism and the portrayal of sexually-orientated stimuli. For example, Boddewyn (1991) stated that offensive advertisements are becoming more violent and indecent in the portrayal of women. Lundstrom and Sciglimpaglia (1977) argued that in advertisements women are often portrayed in traditionally female roles, such as, housewives or mothers, which leads to extenuation of stereotypical sex roles of subservience inferiority. These authors further claim that such representations in advertisements lead women to becoming resentful of these companies and less likely to buy such products. A problem with this finding is that this research is very dated and the results may not be valid or reliable to modern society and consumer behaviour today. In spite of this, this study was supported by Christy (2006) who conducted a series of in-depth interviews of female consumer perceptions of offensive advertisements, analysing the data through grounded theory techniques. A problem with such a study is that the use of grounded theory involves the interpretation of the researcher, which opens the findings up to research bias that could result in poor ecological validity. On the other hand, an interview study, such as this, can obtain a large amount of detailed information on the subject matter that can produce a greater knowledge on this subject. What is more, this study adds external reliability to this finding and ensures that this finding is still ecologically valid in modern times. Rosewarne (2007) explored the occurrence of sexually-harassing pin-ups in public places as such offensive advertisements are prohibited in the workplace. The author claimed that such advertising in outdoor places produces inappropriate masculinised public spaces. Hence, it can be said that the reason why people, particularly women, find such advertisements offensive is because it degrades women and objectifies them. Thus, this study is useful in that it demonstrates to us why individuals find advertisements and products offensive. One popular theory of controversial advertising and the advertising of offensive products is that of Arousal Theory (Howard, 1977, as cited by Wilson & Moore, 1979, p.56-57). Arousal refers to a physiological state of tension in the body, which can influence consumer behaviour (Howard, 1977, as cited by Wilson & Moore, 1979, p.56-57). In this sense, Arousal Theory can explain the use and effectiveness of sexually-oriented stimuli in advertisements. For example, this theory states that these stimuli are directly linked to attention in that such advertisements draw the consumer’s attention to the product. As such, the use of sexually-orientated advertising increases cognitive activity (Howard, 1977, as cited by Wilson & Moore, 1979, p.56-57; Wilson & Moore, 1979), making the individual more aware of the product and the advertisement. In addition to this, this theory argues that sexually-oriented stimuli play on consumer’s innate physiological and motivational states that results in them gaining an innate form of pleasure from the advertisements. Therefore, in light of this theory, it is believed that such advertisements are effective regardless of its appropriateness to the product (Wilson & Moore, 1979; Rehman & Brooks, 1987). Such a theory can be said to be overly simplistic and reductionist explanation of consumer behaviour, as it ignores many other social, historical, religious and cultural factors that may influence consumer spending. However, this theory contributes to our knowledge of offensive advertising and demonstrates arousal as one factor involved in this phenomenon. There is evidence to suggest that this theory is valid. For example, LaTour, Pitts and Snook-Luther (1990) conducted an experimental study of reactions to female nudity portrayed in print advertisements, examining the arousal factors of this nudity in relation to the impression of the advertisement. It was found that female nudity in advertisements resulted in psychophysiological arousal, which could have positive or negative effects on consumer behaviour. A criticism of such a study is that the experimental situation is often unrealistic and artificial, which reduces the ecological validity of the findings. As such, it may not be the case that female nudity influences consumer behaviour but in fact the experimental situation caused the participants to respond in socially acceptable manners. However, a strength of this study is that it employed highly standardised procedures that allow for replication, which increases the external reliability of this study. Thus, in order to ensure that these findings are valid, future research is needed so as to demonstrate this occurrence in a different situation. In support of this study, LaTour and Henthrone (1993) examined attitudes toward advertisements and gender attitudes in relation to different levels of female nudity in advertisements in women’s magazines. The results of this study suggested that women were more tense when exposed to female nudity than men. In addition to this, it was found that men were more positive about the advertisement than women, which resulted in men being more positive about the product and brand advertised. Another related, but interesting, theory relating to offensive advertising is that of distraction (Wilson & Moore, 1979). Wilson and Moore (1979) argue that sexually-orientated or offensive advertising acts as distraction from products of low-quality or offensive nature. Moreover, these authors claimed that distraction can be used in order to attract the attention of audiences away from other products. As with Arousal Theory, this theory suffers from poor explanatory power due to the reductionist stance it takes in the explanation of this phenomenon. It is the case, however, that there is no empirical research to support this theory of offensive advertising. Hence, this theory suffers from a lack of construct validity. Therefore, future research is required in order support or refute distraction as a theory. This evidence demonstrates that sexism and sexually-orientated stimuli are still prevalent themes within the advertising industry. Such themes degrade women and offend people’s sense of social and moral norms, which leads them to consider their attitudes and behaviour toward these products. McAllister (2005) has argued that television advertising can be more persuasive due to its intrusive nature compared to those of print and public advertisements. McAllister also claimed that television advertisements can be more targeted to specific types of consumers are different periods of the day as opposed to those that feature in magazines and newspapers, which can only target readers of that particular readership. In this sense, offensive advertising, such as, sexually-orientated adverts may be more pervasive when presented through the means of television. Moreover, offensive advertisements on television can reach a much wider and younger audience in attempts to gain life-long consumers; however, this could increase criticism and negative appraisals of the products from parents. As there is little to no research on this subject, it is clear to see that there are gaps in the research literature and so future research should aim to investigate whether offensive advertisements aimed at younger audiences lose the loyalty of their parents. In a similar sense, a study examined 2863 magazine advertisements that had a readership of teenagers and adults, which found that advertisements targeted at teenagers contained 65% more provocative than those targeted at adults. Furthermore, it was found that advertisements targeted at teenagers had 128% more sexually-explicit behaviour than those targeted at adults. It was also found that female models were more likely to be presented in a sexually-orientated manner than male models. A strength of this research is that it made use of a wide variety of stimuli, which means that the internal reliability of the study is assured and the representation of this study is excellent. A criticism of this study is that it failed to take into account the views of senior people and thus the sample representation is low and the results of the study can only be generalised to teenagers and adults. Nonetheless, this study has shown that provocative advertising is aimed to younger audiences in order to gain their loyalty from a very young age. It is the case that cultural factors can greatly influence perceptions of offensive advertisements and products, as well as influencing consumer behaviour. An important piece of research in this area of interest was a cross-cultural study conducted by Waller, Fam and Erdogen (2005), which examined the responses to advertisements of controversial products and services by students from the UK, Turkey, New Zealand and Malaysia. This study found that there were significant difference in responses to offensive advertisements and that historical factors and religious beliefs were an integral part of the responses; however, racist imagery was condemned by all consumers surveyed. Waller, Fam and Erdogen concluded that religion is the most important factor for responses to offensive advertising of consumers from Turkey and Malaysia, particularly in relation to scenes of a sexual nature. On this note, Chan, et. al. (2007) conducted a cross-cultural study which investigated the reactions of German and Chinese consumers in relation to potentially offensive print advertisements. The questionnaire distributed by these authors surveyed 563 respondents aged between 17-57 years, which is a fairly impressive sample size, and found that Chinese consumers were more offended by such advertisements than German consumers were. On the other hand, Chinese consumers found these advertisements more informative and credible. This section clearly demonstrates that cultural influence can influence the perception and consumer behaviour of products that are advertised in an offensive manner. Hence, cultural influences are a contributing factor for perceiving adverts as offensive. It has been argued that religion and religious views play important role in consumer behaviour and perceptions of advertisements as offensive (Fam, Waller & Erdogen, 2004; Gibbs, Ilkan & Pouloukas, 2007). For example, Fam, Waller and Erdogen (2004) performed a questionnaire study regarding advertisements of controversial products on 1393 respondents from six different countries and four different religions, including Christians and Muslims. It was found that there were significant differences in the attitudes of these advertisements and products with more negative attitudes from more devout religions, such as, from the Muslim respondents, as these advertisements were seen to demonstrate female sexuality and notions that were against their religious and social norms. A definite strength of this research is that it had a large sample of participants from six different countries, which increases the sample representation of the study and results in the findings being highly generalisable to the wider, global population. On a similar note, Gibbs, Ilkan and Pouloukas (2007) conducted a survey study on 530 students from Muslim and Christian communities, examining the tolerance of these individuals in relation to different forms of advertising. It was found that the reactions to offensive advertising between the two communities were similar. However, when the advertisements were of a sexual nature there were significant differences found between the reactions of these two communities with Muslims found to be more offended by this type of advertising. A criticism of this study is that it used a sample of students, which could mean that these individuals were more aware of the aims of the study and responded in a manner in which they believed was required of them. Thus, the ecological validity of this finding is questionable. Nevertheless, this finding supports that of the above study by Fam, Waller and Erdogen (2004) and thus can be said to be high in external reliability. From this evidence, it is obvious that religion and religious views/norms greatly influence perceptions of offensive advertising and products. In summary, the advertising industry has a very long history and has completely changed from what it begun from. It can be seen from the evidence above, that there is a great deal of research on offensive advertising and there are theories that explain why such advertisements are effective, as they produce sexual arousal or distraction from the product itself. In addition to this, there are several factors that influence consumer perceptions of offensive advertising and products, such as, historical, religious and cultural factors. Furthermore, offensive advertisements can influence consumer attitudes and consumer spending. It is certainly the case that there are strength and limitations to the literature on offensive advertisements, as well as gaps in the research that need to be addressed. References: Aaker, D. A. & Bruzzone, D. E. (1985). Causes of Irritation in Advertising. The Journal of Marketing, 49(2): 47-57. Barnes, JR. J. H. & Dotson, M. J. (1990). An Exploratory Investigation into the Nature of Offensive Television Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 19(3): 61-69. Boddewyn, J. J. (1991). Controlling Sex and Decency in Advertising around the world. Journal of Advertising, 20(4): 25-35. Chan, K., Li, L., Diehl, S. & Terlutter, R. (2007). Consumers’ response to offensive advertising: a cross-cultural study. International Marketing Review, 24(5): 606-628. Christy, T. P. (2006). Females’ Perceptions of Offensive Advertising: The Importance of Values, Expectations, and Control. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 28(2): 15-32. Fam, K. S., Waller, D. S. & Erdogen, B. Z. (2004). The influence of religion on attitudes towards the advertising of controversial products. European Journal of Marketing, 38(5/6): 537-555. Ford, J. B., LaTour, M. S. & Lundstrom, W. J. (1995). Contemporary women’s evaluations of female role portrayals in advertising. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 8(1): 15-28. Gibbs, P., Ilkan, M. & Pouloukas, S. (2007). The ethics of marketing in Muslim and Christian communities: Insights for global marketing. Equal Opportunities International, 26(7): 678-692. Kirkpatrick, J. (2007). In Defense of Advertising: Arguments from reason, ethical egoism, and laissez-faire capitalism. USA: Greenwood Publishing Group. LaTour, M. S., Pitt, R. E. & Snook-Luther, D. E. (1990). Female Nudity, Arousal, and Ad Response: An Experimental Investigation. Journal Advertising, 19(4): 51-62. LaTour, M. S. & Henthrone, T. L. (1993). Female nudity: attitudes towards the ad and the brand, and implications for advertising strategy. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(3): 25-32. Lundstrom, W. J. & Sciglimpaglia, D. (1977). Sex Role Portrayals in Advertising. The Journal of Marketing, 41(3): 72-79. McAllister, M. P. (2005). Television Advertising as Textual and Economic Systems. In, J. Wasko (Ed). A Companion to Televesion. USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Muehling, D. D. (1987). Comparative Advertising: The Influence of Attitude-toward-the-Ad on Brand Evaluation. Journal of Advertising, 16(4): 43-49. Norris, C. E. & Colman, A. M. (1993). Context effects on memory for television advertisements. Social Behaviour and Personality: an International Journal, 21(4): 279-296. O’Guinn, T., Allen, C. & Semenik, R. J. (2009). Advertising & Integrated Brand Promotion. USA: Cengage Learning. Pincas, S. & Loiseau, M. (2008). A History of Advertising. USA: Taschen. Rehman, S. N. & Brooks, JR., J. R. (1987). Attitudes toward television advertisements for controversial products. Journal of Health Care Marketing, 7(3): 78-83. Reichert, T. (2003). The Prevalence of Sexual Imagery in Ads Targeted to Young Adults. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 37(2): 403-412. Rosewarne, L. (2007). Pin-ups in public space: Sexist outdoor advertising as sexual harassment. Women’s Studies International Forum, 30(4): 313-325. Stroebe, W. & Fennis, B. M. (2010). The Psychology of Advertising. Hove: Routledge. Sweeney, J. & Swait, J. (2008). The effects of brand credibility on consumer loyalty. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 15(3): 179-193. Treise, D., Weigold, M. F., Conna, J. & Garrison, H. (1994). Ethics in Advertising: Ideological Correlates of Consumer Perceptions. Journal of Advertising, 23(3): 59-69. Waller, D. S. (1999). Attitudes towards offensive advertising: An Australian study. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(3): 288-295. Waller, D. S., Fam, K. & Erdogen, B. Z. (2005). Advertising of controversial products: a cross-cultural study. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(1): 6-13. Wells, W., Burnett, J., Moriarty, S. E. & Pierce, R. C. (1992). Advertising: principles and practice. NJ: Prentice Hall. Wilson, R. D. & Moore, N. K. (1979). The role of sexually-oriented stimuli in advertising: theory and literature review. In, W. L. Wilkie. & A. Abor. (Eds). Advance in Consumer Research, Vol 6. Association for Consumer Research, 55-61. Read More