the impact of visual metaphors on brand image1231325/fulltext01.pdf · brand attitudes, brand...
TRANSCRIPT
Damaris Plocher & Helena Romfeld
The Impact of Visual Metaphors
on Brand Image
Business Administration Master’s Thesis
30 ECTS
Term: Spring 2018
Supervisor: Dr. Jakob Trischler
Acknowledgement
Firstly, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to our supervisor Jakob
Trischler for the continuous support and insightful comments as well as
encouragement and guidance. We could not have wished for a better advisor
and mentor for this thesis.
Besides, our sincere thanks goes to Carolin Plocher, who assisted us in the field
of statistical analysis with advice and deeds.
Abstract
This thesis aims to investigate the impact of visual metaphor advertising on
brand image by focusing on the metaphor’s different levels of complexity. The
focus is hereby set on visual metaphors with low and medium complexity. To
investigate this impact, a quantitative research design comprising a field
experiment with 102 participants has been carried out. After conducting a one-
way MANOVA, the empirical results suggest that visual metaphors have a
positive impact on the consumer’s perception of a brand. The comparison of
the two levels of complexity, however, resulted in no significant difference,
which shifts the focus of the metaphor creation to the recipients’
comprehension instead of focusing on the ultimate level of complexity to trigger
the most positive reaction. In sum, the findings of this thesis provide several
practical implications, especially in helping marketers by using marketing
metaphors to establish a positive bond between the communicating brand and
the observer.
Keywords: marketing metaphors, visual metaphor advertising, levels of
metaphors’ complexity, brand image
Agenda
List of figures .................................................................................................... 2
List of tables ...................................................................................................... 2
1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 3
1.1. Background ................................................................................................. 3
1.2. Problem discussion .................................................................................... 4
1.3. Aim and research question ........................................................................ 6
1.4. Structure ...................................................................................................... 6
2. Theory ........................................................................................................ 7
2.1. Branding ...................................................................................................... 7
2.1.1. Importance and current situation .................................................... 7
2.1.2. The brand and its functions ............................................................. 8
2.2. Metaphor advertising ................................................................................. 9
2.2.1. Definition of visual metaphors ........................................................ 9
2.2.2. Metaphors in marketing research ................................................. 10
2.2.3. Complexity levels of visual metaphors ........................................ 11
2.3. Brand image ............................................................................................. 13
2.3.1. Definition and classification .......................................................... 13
2.3.2. Influencing factors .......................................................................... 14
2.3.2.1. Brand experience ........................................................................ 15
2.3.2.2. Brand associations ...................................................................... 15
2.4. Hypothesis development ........................................................................ 16
3. Method ..................................................................................................... 20
3.1. Quantitative research design .................................................................. 20
3.2. Experiment ............................................................................................... 21
3.2.1. Experimental design ....................................................................... 21
3.2.2. Procedure ......................................................................................... 22
3.3. Sample ....................................................................................................... 24
3.4. Measures ................................................................................................... 24
3.5. Data analysis............................................................................................. 26
3.6. Trustworthiness ....................................................................................... 27
3.6.1. Criteria .............................................................................................. 27
3.6.2. Application ....................................................................................... 28
4. Empirical material and results ............................................................... 30
4.1. Descriptive statistics ................................................................................ 30
4.2. Group results ........................................................................................... 32
4.2.1. Heineken .......................................................................................... 33
4.2.2. Heinz ................................................................................................. 34
4.3. Manipulation check ................................................................................. 35
5. Analysis .................................................................................................... 37
5.1. Evaluation of hypotheses H1 and H1a ................................................ 37
5.2. Evaluation of hypothesis H1b ............................................................... 40
6. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 44
6.1. Theoretical reflection .............................................................................. 44
6.2. Managerial implications .......................................................................... 45
6.3. Limitations and future research recommendations ............................ 46
References ....................................................................................................... 48
Appendix ......................................................................................................... 54
2
List of figures
Figure 1: Different types of visual metaphors: (a) no metaphor, (b) juxtaposition, (c) fusion, and (d) replacement. ..................................................... 12
Figure 2: Theoretical model .................................................................................... 19
Figure 3: Procedure of the field experiment ........................................................ 23
List of tables
Table 1: The measurement items of the questionnaire ....................................... 25
Table 2: Group comparison of gender and age ................................................... 30
Table 3: Group comparison of the influencing factors ...................................... 31
Table 4: Group comparison of the frequent buyers ........................................... 31
Table 5: Variable-related results of Heineken ...................................................... 33
Table 6: Selected variables of Heineken ............................................................... 33
Table 7: Variable-related results of Heinz ............................................................ 34
Table 8: Selected variables of Heinz ...................................................................... 35
3
1. Introduction
In the first chapter of this thesis, the background and present problem are
explained. This includes highlighting the relevance and significance of the
central issue and defines the aim and research question that follow from the
problem definition. Lastly, an overview of the thesis’ structure is provided.
1.1. Background
“Marketing’s broader importance extends to society as a whole” (Kotler &
Keller 2012, p. 4). This is true for the today’s business situation, where
marketing plays a key role due to its function of dealing with the demand as the
essential factor for the companies’ profit (Kotler & Keller 2012; Meenaghan
1995). Moreover, today’s markets are characterised by a variety of products
within the same category. Accordingly, customers are overstrained and face
difficulties to distinguish between similar products (Chen et al. 2012).
Consequently, the main goal of companies to succeed in those markets is to
establish long-term competitive advantages. To manage this, brand
management is one of the most important and promising tools to differentiate
the offer from the competitors (Chen et al. 2012). Building strong brands and
ensuring customer loyalty contribute heavily to the overall company value
(Kotler & Keller 2012). Thus, brands comprise indispensable assets for the
holding companies and precious benefits, also for the customers (Kotler &
Keller 2012).
One significant element of a brand is its image, which constitutes the picture of
a brand in the consumer’s mind (Esch et al. 2005a). The brand image affects
sales directly and, thus, companies invest millions of dollars every year to
develop and promote their brand images. Therefore, companies set up a broad
combination of brand-related actions, e.g. communication (Park et al. 1986).
To succeed in positively influencing the brand image, marketers are equipped
with a toolbox of various possibilities (Kotler & Keller 2012). One such tool is
advertising, which is a key element of the marketing communication mix;
specifically, it is a non-personal mass communication channel, paid by the
advertising company (Bruhn 2009; Kotler & Keller 2012). Advertising includes
several different types of media, whereby the focus of this thesis lies on print
media, like newspapers and magazines, and display media including billboards,
signs and posters (Kotler & Keller 2012). The current significance of mass
media is still justified, although personal communications were used increasingly
4
by the marketing departments and despite the growing importance of the
Internet (Kotler & Keller 2012). Additionally, especially for consumer goods
companies, mass media and media advertising are the most important
communication instruments. Accordingly, they hold the major part of the
communication budget and provide a various field of applications (Bruhn 2009).
Within print and display media, there are several instruments that can be applied
to accomplish the pursued reaction of customers. This thesis focuses on the
essential tool of marketing metaphors as a stylistic device. Metaphors within
research comprise not a new topic, but with regard to the current studies, their
today’s importance is clearly given. Metaphors play a dominant role in modern
advertising and communication (Phillips 2003). Moreover, researches show that
75% of print advertisements have at least one metaphor in their headlines (Kim
et al. 2012). According to Zaltman & Coulter (1995), metaphors are potentially
important devices for getting useful insights into consumers, thoughts and
behaviour. Moreover, previous studies show that conceptual metaphors – in
pictures or words – enhance the power of advertisements (Shan et al. 2017).
Additionally, metaphors include several advantages, such as, e.g. the better
understanding of seemingly distant messages (Capelli & Jolibert 2009).
Consequently, a well-chosen metaphor can raise the attractiveness of a particular
product or brand and, thus, can be effective in persuasion (Shan et al. 2017).
1.2. Problem discussion
As illustrated above, a key aim of a company’s marketing activities is to
positively influence the consumer’s perception and attitudes towards the brand.
Thereby, the purpose is to create a strong and unique brand image in consumers’
minds (Aaker 1991).
One tool to positively influence the brand image involves metaphors within
advertisements. As highlighted above, metaphors are an important
communication element in modern advertising (Shan et al. 2017). Therefore,
metaphors have the power to increase the impact of an advertisement (Grey
2000). Previous studies show that a customer can get affected more intensively
by a metaphorical advert than by an advert without this stylistic device. This
impact concerns the recipients’ attention, receptivity, involvement and
emotional reactions (Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Mothersbaugh et al. 2002;
McQuarrie & Mick 2003; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; Phillips 1997; Phillips &
McQuarrie 2009; Toncar & Munch 2001).
5
This thesis focuses on print and display advertising and, thus, visual metaphors
since this media relies heavily on visuals to convince and persuade stronger than
verbal messages (Scott 1994). Additionally, visuals capture a large part of
magazine adverts in comparison to the decreasing number of words (McQuarrie
& Phillips 2005). Moreover, several approaches to categorise visual metaphors
share the consensus of referring to their different complexity levels (van Mulken
et al. 2014). Hence, this thesis concentrates not only on visual metaphors in
general, but on the complexity levels, as well.
Since metaphors are a widespread and often-used tool of advertisements, they
have been examined by several studies (e.g., Capelli & Jolibert 2009; Cornelissen
2003; Shan et al. 2017). These, however, primarily focused on verbal metaphors,
like in headlines (e.g., Hitchon 1991; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; Phillips 2000).
Furthermore, diverse studies concentrated on more specific topics, such as the
different types of metaphors (Gkiouzepas & Hogg 2011; Yu 2009), the effect
of visual metaphor on advertising response (Sakr 2016), the openness of
metaphorical advertisements (Lagerwerf & Meijers 2008), the comprehension
or interpretation of customers regarding metaphor advertising (Morgan &
Reichert 1999; Phillips 1997; van Mulken et al. 2014), or its use and impact on,
e.g. brand extension (Shan et al. 2017).
Moreover, the focus of additional studies lies not only on metaphors, but
examines them as one part of the research, like McQuarrie and Mick (1999)
investigated visual rhetoric in advertising, Toncar and Munch (2001) who
studied consumer responses to rhetoric figures in print advertising, or DeRosia
(2008) who discovered the audience response of rhetorical figures. In addition,
several studies focused on the influence of metaphors on the brand choice,
interest or attitudes towards the brand (e.g., Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Chang &
Yen 2013; Jeong 2008; Kim et al. 2012; McQuarrie & Mick 2003; Shan et al.
2017; Morgan & Reichert 1999). However, those studies did not examine the
essential concept of brand image, but only the less significant approaches of
brand attitudes, brand awareness or similar drafts. Regarding the complexity of
metaphors in advertisements, van Mulken et al. (2014) examined only the
effectiveness. Thus, to the authors’ knowledge, this thesis’ investigation aim
uniquely analyses the influence of the complexity of purely visual metaphors on
brand image.
6
1.3. Aim and research question
Derived from the theoretical marketing background and the presented problem
discussion above, the aim of this paper is to investigate the impact of visual
metaphor advertising on brand image by focusing on the metaphor’s different
levels of complexity. Thus, the thesis’ research question is:
How do different levels of complexity of visual metaphor advertising
influence the brand image?
To address the research question, this thesis uses a quantitative research design.
The investigation includes a field experiment, which serves for a comparison
between a non-metaphorical advertisement and adverts including visual
metaphors of either low or medium complexity. Additionally, follow-up
questions are asked to support the results of the field experiment and to gain a
deeper understanding of the advertisements’ impacts.
1.4. Structure
The remainder of this thesis is structured as follows. Next, the theoretical
chapter is presented, which is divided into four parts: branding, marketing
metaphors, brand image and hypotheses development. The third chapter
concerns the methodology of this thesis. After explaining the research design
including the quantitative methodology, the field experiment, the sample, the
measures and the data analysis are presented. The trustworthiness closes this
chapter. The empirical material and results are presented in chapter 4, while
chapter 5 focuses on the analysis of the data. Finally, chapter 6 concludes the
existing study and discusses managerial implications and limitations. The thesis
closes with outlining recommendations for further research.
7
2. Theory
This chapter clarifies the underlying theory of the thesis. First, the general topic
of branding is explained to classify the background of the subject area. The
focus of this thesis lies on marketing metaphors, which are carried out in detail
in section 2.2. Afterwards, the second focal point is given by defining and
classifying brand image, followed by the hypotheses development, which closes
this chapter.
2.1. Branding
This chapter defines and discusses the concept of branding. Hence, it serves as
a broad and general inauguration and classification for the key marketing points
of this thesis since brand image and metaphor advertising both comprise sub-
items of branding. The significance of a brand explains the general importance
of the brand management including diverse tasks, e.g. the handling of the best
possible brand image. Moreover, the brand functions show various tools to
succeed by profitably managing a brand. Several of those functions can be
influenced by the instrument of marketing metaphors and, thus, lead to brand
success. Accordingly, this first part of the theoretical chapter functions as a
foundation for the following sections. Due to the limited extent of this thesis,
the individual parts focus on the key points and assume a basic knowledge of
branding.
2.1.1. Importance and current situation
Since the brand has been identified as a major asset, it has become an
increasingly focused topic of marketers and marketing researchers (Del Río et
al. 2001; Esch et al. 2005b; Kotler & Keller 2012). The mega topic of brands is
justified by the enormous influence of brands on the consumer behaviour. Clear
brand images lead to relationships between customers and brands and, thus, to
increased purchases (Esch 2005). Generally, companies as well as customers
benefit by gaining a value from brands. They can improve customers’ lives and
leads to increasing sales and a grown market share (Del Río et al. 2001; Kotler
& Keller 2012). To sum up the current situation: More and more brands struggle
in more and more media for the favour of passive acting and poorly involved
customers (Esch et al. 2005a). This product and brand inflation results in
unmanageable offers within several product areas and industries. On the one
hand, this oversupply implies a multiplicity of provision and, thus, a great
freedom of choice (Esch et al. 2005b). On the other hand, consumers are
8
overloaded and lose the overview of the product range. The consequences
include a limitation of the perceived brands to avoid this overload (Esch et al.
2005b). The aim of the brand offering companies is, therefore, to bring their
brands into the minds of the customers. Hence, the concept of branding can be
characterised by its relating nature between the brand and the customer
(Meenaghan 1995).
2.1.2. The brand and its functions
According to the American Marketing Association, a brand can be defined as
“a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended to
identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate
them from those of competitors” (Kotler & Keller 2012, p. 241). Thus, brands
build a relationship between the customer and the offered products/services or
the company itself. By doing so, brands do not only supply a name and a logo,
but also add emotional and/or symbolic attributes to a regularly rather
functional, rational and tangible product (Kotler & Keller 2012). The
intangibility forms another crucial characterisation of brands. They consist in a
great extent of subjective impressions of the consumers and, hence, take place
in the consumers’ minds and imaginations primarily (Esch et al. 2005b).
It becomes clear that a brand labels a product or service for several reasons. The
main function is the differentiation from other brands (Esch et al. 2005b;
Hansen & Christensen 2003; Kotler & Keller 2012; Miletsky & Smith 2009). On
saturated markets with a various offer, brands make the difference to endow the
products with preferences. Hence, the customer can reduce the functional,
social and psychological risks of a purchase and thereby simplify the orientation
within the variety of the supplies (Esch et al. 2005b). Another function regards
the providing of information by endowing a product or service with a brand.
This can be fulfilled by, e.g. the tool of metaphor advertising (Shan et al. 2017),
to be reminded positively (Hansen & Christensen 2003). Furthermore,
endowing the companies’ offer with the charisma and power of a brand hides
several more advantages, like the potential of brand loyalty, a bigger price range,
the protection from external influences, e.g. competition or trademarks, and the
possibility of licensing or brand extension (Esch et al. 2005b; Kotler & Keller
2012).
9
2.2. Metaphor advertising
A well-created metaphor can enable a brand to be reminded more positively
(Shan et al. 2017). A metaphorical message can thereby be visual and/or verbal
(McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). In comparison to verbal metaphors, visually
displayed metaphors possess additional benefits (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005).
Pictures are known to outperform words in terms of drawing attention (Pieters
& Wedel 2004), stimulating the imagination (Kisielius & Sternthal 1986) and
increasing recall (Lutz & Lutz 1977). In addition, modern advertising has
constantly intensified its focus on pictures over words throughout the last
century (Phillips & McQuarrie 2002). As a result, today’s advertising is
predominantly visual and, thus, this thesis focuses on visual metaphors. This
chapter defines and explains visual metaphors and highlights different types. In
addition, reference is made to current literary findings.
2.2.1. Definition of visual metaphors
Visual metaphors play a dominant role in modern advertising and a central role
in modern communication (Phillips 2003). They are by definition a tool “for
seeing something in terms of something else” (Burke 1945, p. 503). Visual
metaphors belong to the class of rhetorical figures, which in turn present an
artful deviation from expectation (McQuarrie & Mick 1996). They are known
to be used by people to facilitate the understanding of an abstract concept by
referring to a concrete one. Metaphors put two ideas in relationship to each
other by using one of them to conceptualise the other (Lakoff & Johnson 1980).
Thereby, two objects are being compared through an analogy by implying that
one object is figuratively like another, even though they are quite different in a
literally manner (Stern 1990). The interaction between these objects can hereby
be in harmony as well as contradicting (Grey 2000; Zymner 1993). The key is
hence to highlight their common elements (Corbett 1965; Cornelissen &
Kafouros 2008).
Advertisements are predominantly using visual metaphors, which contain cross-
domain comparisons (Lakoff & Johnson 1980). Thereby, metaphors point out
the similarities between the presented ideas and domains while simultaneously
creating similarity within them (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). The focus lies on
the target situation in which the metaphor highlights the matching
characteristics and masks the ones that are not matching the situation (Phillips
& McQuarrie 2009). In addition, metaphors do not communicate
straightforward, but leave the recipient with a riddle that needs to be solved to
10
fully understand the destined message (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). Thereby,
the metaphor’s statement often conflicts with the assumptions of the recipient
(Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). When the recipient solves the riddle, it flatters
his/her intellectual capabilities (Phillips 1997), thus creating a bond between the
recipient and the communicator (Norrick 2003). Therefore, metaphors can be
seen as the recipient’s process of revealing the intended meaning.
Simultaneously, it underlines the importance of caution with which the
metaphor needs to be designed (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005).
2.2.2. Metaphors in marketing research
Some studies imply that the use of metaphors represents no guarantee for
favourable results. This becomes evident when looking at studies focusing on
differences between metaphors and literal messages in terms of changes in
consumer attitudes regarding the advertised products or brands which resulted
in unstable and contradicting outcomes (Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Ashley 2004;
Nelson & Hitchon 1995). Likewise, it is doubted by some researchers that
metaphorical messaging is effective in persuasion (Bosman & Hagendoorn
1991; Sopory 2008).
When looking at creative and novel advertisements in general, however,
numerous studies report that they typically entail a positive change in brand
attitude and purchase intention (McQuarrie & Mick 2003; Phillips & McQuarrie
2009). Furthermore, research on rhetorical figures shows an increasing effect on
the recipient’s message elaboration (Hoeken et al. 2009) and, therefore, intensify
the advertisement’s persuasiveness (McQuarrie & Mick 2009; Stathakopoulos et
al. 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).
In addition, these studies (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009; van Mulken et al. 2014)
suggest that metaphors as rhetorical figure have the very same effect. The
reasoning for this assumption is the resource-matching theory, which compares
the metaphor with a riddle that needs to be solved, as mentioned above
(Huhmann & Albinsson 2012). The interpretation of the riddle depends
strongly on the individual and his/her subjective opinion (van Mulken et al.
2014). The degree to which an individual believes to have fully decoded and
understood the metaphor’s meaning is called subjective comprehension.
Comprehension is a precondition to experience pleasure (van Mulken et al.
2014). Attitude changes as well as advert credibility are closely linked to the
subjective comprehension of an advert (Mick 1992). If the recipient’s cognitive
resources match the complexity of the rhetorical figure, it confers the advert a
11
higher degree of persuasiveness and subsequently readily recalled (van Mulken
et al. 2014).
Accordingly, previous studies provide evidence that metaphors increase
receivers’ attention and involvement (Mothersbaugh et al. 2002; Phillips 1997;
Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). It is even suggested that metaphors possess the
advantage of causing more cognitive elaboration compared to literal and direct
messages (Toncar & Munch 2001). Furthermore, metaphors have the power to
trigger cognitive and emotional reactions (Ang & Ching Lim 2006; McQuarrie
& Mick 2003; Mothersbaugh et al. 2002; Phillips 1997). Moreover, they are
attributed to increase the recipient’s receptivity to multiple, pronounced,
positive inferences regarding the product or brand being advertised (McQuarrie
& Phillips 2005) and manage to increase the advert’s overall impact and enhance
the recipient’s receptiveness and responsiveness by overcoming literal
deficiencies (Grey 2000).
The novelty and complexity of the message is said to increase the recipient’s
motivation to decode and interpret the advertisement (Bulmer & Buchanan-
Oliver 2004; Morgan & Reichert 1999). As such, metaphors have the ability to
generate more interest than non-metaphoric adverts and, thus, are more likely
to generate positive responses (Chang & Yen 2013). Hence, several studies
imply an out-performance of metaphors over literal alternatives.
The metaphor’s encryption and decryption represent thereby its core value.
Metaphors require an interplay between recipient and creator by combining
linguistic elements with cognitive attributes. The recipient’s positive emotions
felt while successfully solving the riddle may lead to a positive valuation of the
advertised product or brand (Berlyne 1974).
2.2.3. Complexity levels of visual metaphors
Visual metaphors appear frequently in contemporary advertising. Therefore, it
is necessary to categorise them. Metaphors ordinarily consist of three elements
(van Mulken et al. 2014). The first element is the source whose properties and
attributes are used to transfer it to the target, which represents the second
element (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014). The target is thus an object
that takes on the source’s attributes (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).
The third element is the ground, which connects the two named elements with
each other by providing the fundamentals for a comparison (van Mulken et al.
2014).
12
While there are several approaches to categorise visual metaphors, they all share
the consensus of referring to the complexity of metaphors. In general,
complexity contrasts simplification and can refer to numerous definitions since
complexity itself can only be explained in a determined context (Baechler &
Seiler 2016). For example, complexity occurs in everything that holds a
structure, in language, and also in more defined areas, such as advertising. It
always refers to the mental capacity of the recipient and can, hence, be
recognized very differently (Baechler & Seiler 2016). In the area of advertising,
complexity can be defined in terms of geometrical characteristics of a picture (Morrison
& Dainoff 1972). Within this thesis, the level of complexity refers to the spatial
distribution of the pictorial elements within a metaphorical advertisement,
which are briefly described below (van Mulken et al. 2014).
In Forceville's approach (2008), the delineation of levels of complexity becomes
most apparent. He states that the complexity of a metaphor increases with the
visual structure and the rising necessary amount of inference in order to be able
to interpret the visual metaphor appropriately (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et
al. 2014). Forceville (2008) distinguishes between three different levels of complexity:
going from pictorial similes (juxtaposition) to hybrid metaphors (fusion) up to
contextual metaphors (replacement). The classification is thereby strongly based
on the visibility of the target, which is illustrated in figure 1.
Figure 1: Different types of visual metaphors: (a) no metaphor, (b) juxtaposition, (c) fusion, and (d) replacement (van Mulken et al. 2014).
Within a juxtaposition (pictorial simile), the target and source “are saliently
juxtaposed” (Forceville 2008, p. 7). Thereby, the target as well as the source are
visually shown separately while similarities are generated between them through
the help of one or more visual traits, such as colour, size or posture as shown
in figure 1 (Forceville 2008).
According to Forceville (2008), the complexity level increases along with the
necessary time for the process of inferring in order to interpret the visual
metaphor appropriately. For this reason, he implies an increasing complexity
from juxtaposition to fusion to replacement. Since the target is clearly shown
13
within a juxtaposition, it involves the least amount of inference to successfully
solve the riddle of a metaphor. Consequently, it represents a visual metaphor
with a low level of complexity (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).
The fusion (hybrid metaphor) presents the metaphorical relationship between
target and source by uniting them into one unrealistic object, as illustrated in
figure 1 (Forceville 2008). This means that the target is no longer shown in its
original form and requires a longer process of inferring. Accordingly, a fusion
represents a metaphor of medium complexity (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et
al. 2014).
The last category represents the replacement (contextual metaphor), where the
source itself is not visually shown (see figure 1), which increases the level of
difficulty solving the riddle of the metaphor. The visual placement of the target,
however, “invites the viewer to evoke the identity of the source” (Forceville
2008, p. 7). A replacement requires therefore more effort and time to solve the
riddle and, hence, constitutes the most complex metaphor, which results in a
considerable complexity level (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).
In addition to Forceville’s categorisation, visual metaphors can be differentiated
based on the visually shown brand image (Chang & Yen 2013). An explicit
metaphor integrates the product or brand image into the advertisement and
clearly shows it (Chang & Yen 2013). An implicit metaphor, in contrast, presents
the product or brand image in a less obvious way, which supports its passive
role within the advertisement (Chang & Yen 2013).
For the further course of this thesis, the complexity categorisations are applied,
as described above.
2.3. Brand image
Besides marketing metaphors, brand image represents a key element of this
thesis. It is a crucial factor to make the brand noticeable, to differentiate it from
the competitors’ brands, and to communicate the benefits clearly to the target
customers (Esch et al. 2005b). Therefore, this chapter defines the brand image
and classifies it within the marketing context, clarifies its importance in the
marketing world and its influencing factors.
2.3.1. Definition and classification
“Brands allow marketers to add meanings to products and services, but it is
consumers who ultimately determine what a brand means” (Batey 2014, p. 22).
14
While related concepts, like brand attitude or brand awareness, only scratch the
surface, the brand image comprises the most significant and universal brand
concept (e.g., Dobni & Zinkhan 1990; Nandan 2004; Park & Rabolt 2009).
Brand image is the picture of a brand which arises and exists only in the minds
of the customers. It can only to a certain extent be controlled by the owner of
the brand (Batey 2014; Esch et al. 2005a; Meenaghan 1995). Tools to influence
the image are, e.g. advertising. The concept of the brand, which can be fully
controlled by the brand holding company, is called brand identity (Batey 2014;
Esch et al. 2005a; Meenaghan 1995). The identity of a brand includes its
attributes, promises, values and personality. Those elements are determined by
the company and the aim is to realise them (Esch et al. 2005a). The brand
identity reflects all strategic ideas of a company towards a fundamental
substantially orientation of a brand (Esch et al. 2005a). The company strives for
the greatest overlap of brand identity and brand image. Consequently, brand
identity is the brand’s self-perception and brand image is the foreign picture of
a brand (Esch et al. 2005a).
The customers’ identification with a brand is an essential aim of companies
regarding the target customers. At best, the customers add the brand image to
their self-image and, thus, gain an ideal self (Batey 2014). In conjunction with
this, a central marketing management task is to endow the product with a
personality embodied by the brand and reflected as the brand image in the minds
of the customers. Hence, the mentioned essential link between the product and
the customer can be established (Meenaghan 1995). This relationship should
lead to a brand preference due to the unique and relevant brand image. It forms
the basis for the attractiveness of a brand (Esch et al. 2005b). To clarify this, the
special brand image results in an independent positioning in the heads of the
customers to differentiate it towards the competitors. Long-term aims of the
brand preference include a scope of the price policy, brand loyalty and brand
bonding (Esch et al. 2005b).
2.3.2. Influencing factors
Due to the structure of the underlying field experiment, the aim is to isolate the
pure impact of metaphors on brand image. Therefore, in the frame of this thesis,
the influencing factors on brand image are examined. The basic factor
constitutes the brand experience of the customer, which includes several
elements, like brand awareness, brand knowledge and brand usage.
15
Furthermore, the second determinant comprises the brand associations, which
are explained in detail in section 2.3.2.2.
2.3.2.1. Brand experience
Brand experience represents the first out of two significant determinants of
brand image. It constitutes two components: first, external points by the
company and competition as, e.g. marketing activities or the positioning of the
brand, which are based on the brand identity and the highest possible fit of
identity and image (Dobni & Zinkhan 1990; Esch et al. 2005a). The second
component is the subjective processing and perceiving in the mind of the
customer formed by the external factors and his/her own practice with the
brand (Esch et al. 2005a). Therefore, brand experience plays a major role when
shaping the brand image. The brand experience is based on the brand
knowledge, which includes all information obtained by the customer, e.g. the
acquired recommendations. Moreover, it refers to the brand awareness and
brand usage of the customer (Esch et al. 2005a; Shank & Langmeyer 1993).
Another significant point of brand experience regards the degree of consistency
of the communication of the brand identity that leads to an equally consistent
brand image. For example, frequent changes of the brand campaigns can have
a negative effect on the consumer, so that his/her brand experience gets
confused and less clear (Esch et al. 2005a). Thus, the brand image can suffer
from inconsistency.
There are additional possible influencing factors regarding brand image, which
are seen as less important for this thesis due to the plain focus on visual
advertisements. For this reason, there are listed exemplary in the following, but
are not explained in detail due to the limitation of this thesis: the country of
origin (Allman et al. 2016), price strategies (Hunt & Keaveney 1994), cultural
values (Park & Rabolt 2009), brand appearances (van Reijmersdal et al. 2007),
or wording actions (Wänke et al. 2007).
2.3.2.2. Brand associations
Since brand associations can be named as “the heart and soul of the brand”
(Aaker 1991, p. 8), they constitute the second significant determinant of brand
image. The customer reflects his/her perceptions of the brand and summarises
those to a cluster of associations (Del Río et al. 2001). These associations come
into the customer’s mind when he/she thinks about the brand name (Del Río
et al. 2001). Additionally, both, companies and customers can benefit from
16
brand associations which support the consumer by classifying and recapturing
brand information. Furthermore, brand associations position and differentiate
the brand and offer reasons to purchase the branded product (Till et al. 2011).
Thus, “all companies strive to build a brand image with as many strong,
favourable, and unique brand associations as possible” (Kotler & Keller 2012,
p. 10). Derived from that, it becomes clear that brand associations serve as the
basis for brand image (Till et al. 2011).
According to Keller (1993), brand associations can be classified into attributes,
benefits and attitudes. Attributes concern the detailed characteristics of a
product/service (Keller 1993). They refer to the main functions and features
that the consumer thinks of when dealing with the purchase decision or direct
consumption. Benefits, in turn, apply to the personal value the consumer adds
to the product (Keller 1993). Hence, this is what the product does for the
customer personally. Lastly, the attitudes refer to the general view and valuation
of the consumers, which is, therefore, one part of the foundation of consumer
behaviour (Keller 1993).
2.4. Hypothesis development
Following the detailed literature review, it is now important to apply the
knowledge gained to this thesis. The independent variable of this thesis, whose
impact and effects are more closely examined, is the visual metaphor. As
mentioned above, a visual metaphor represents a rhetorical figure in which an
idea or product is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in
order to suggest a resemblance (Burke 1945; Stern 1990). In comparison to non-
metaphorical adverts, which highlight the product’s benefits in a direct and
straightforward way (Chang & Yen 2013), visual marketing metaphors leave the
recipient with a riddle that needs to be solved to fully understand the destined
message (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009).
It has already been shown by previous research that metaphors can influence
the consumer in general (Shan et al. 2017). Within this thesis, visual metaphors
are seen as a possible tool to enhance the brand image. As prior defined, brand
image equals all the attributes of a brand as perceived by potential and actual
customers (Batey 2014) and, thus, represents the dependent variable within this
thesis. Marketing metaphors and brand image are closely related, as suggested
by several researcher: Previous studies (e.g., Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Jeong 2008;
Kim et al. 2012; McQuarrie & Mick 1999, 2003) show that marketing metaphors
can influence the consumer’s attitude towards the advertisement or brand.
17
Indirect persuasion, like metaphors, can possibly make recipients more
receptive to conclusions about the marketed brand and simultaneously transmit
the key message of the advert (McQuarrie & Mick 2003). In addition, marketing
metaphors provide insights and illuminate the subjects that they advertise
(Cornelissen 2003) and can, thus, affect the perceived image of a brand.
Also, metaphors cover persuasive messages in a subtle way, so that the recipient
may be convinced in a more elegant and compelling manner than with a direct,
straightforward message (Jeong 2008; McQuarrie & Mick 1999; McQuarrie &
Phillips 2005). These hidden visual arguments provide a subconscious
conviction of the customer regarding his/her attitude towards the brand
(McQuarrie & Mick 1999), which results in an enhanced brand image. In
conjunction with this, metaphor advertising includes the possibility to
effectively communicate brand attributes to positively influence the brand image
(McQuarrie & Mick 1999), since metaphors can be evaluated as being exciting
and sophisticated (Ang & Ching Lim 2006).
In addition, creative metaphors with decorative imagery can counterbalance
what a functional product lacks (Ang & Ching Lim 2006) and endow a product
with emotions. Phillips and McQuarrie (2009) found out that metaphors in
advertisements can influence the consumer belief positively, if the recipient
perceives the advert “as an artful deviation from expectation” (Phillips &
McQuarrie 2009, p. 59), and thereby aim to ease the persuasion. Consequently,
the first hypothesis can be formulated as followed:
H1: Visual metaphors have a significant positive impact on
brand image.
However, a condition for a positive impact of visual metaphors on brand image
is the right management, control and use of metaphors and, hence, the
appropriate handling of the identity. Otherwise, unclear metaphors could
confuse the consumer (Cornelissen 2003) and then falsify the image. For this
reason, a visual metaphor needs to be designed with great caution (McQuarrie
& Phillips 2005). Thereby, the complexity level is essential. According to van
Mulken et al. (2014), metaphors complexity and pleasurable feelings share a
positive relation “until a tipping point is reached, when complexity outweighs
comprehension” (van Mulken et al. 2014, p. 333).
On the one hand, a riddle that is either too simple or too challenging to solve
will not give pleasure to the recipient (Huhmann & Albinsson 2012). On the
18
other hand, however, highly complex metaphors, if correctly comprehended,
are assumed to trigger greater and therefore more effective assumption and
power of recall (van Mulken et al. 2014). However, the risk that the recipient is
not able to decode the message rises with the complexity of the metaphor
(McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). Hence, a medium complexity level is needed in
order for the recipient to experience enjoyment while processing the advert
(Huhmann & Albinsson 2012), which in turn promotes a positive brand image.
This thesis focuses therefore on visual metaphors with a medium level of
complexity. In addition, visual metaphors of low complexity are included in this
study to identify possible differences in regard of their impact on brand image.
This thesis adopts the complexity categories by Forceville (2008) and van
Mulken et al. (2014) as described in section 2.2.3. Consequently, the first
overarching hypothesis can be divided into two sub-hypotheses:
H1a: Visual metaphors of low complexity have a significant
positive impact on brand image.
H1b: Visual metaphors of medium complexity have a
significant more positive impact on brand image than visual
metaphors of low complexity.
Furthermore, this thesis only makes use of explicit metaphors, which clearly
show the product or brand image within the advertisement since the brand
needs to be visible to test the metaphor’s impact on brand image (Chang & Yen
2013).
To analyse the actual impact of visual metaphors on brand image, it is necessary
to isolate the influencing factors, which were identified in section 2.3.2.
Additionally, the comprehension of metaphors succeeds stronger, if the
recipient has a certain degree of product knowledge (Roehm & Sternthal 2001).
Therefore, brand experience and brand associations are the relevant influencing
factors to be considered. In this context, it must be mentioned that brand
experience consists of several elements, such as brand awareness, brand
knowledge, brand usage, and consistency of the communication. To be able to
control the influencing factors as good as possible, brands with inconsistent
brand communications are dispensed within the experiment. Thus, consistency
of the communication is an irrelevant influencing factor. The theoretical model
depicting these relationships is shown in figure 2.
19
Figure 2: Theoretical model (own research).
20
3. Method
Since research focuses on knowledge and the optimal accomplished “truth”, the
underlying methodology is significant for the comprehensive research study
(Newman & Benz 1998; Sale et al. 2002). Therefore, this chapter clarifies the
research design, followed by the experiment, sample, measures, data analysis
and the trustworthiness, which closes this third part of the thesis.
3.1. Quantitative research design
This thesis uses a quantitative approach. In contrast to a qualitative design,
which focuses on deriving meaning and exploring a phenomenon where little
previous research exists, quantitative research focuses on testing theory
(Amaratunga et al. 2002; Newman & Benz 1998; Sale et al. 2002). Since this
thesis draws on established theories, the quantitative design is deemed
applicable.
Quantitative studies can be seen as the more traditional research design
(Amaratunga et al. 2002; Newman & Benz 1998) since they “have been the
dominant methods of research in social science” (Newman & Benz 1998, p. 10).
Quantitative approaches can be characterised by their objective, measuring, data
analysing and statistical nature (Amaratunga et al. 2002). In addition,
quantitative studies focus on the generalisability of the sample in regard to the
population, control of variables, validity and reliability of the results and
randomisation (Newman & Benz 1998). Whereas interpretation and meaning
are in the focus of qualitative research, quantitative methods concentrate on an
objective reality independent from the subjective perception of humans in
general (Sale et al. 2002). Thus, quantitative research bases on a view from the
outside and, hence, on the independence of the interviewer from the
interviewee, on objective measures and on “hard data”. In contrast, subjectivity,
reflection and intuition are not in demand (Amaratunga et al. 2002).
A deductive approach implies drawing conclusions from theories and applying
them to a defined phenomenon (Gratzer & Tesfaye 2006). Thereby, theory
always builds the starting point for the inspection of a phenomenon (Gratzer &
Tesfaye 2006). This thesis is based on theories concerning marketing metaphors
and brand image. The contents of the theories and the consequent hypotheses
are then reviewed and analysed in the form of an experiment. Thus, a deductive
approach is applied.
21
3.2. Experiment
The framework for the quantitative research design is a field experiment, which
is combined with a survey. An experiment is by definition an investigation under
controlled conditions that is made to test a pre-set hypothesis (Shadish et al.
2002). This is done by manipulating the independent variable (the cause) and
measuring the size and change of each dependent variable (the effect) (Saunders
et al. 2012; Shadish et al. 2002). Any extraneous variables are thereby controlled
to the most possible extend (Saunders et al. 2012; Shadish et al. 2002).
For this thesis, a field experiment is chosen. In contrast to a laboratory
experiment, a field experiment is carried out in the natural environment of the
participants, such as a classroom or the workplace (Dennis 1990; Saunders et al.
2012). The independent variable gets still manipulated, but in a real-life setting
(Dennis 1990; Saunders et al. 2012). Hence, the observed causal relationships
are more likely to reflect real life due to its natural setting (Saunders et al. 2012).
On the other side, a field experiment has less control over extraneous variables
that might bias the results (Saunders et al. 2012). This makes it difficult for
another researcher to replicate the study in exactly the same way.
The unique strength of experiments lies within the causal description of the
consequences based on the intentional change of a variable (Shadish et al. 2002).
With the help of experiments however, it is only partially possible to explain the
mechanism behind the causal relationship and the conditions which assure it
(Shadish et al. 2002). Therefore, follow-up questions are being asked
additionally, to fully understand the relationships between the variables.
3.2.1. Experimental design
A between-group design serves as foundation for the field experiment. The
between-group design is defined as an experiment that consists of two or more
groups of subjects (Charness et al. 2012). Thereby, each participant gets tested
on only one treatment. Results are obtained by comparing the behaviour of
participants of one treatment with those exposed to the other treatments
(Charness et al. 2012). The experiment of this thesis consists of two treatment
groups and one control group. All participants are equal in all relevant aspects
to the research except the fact whether the participants are exposed to a
manipulation or not.
Furthermore, two brands are chosen in preparation for the experiment.
Thereby, the following criteria served as guideline: The first precondition is that
the participants are familiar with the shown brand. Therefore, the brand needs
22
to be well-known in Sweden since the experiment takes place in a Swedish city.
Second, the brand needs to provide a consistent continuous brand
communication to exclude the extraneous variable consistency of the
communication, as explained in section 2.4. Third, it is made a condition that
the selected brands belong to the same industry to enable a better comparison.
Fourth, the brand must use metaphor advertising in real life to guarantee
truthfulness of the used adverts within this experiment. Based on these named
criteria, the American ketchup brand Heinz and the Dutch beer brand Heineken
are selected as representative brands of the food industry.
For each brand, three specific advertisements are selected, which were published
and used by the respective brand. Those three advertisements include one non-
metaphorical advert and two metaphorical adverts, whereby one is of low
complexity (juxtaposition) and the other one of medium complexity (fusion).
Since replacements exceed the level of complexity for this thesis, they stay
unnoticed, as explained in section 2.2.3. As mentioned in section 2.4., all
advertisements visually display the brand name as precondition to measure a
possible impact on brand image.
3.2.2. Procedure
The participants are approached by researchers within their natural
surroundings as, e.g. the library, lecture halls and private homes. None of the
participants has the chance to prepare answers since questions are not handed
out in advance and the people interviewed are chosen randomly. The
quantitative survey starts with questions referring to the respondents’
background, such as gender and age, followed by more in-depth questions
concerning the extraneous variables (i.e. brand experience and brand
associations) and brand image (see appendix A). The components of brand
experience are queried in the following order: brand awareness, brand
knowledge and brand usage. The in-depth questions are all related to one of the
two selected brands (e.g. brand A).
Afterwards, the participant is shown an advertisement of the same brand about
which he/she was just interviewed (brand A). Whether the advert is a non-
metaphorical advert, a juxtaposition or a fusion depends on which group he/she
belongs to (see appendices B1, B2, B3). All participants are assigned randomly
to the groups.
Figure 3 depicts the experimental procedure. Participants belonging to the first
treatment group are shown metaphorical adverts of low complexity (M+), while
the second treatment group consists of metaphorical adverts of medium
23
complexity (M++). The control group, in contrast, gets to see non-metaphorical
adverts (Mo). The advertisements are submitted to each participant with the
same set instructions. After he/she was able to take a closer look at the advert,
the participant’s brand image gets queried again. This is followed by four follow-
up questions to find out why the participant's brand image either stayed the
same or has deteriorated or improved.
After this procedure, the second pass takes place, as shown in figure 3. It
includes the very same steps as the first one. The only difference is that the
second run relates to the second brand that has not been queried yet (brand B).
Accordingly, the advertisement of the second brand is shown (brand B).
Whether the first pass concentrates on brand A or B is decided randomly. In
total, every participant gets to see two different advertisements of the same kind.
Figure 3: Procedure of the field experiment (own research).
Brand image, as the dependent variable within this thesis, gets measured prior
to and after the manipulation of the independent variable (visual metaphor).
This applies for the two treatment groups as well as the control group. It enables
a comparison of the results before and after the manipulation. Consequently, it
is expected that differences concerning brand image between the treatment
groups themselves, and in comparison to the control group can be attributed to
the intervention.
24
To ensure that the changes on brand image actually refer to the visual
metaphors, the participants get assigned randomly to the groups. Moreover,
using a control group enables the checking of possible alternative explanations
for changes of the dependent variable. Since the control group underlies the
same external influences as the treatment groups, it can be expected that all
changes originate from the experiment itself and, thus, the independent variable.
Plus, differences caused due to possible different composition of the three
groups cannot be taking into account since all participants are randomly
assigned. Finally, to evaluate as to whether the treatment worked (manipulation
check), each participant is asked follow-up questions immediately after the
experiment. Specifically, questions asked include:
Did you like the shown advertisement? And if so, why/why not?
After having seen the advertisement, have the brand characteristics
changed? Why has/hasn’t it changed?
3.3. Sample
This thesis is conducted among a homogeneous population. The term refers to
people who share the same context and have therefore physical and
organisational proximity. Students are constrained and dependent on the
university and, thus, form a homogeneous population (Vandebosch 2008). This
guarantees that voluntary participants will not be notably different from non-
respondents (Saunders et al. 2012).
The sample size is 102 students referring to the calculation outcomes of the
statistical analysis program G*Power. This program provides several tools, e.g.
an analysis to determine the appropriate sample size (Faul et al. 2009). The basis
comprises three variables: the significance level, the requested statistical power,
and, lastly, the effect size of the pursued population (Faul et al. 2009). The 102
students study at the Karlstad University in Sweden, whereby 56% is female and
44% is male. The age range goes from 19 to 45 with 24 as the average age. A
total of 32 participants belongs to the first treatment group, while 33 participants
are part of the second one. The control group consists of 37 people. This
circumstance creates a solid base for comparisons of the three groups.
3.4. Measures
The questionnaire aims to measure brand image as well as its most important
influencing factors, which are brand experience and brand associations, as
explained in section 2.3.2. Brand experience is divided into brand awareness,
25
brand knowledge and brand usage. Thus, the questionnaire includes five
measurement items which compromise 31 statements, respectively questions.
All questions of a measurement item are based on verified and confirmed
statements of previous researchers as shown in table 1.
Table 1: The measurement items of the questionnaire (own research).
26
The statements to measure brand awareness are adopted almost unchanged
from Lee and Leh (2011). A minor rewording was required to avoid a double
negation as the survey is not conducted in the respondent's mother tongue. The
basis for the questions referring to brand associations is also provided by Lee
and Leh’s (2011) statements, which, however, had to be cut down due to their
size. In addition, they are very broad and cover several areas, but only a few
specific statements are of interest to this thesis. While some referring to the
participant’s perceived value, trustworthiness and social image are crucial,
statements concerning the flawlessness in the product’s physical construction
are irrelevant for this thesis. Likewise, associations concerning the country-of-
origin as well as the corporate social responsibility do not matter, as the shown
adverts do not allude to these topics. As a result, brand associations are
measured with a reduced number of eight meaningful and insightful statements.
The questions concerning brand awareness and brand associations are scaled
using the 5-point Likert scale, whereby 1 equals strongly agree, 2 stands for
agree, 3 represents neutral, 4 means disagree and 5 stands for strongly disagree.
Brand knowledge, in contrast, is queried with two statements based on Zhou et
al. (2010), whereby the respective statement must be ticked. Questions referring
to the participant’s brand usage are direct questions, as are the questions of
gender and age, which is why no previously tested questions by researchers are
needed.
To measure brand image, a semantic differential is used. The semantic
differential measures people's reactions to contrasting adjectives at each end on
a bipolar scale. Thereby, a total of 15 bipolar adjectives are used based on Low
& Lamb Jr.’s (2000) selection of adjectives. Hereby, a prior selection of the
adjectives is made in line with the selected brands. Each response option
represents a point value from 5 to 1, whereby 5 stands for a strong tendency to
the positive adjective and 1 to the negative one. Furthermore, the questionnaire
offers as a sixth answer option “not applicable” to reduce the amount of missing
and untrue answers (Revilla et al. 2014).
3.5. Data analysis
To analyse the results of the underlying experiment, the participants’ answers
must be evaluated at first. This evaluation is conducted by using the statistical
program SPSS. First, descriptive statistics are used to analyse the two treatment
groups and the control group regarding their structure and characteristics, e.g.
age and gender. Since the brand image is queried twice and consists of 15
27
dependent variables (see section 3.2., appendix A), a one-way multivariate
analysis of variance (MANOVA) is applied. Within this analysis, Wilk’s Lambda
is documented as one part of the outcome. It is a classical and commonly used
tool for conclusions about the crucial significances (Todorov & Filzmoser 2010)
and, thus, used within this thesis to assure the accuracy of the results of the
MANOVA. Because MANOVA evaluates significances of all groups, but
cannot distinguish between the single groups, a post-hoc test is applied
afterwards.
The selected post-hoc test compares the means of several groups. In contrast
to other post-hoc tests, such as Bonferroni, the Scheffé procedure suits best as
it conducts simultaneously comparisons in pairs for all possible combinations
of means (Savin 1980). Furthermore, the Scheffé procedure does not focus on
one special comparison, but values all groups in the same way, whereby
Bonferroni distinguishes between data sets of primary and secondary interest
(Savin 1980). Hence, the Scheffé test is applied using SPSS and shows the most
important outcome, which is the significance value. The three tested groups are
contrasted in each combination, so that three data sets of significances result
(treatment group 1 vs. control group, treatment group 2 vs. control group,
treatment group 1 vs. treatment group 2). Furthermore, the answers of the
follow-up questions (see section 3.2.) are summarised and systematically listed,
with special regard to their similarities and differences. All answers are analysed
and put into patterns in the same way without exception.
3.6. Trustworthiness
Since unreliable, invalid studies are seen to be worthless, the trustworthiness
must be ensured. Thus, the quality of research is proven by meeting universal
criteria (Amankwaa 2016). Those are explained first, followed by the application
of those criteria on the underlying study of this thesis.
3.6.1. Criteria
In the conventional research, reliability and validity are the common criteria for
quantitative designs (Amankwaa 2016; Connelly 2016; Korstjens & Moser 2017;
Krefting 1991).
Validity is split into internal and external validity. Internal validity deals with the
generality of the research, especially the surroundings and findings of the study
(Krefting 1991). This criterion can be assured by detailed descriptions of the
investigation, especially the results (Krefting 1991). External validity handles the
28
degree of a study to be applicable to similar situations, circumstances or samples
(Krefting 1991).
Moreover, the study must be reliable to be officially accepted. The aim of this
criterion is to “minimise errors and biases in a study” (Amaratunga et al. 2002,
p. 29). Thus, the consistency of the findings or rather data is important to
ensure, which is directly connected to the external validity (Krefting 1991). It
deals with the degree of consistency of the data, if the study was repeated using
the same sample or same situation (Amankwaa 2016; Amaratunga et al. 2002;
Krefting 1991). In conjunction with this, a necessary degree of neutrality or
rather objectivity must ensure the high quality of research (Amankwaa 2016;
Krefting 1991). In quantitative methods, neutrality regards the distance between
the researcher and the recipients to reduce bias by, e.g. randomisation.
Therefore, the researcher does not influence the investigation in a biased way
and is, hence, objective (Krefting 1991).
3.6.2. Application
Several instruments can be applied to establish trustworthiness within the
research (Amankwaa 2016; Amaratunga et al. 2002; Korstjens & Moser 2017;
Krefting 1991). First, a procedure protocol has been set up, so that the
researchers do not forget any major or minor steps of the investigation,
especially concerning the analysis of the results.
To guarantee validity, a prolonged engagement with the participants was carried
out. It gives the participants enough time to become familiar with the situation
and tasks (Korstjens & Moser 2017). This is significant since it builds trust and
avoids misunderstandings. Besides, validity can be ensured through the semi-
structured design of the follow-up questions, which encourage the participant
to go into further details or give examples (Korstjens & Moser 2017). Another
tool is data triangulation (Korstjens & Moser 2017). For this research it means
collecting data at different times of day and at different places as, e.g. the
university or student homes. In addition, investigator triangulation is given by
the two investigating researchers.
Moreover, the structure of the experiment ensures internal validity since the
assignment of all participants to the groups and the order of the shown
advertisements happened randomly. Furthermore, an additional control group
serves as reference and, consequently, ensures that every change of the
dependent variable is indeed a direct result of the independent variable.
29
Since not every approached person is willing to participate, the volunteers might
not be representative, which leads to problems of external validity. However,
this study focuses on students only, which represent a homogeneous population
(Saunders et al. 2012). In addition, a cross-analysis of two selected brands with
multiple advertisement sets has been carried out to increase external validity.
To maintain reliability, peer-debriefings of the two researchers were held.
Additionally, the procedure of investigation was discussed with the supervisor
and other researchers. Thus, biases from one of the researchers could be
prevented (Connelly 2016). Moreover, detailed notes of the process of the
analysis were written down for comprehension.
30
4. Empirical material and results
This chapter provides a presentation and overview of the collected data. In
order to best illustrate the results, tables are developed according to the
collected data.
4.1. Descriptive statistics
Descriptive statistics serve the purpose of summarising and describing the
empirical data in a clear way. In order to find an actual effect caused by the
experiment, it is necessary that the two treatment groups and the control group
are similar in their characteristics. For this reason, in the first step, the different
characteristics of the individual groups are examined and compared. A data
screening indicates a confirmation of the necessary precondition for this thesis
as shown in table 2 and 3.
Table 2: Group comparison of gender and age (own research).
As illustrated in table 2, the gender distribution in the three groups is irregular.
However, due to gender, no strong different influence is assumed since the two
queried products are consumed by both sexes. In contrast, the average age in
the individual groups is almost identical, which supports the similar structure of
the groups.
Furthermore, the total amount of participants is nearly the same in the two
treatment groups, whereas the control group has a few more participants. This
circumstance, though, creates a more solid basis for comparison in regard to the
two treatment groups. Concerning the analysis, however, one participant
belonging to treatment group 1 must be excluded for the brand Heineken due
to too many missing answers. With regard to the second brand Heinz, the
participant will continue to be considered since all questions have been
answered.
Table 3 provides an overview on the queried influencing factors according to
the different groups and brands. Again, overall similarities between the three
groups are recognizable. When focusing on each influencing factor individually,
minor differences become evident, which, however, are not crucial.
31
Table 3: Group comparison of the influencing factors (own research).
Without exception, all respondents indicated to know both brands. In the case
that one participant would not have known one of the two brands, it would
have led to the immediate exclusion from the analysis of the respective brand.
In general, it is noticeable that the values in relation to Heinz are slightly higher
than those for Heineken. The phenomenon is evident in all three groups. This
suggests that the participants are more familiar with Heinz than Heineken.
Likewise, Heinz is rated more positively.
According to the data regarding brand awareness, it is equally hard respectively
easy for all group members to imagine the two brands and distinguish them
from other competing brands. Moreover, values concerning brand knowledge
are consistent in all three groups. This indicates that the groups hold a very
similar level of knowledge about the brands.
Table 4: Group comparison of the frequent buyers (own research).
The question of whether participants see themselves as a frequent buyer is of
particular importance, as these answers make it clear how strongly the
participants are attracted to the brand. Most of the participants tend to negate
the question as shown in table 4. In every group, Heinz has a higher number of
frequent buyers in comparison to Heineken. Nevertheless, regardless of the
32
respective brand, the number of those who do not consider themselves a regular
buyer outweighs the number of regular buyers in any case. The only exception
is the number of frequent Heinz buyers in the control group.
A look at table 3 indicates that the values in relation to brand associations are
also similar. However, the calculation of the mean values takes place regardless
of the question whether the participants see themselves as proud owners of the
respective brand. For both brands, the question is excluded from the calculation,
as more than 30% of participants responded with "I do not own a product".
More precisely, 40 participants ticked this answer option for Heineken and 20
times for Heinz.
The overall picture implies that the prerequisite for investigating an effect on
the brand image caused by the experiment is given. All three groups, which
include two treatment groups and one control group, seem to be similar in their
characteristics. Despite the random assignment to the group, the outcome
signifies three well-comparable groups.
4.2. Group results
As explained in 3.5., the results of the block of questions regarding brand image
are evaluated by using MANOVA and the Scheffé procedure. This results in
values that are either significant or not. In the following, the first table shows all
variables of one brand and the significance value for all three groups evaluated
by MANOVA. This table serves as a basis for the selection of variables used for
the Scheffé test. Afterwards, the individual significances of those selected
adjectives are presented for each group comparison (see section 4.1. for the
division into three data sets). Statistical significance describes a range of
amounts less or equal 0,05. Thereby, the range from 0,05 down to 0,01 refers to
the lowest significance level. A number less or equal 0,01 is very significant and
an amount of less or equal 0,001 represents a highly significant result (Carver
1978).
The chapter is divided into two subchapters. First, the results will be presented
in relation to Heineken, followed by the results of Heinz.
33
4.2.1. Heineken
Table 5: Variable-related results of Heineken (own research).
Table 5 shows the overall significances of all three data sets in relation to
Heineken as evaluated by MANOVA. This serves as a basis for the selection of
variables, which are measured afterwards by the Scheffé procedure for each
compared group. First, the significances are in the focus. Since thirteen out of
fifteen queried adjectives are statistically significant, the researchers concentrate
on the highly significant variables, which are the first five variables listed in table
5. However, the selection is not based solely on the results of the Scheffé test.
In addition, the selected metaphorical adverts by Heineken are used as a second
selection criterion. The adjectives fresh and appetising refer to the product itself
and the topic of the advertisement since Heineken uses the word “fresh”
directly. Additionally, fun and exciting can be related to the metaphor and the
underlying riddle. Being able to solve the metaphor can evoke positive feelings
in the viewer, combined with fun and excitement, as explained in section 2.2.2.
Lastly, the adjective friendly is included in the selection due to the high
significance value.
Table 6: Selected variables of Heineken (own research).
34
Table 6 shows the significance results evaluated by the Scheffé procedure for
the selected five variables. Every column displays one data set of two compared
groups. The first two columns are highlighted in grey colour due to their very
and highly significant values. Hence, nine out of ten values are highly significant
and one value is very significant (more precisely, the adjective fresh in the
comparison of treatment group 2 vs. control group). The comparison of
treatment group 1 vs. treatment group 2, on the other hand, results in no
significant values.
4.2.2. Heinz
Table 7: Variable-related results of Heinz (own research).
As explained in section 4.2.1., the significances shown in table 7 constitute the
basis for the selection of variables for the post-hoc test in relation to Heinz. As
illustrated in table 7, eight out of fifteen variables are highly significant, which is
why they get considered for the final selection. Due to the consistency of this
evaluation within this thesis, the same number of adjectives is selected for both
brands, resulting in five per brand. Likewise, the procedure is the same for both
brands. Here, too, attention is paid to the metaphorical adverts used by Heinz
when selecting the variables. Fresh and natural refer to the product group of food
and, in addition, Heinz’ advertisements aim to reach those brand values which
becomes obvious due to the constant visual placement of fresh tomatoes. Fun
and exciting relate again to the riddle behind the used metaphor. Furthermore,
good performance constitutes an adjective describing the general power or rather
achievement of a brand. This results in a total of five adjectives for Heinz, which
35
will be analysed more closely. Modern and attractive packaging are excluded as these
adjectives are not in the focus of the chosen adverts of Heinz. Good style is not
selected either because the five adjectives chosen above are seen as more
suitable.
Table 8: Selected variables of Heinz (own research).
Table 8 indicates multiple significances like table 6. The grey highlighted table
fields indicate very and high significant values of the three compared data sets.
The Scheffé procedure reveals consistent significances for the second data set,
while the first compared groups lack only one significant value. This time,
however, there is one significant value in the comparison of treatment group 1
and treatment group 2.
4.3. Manipulation check
To evaluate whether the above effects did in fact originate from the independent
variable (treatment), a manipulation check was performed in the form of follow-
up questions. These were conducted immediately after the first and second run
of the questionnaire – each referring to a different brand (i.e. Heineken and
Heinz). All participants belonging to the same group answered similarly,
supporting the results of the field experiment. Thus, the manipulation check
worked successfully.
Specifically, most participants belonging to the first treatment group, which
were shown metaphorical adverts of low complexity, perceived the adverts as
creative, funny and smart. Both, the advertisements of Heineken and Heinz, caused
majorly a positive change of brand image since Heineken appeared to be fresher
and tastier and Heinz made a more natural and organic impression. Members of
treatment group 2, who were given metaphorical adverts of medium complexity,
answered similarly. Again, the adverts triggered positive feelings referring to the
inventive visualisation of the brand. Both products were considered more
appealing and appetising, whereby Heineken mostly occurred as lighter and fresher
and Heinz often got related to as being homemade and green. The last group, which
is the control group, got to see non-metaphorical adverts. Here, the answers
36
majorly referred to the adverts as plain, boring and common. Most often, no change
of brand image occurred since the adverts were seen as too passive and neutral.
37
5. Analysis
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate how different levels of complexity of
visual metaphor advertising influence brand image and, thus, to understand how
visual metaphors can allow marketers to enhance a firm’s brand image. Three
hypotheses were defined to address the research question, which investigates
how different levels of complexity of visual metaphor advertising influence the
brand image. The hypotheses were tested through quantitative data that was
collected by means of field experiments involving a total of 102 participants. All
respondents are students who were interviewed in their natural surroundings,
such as the library. The survey included two identical runs, each referring to a
different brand (i.e. Heineken and Heinz). The results of this field experiment,
as presented in chapter 4., serve as a basis for the subsequent analysis. In the
first step, the overarching hypothesis H1 and the first sub-hypothesis H1a are
evaluated. This is followed by the analysis of the second sub-hypothesis H1b.
5.1. Evaluation of hypotheses H1 and H1a
The first hypothesis H1 examines whether visual metaphors have a significant
positive impact on brand image. This hypothesis is considered as the
overarching hypothesis for the following two sub-hypotheses H1a and H1b,
which deepen the first assumption by focusing on the complexity of the
metaphor.
To test H1, two treatment groups (low and medium complexity metaphor) were
compared with a control group (no metaphor). The comparison of treatment
group 1 and the control group shows a significant difference for nine out of ten
values. The values even yield ten out of ten significant variables by contrasting
treatment group 2 and the control group. Thus, the first hypothesis is supported
by the results of the field experiment as expected based on the previous
literature review. The results implicate that metaphors possess the ability to
generate more interest than non-metaphorical adverts. Consequently, it is also
likely that they are more inclined to elicit positive emotions, as suggested by
Chang & Yen (2013). In terms of implementation, this means that metaphors
are indeed a useful tool for attracting people to a brand.
At this point, it is important to refer to the first sub-hypothesis H1a, which
focuses on visual metaphors of low complexity and states that these have a
significant positive impact on brand image. The decision whether to support or
falsify the hypothesis H1a is, therefore, based on the comparison of treatment
38
group 1 and the control group. Since this inspection is already included in the
analysis of the results of hypothesis H1, it can be said that by supporting the
overarching hypothesis H1, H1a is automatically supported as well.
In the following, the data are examined and discussed in detail – initially in
general and then based on the two brands used in the experiments (i.e. Heinz
and Heineken). With a closer look at the values, it becomes clear that all
adjectives except one have improved significantly after the participants have
seen the metaphorical advertising – regardless of the participants’ affiliation to
either treatment group 1 or 2, or Heineken or Heinz. Moreover, there seem to
be little effects following from the metaphors’ different level of complexity (low
vs. medium).
All values are in the highest significance range, suggesting that the difference
between the two treatment groups and the control group is high and relevant.
These results signify that visual marketing metaphors can have a positive effect
on the way participant perceive a particular brand. This positive effect might be
attributed to the riddle behind the metaphor as several answers of the follow-
up questions reveal. Participants of treatment group 1 and 2 describe the
advertisements as creative, clever and appealing, while participants belonging to the
control group use words like boring and common to express their opinion about
the given advertisements. This supports previous findings (e.g., Jeong 2008;
McQuarrie & Phillips 2005) implying that metaphors convince in a more elegant
and compelling way in comparison to non-metaphorical adverts. In addition,
this field experiment supports that metaphorical adverts are viewed as exciting,
as stated by Ang & Ching Lim (2006). Consequently, a higher performance
following from metaphorical adverts over direct and straightforward messages
can be supported by the results of this thesis.
Simultaneously, the outcome reveals the high potential of using metaphors in
the daily advertising business. Visual metaphors should therefore be used with
increased frequency. However, metaphors require the utmost care during the
inventive creation process (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). The metaphors core
value is the decryption of the metaphor itself. As explained in chapter 2, section
2.2.3., a metaphor consists of three elements: the source, the target and the
ground. In order for the viewer to solve the riddle behind the metaphor, it must
be created in a way that the connection between source and target becomes
apparent. If no obvious connection between these two elements is apparent to
the viewer, he/she remains confused, which in turn can lead to negative feelings
towards the brand. To avoid this reaction, it is firstly important to carefully select
39
the source, and secondly, to successfully imply that target and source share a
common meaningful element. Assuming that the points mentioned are taken
into account, metaphors can be used to establish a positive relationship between
the viewer and the communicator (Norrick 2003), as supported by the results
of this thesis.
When only focusing on the values of Heineken, it becomes clear that the highest
values are found for the adjectives appetising and exciting, as shown in table 6.
Heineken's two metaphorical adverts are designed to highlight the freshness and
coolness of the beer by associating it with a popsicle (see appendix B2). Several
participants emphasized how much the adverts triggered their desire for a cold
beer. As far as the participants are concerned, the presentation of the popsicle
has thereby strongly contributed to the temptation to drink a beer as it made
the beer seem more enticing and appetising. Thus, the interaction between source
(beer) and target (popsicle) has been successfully implemented.
The non-metaphorical advertisement, in contrast, contains only a simple image
of the beer and has not triggered such a need. According to the participants, the
advert was too common and too well-known to trigger any strong emotions. Fun is
the adjective with the third highest scores, followed closely by friendly (see table
6). Again, both adjectives can be traced back to the used metaphors based on
popsicles. Above all, the depiction of palm trees in the juxtaposition contributes
greatly to the fun factor and supports a friendly atmosphere. With still
outstanding values, fresh is the last adjective, which gets closer examined. The
word “fresh” is used literally in both metaphorical adverts, which was expected
to increase the variable’s value. The researchers are aware that this could have
positively influenced the impact of metaphors. Therefore, it is reassuring to see
that other adjectives have been more strongly influenced, which reinforces the
effect of visual metaphors on brand image.
The values of Heinz are shown in table 8. The adjectives with the highest
significances are fun and exciting. As already explained by Heineken's results, a
close relation to the used metaphors can be drawn. Heinz's metaphorical adverts
highlight tomatoes as the main ingredient in ketchup, claiming the natural
characteristic of ketchup (see appendices B1, B2). The juxtaposition implies that
the ketchup bottle grows out of the ground like tomatoes, by showing the
ketchup bottle surrounded by a tomato plant and within the fusion, several
tomato slices form the ketchup bottle. For both advertisements, most of the
participants subsequently stated how creative and unusual the visualisation of the
message is. In some cases, the adverts even made the participants grin or laugh.
40
Partly, this response is also due to the superior feeling of a few participants who
are convinced that ketchup is not purely natural. Still, the participants stated to
appreciate the creative adverts. This reaction suggests that here, too, the
interplay between source (ketchup) and target (fresh tomatoes) has succeeded.
The adjective fresh is closely related to the metaphorical adverts’ aim of
emphasizing the natural ingredient, and thus, the freshness. However, only
treatment group 2 shows a significant value for fresh (see table 8). A possible
reason for this result is the visualisation of several tomato slices within the
fusion, which are displayed relatively large in comparison to the juxtaposition,
where only small tomatoes are displayed. Good performance has also achieved
highly significant values, as shown in table 8. According to the participants,
these values can be attributed to the recognition of the overall appealing and
creative advertising. Lastly, the attitude of associating ketchup with unhealthy
ingredients may be a possible reason why the adjective natural shows lower
values in comparison to the other selected adjectives. Nevertheless, natural has
achieved significantly higher scores within the treatment groups than in the
control group. This may be due to the rather simple non-metaphorical advert
of Heinz, which shows the ketchup bottle in front of a white background and,
thus, does not highlight tomatoes as natural ingredients in any way.
In summary, the deeper analysis supports hypothesis H1 and the first sub-
hypothesis H1a. The results imply that metaphorical advertisements can indeed
have a positive impact on the consumer perception of brand image. Likewise,
this is supported in terms of low complexity metaphorical adverts.
5.2. Evaluation of hypothesis H1b
The second sub-hypothesis H1b states that visual metaphors of medium
complexity have a significant more positive impact on brand image than visual
metaphors of low complexity. This assumption digs deeper into the theoretical
basis of metaphors since it refers to the two selected levels of complexity. The
different levels of complexity have been defined and categorised based on
Forceville (2008) and van Mulken et al. (2014). The authors assumed a
meaningful significance to reveal, premised on the underlying theory (see
chapter 2, sections 2.2., 2.4.; e.g., Huhmann & Albinsson 2012; McQuarrie &
Phillips 2005). The riddle behind the metaphor becomes harder to solve as the
level of complexity rises (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). When the so-called
tipping point is reached, the recipient is not any longer able to solve the riddle
due to the high degree of difficulty that outweighs his/her comprehension (van
41
Mulken et al. 2014). Hence, in this thesis, low and medium complexities of
metaphors are compared. The focus is thereby set on juxtapositions and fusions,
as explained in chapter 2, section 2.4. As a result, the assumption of a significant
difference between treatment group 1 and 2 developed. Therefore, the
experiment holds the purpose of finding out, if there is a disparity between
juxtaposition and fusion in terms of their impact on brand image.
The experimental results suggest that hypothesis H1b cannot be supported. This
result is based on the outcomes of the MANOVA (see table 6 and 8), which
comprises nine out of ten variables with no statistical significance. Only one
variable (fresh, see table 8) shows a significance. However, this single significant
result appears to be less meaningful in comparison to the other nine not
significant variables. The significance for the adjective fresh can be justified by
the visualisation of tomatoes within the adverts from Heinz, as explained above.
Furthermore, the disproof of the hypothesis is additionally substantiated by the
answers of the follow-up questions, which are very consistent.
The lacking support for sub-hypothesis H1b contrasts the findings reported in
previous studies (see chapter 2, sections 2.2., 2.4.; e.g., Forceville 2008; van
Mulken et al. 2014). Specifically, theory suggests that the positive feelings
towards a metaphorical advert should increase with the levels of complexity
until a certain tipping point is reached (van Mulken et al. 2014). However, the
underlying experiment indicates that the participants evaluated both types of
metaphors as equal, as derived from the significance values and the answers of
the follow-up questions. Therefore, it becomes clear that both levels of
complexity are recognized by the participants as similar regarding their
attractiveness and impact. Possible reasons for this outcome are explained in
detail in the subsequent paragraphs.
First, the answers of the follow-up questions of the brands are analysed to show
the lack of significant differences between the advertisement including a
juxtaposition (metaphor of low complexity) and the advert using a fusion
(metaphor of medium complexity). Heineken is the first brand to be analysed,
followed by Heinz. Before the experiment, several recipients of treatment group
1 had a negative or just neutral opinion of Heineken and changed their mind to
the positive after seeing the juxtaposition, which reminded them of summer and
a refreshing feeling. This change also occurred within treatment group 2, where
participants were shown a fusion. When looking at Heinz, a similar outcome is
determined. Both juxtaposition and fusion influenced the participants in the
same way. The majority changed their opinion to the positive due to the natural
42
and funny attributes of the advertisement. However, among the participants
were also people who felt fooled after having seen the advert since they knew
that Heinz is not only made of tomatoes. Hence, they did not change their
opinion. To sum this up, the follow-up questions of both brands regarding
juxtaposition and fusion result in very similar answers, thus, no significant
differences between the levels of complexity.
Two variables (appetising for Heineken and natural for Heinz) even reveal a higher
value for treatment group 1 than treatment group 2. In addition, several answers
of the follow-up questions imply that the juxtaposition of Heineken was
recognized as being more attractive than the fusion. The literature review,
however, assumes more positive feelings towards the fusion since the solution
of the riddle requires more competence and thus flatters the viewer more (e.g.,
Forceville 2008; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; van Mulken et al. 2014). More
precisely, if a riddle is simple to solve, the recipient feels less challenged and,
thus, less satisfied after solving the riddle in comparison to successfully figuring
out a riddle of higher complexity (van Mulken et al. 2014). Therefore, the
fusions of the advertisements were expected to hold a higher increase of positive
opinions towards the brand. Possible causes for the appearance of higher values
in treatment group 1 concern the style of the shown advertisements (see
appendices B1, B2). More precisely, the selected juxtapositions and fusions hold
stylistic similarities in terms of the adverts’ colours and topics. Thus, the
deficiency of significant differences means that there are no preferences towards
one level of complexity. This explains small amplitudes in both directions,
towards more positive results of treatment group 1 or 2. To illustrate this, the
similarities will be explained in the following, ordered by brand.
For Heineken, it is the different background and presentation of the
advertisements that could have prevented a significant more positive effect of
the fusion. To clarify, the fusion is presented with a plain green background,
whereby the juxtaposition uses palm trees and different shades of green and
yellow. This more colourful background of the juxtaposition was recognized as
being more attractive than the plain green one, which constitutes a limitation of
this experiment (see section 6.3.). Regarding Heinz, the advertisements were not
recognized as being very different either. Several participants replied similarly to
the follow-up questions for the juxtaposition and the fusion in terms of the style
of the shown advertisements. The similarity of these two adverts is further
supported as they address the same issue – tomatoes as natural ingredients.
43
Thus, the selection of advertisements might have supported the similar
responses to the two different levels of complexity.
In a nutshell, the field experiment resulted in the support of hypotheses H1 and
H1a, but hypothesis H1b was not supported. Thus, the first two conjectures
confirm previous findings, while the last assumption contrasts preceding
studies. Possible explanations were discussed to interpret the outcomes based
on the empirical results and the underlying theories.
The results of this study imply the possible success of correctly implemented
visual metaphors. They suggest that visual metaphors can indeed positively
change the perception of a brand. Metaphors are attributed to increase the
advert’s overall impact (Grey 2000). In addition, the results show that
metaphors enhance the recipient's receptivity to multiple, positive inferences
regarding the brand being advertised. This knowledge should be used, by
purposefully using visual metaphors to improve the image of a brand.
The favourable attitude change caused by a visual metaphor is closely linked to
the subjective comprehension of an advertisement (Mick 1992). With regard to
the implementation, it should therefore be noted that the precondition for the
viewer to experience pleasure is his/her comprehension of the metaphor (van
Mulken et al. 2014). If this circumstance is given, it confers the advert a higher
degree of persuasiveness (van Mulken et al. 2014). As a result, it is wise not to
make the metaphor too complex, and thereby, too difficult to comprehend.
Consequently, the focus of the metaphor creation should lie on the recipients’
comprehension, since the underlying experiment indicates no impact of the
metaphor’s complexity.
44
6. Conclusion
This final chapter summarises the underlying thesis by providing a brief
theoretical reflection about the purpose, method and results of the applied field
experiment. Moreover, managerial implications comprise advices for marketers
regarding the use of visual metaphors within print advertising. This thesis
concludes with outlining limitations and future research recommendations.
6.1. Theoretical reflection
The aim of this thesis was to investigate the impact of visual metaphor
advertising on brand image by focusing on the metaphor’s different levels of
complexity. The focus is hereby set on visual metaphors with low and medium
complexity. Complexity refers to the spatial distribution of the pictorial
elements within a metaphorical advertisement and the increasing necessary time
for the process of inferring to interpret the visual metaphor appropriately
(Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).
Previous studies have shown that the customer’s attention, receptivity,
involvement and emotional reaction can get more intensively affected by a
metaphorical advert than by a non-metaphorical advert (Ang & Ching Lim 2006;
Mothersbaugh et al. 2002; McQuarrie & Mick 2003; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005;
Phillips 1997; Phillips & McQuarrie 2009; Toncar & Munch 2001). However, to
the authors’ knowledge, the impact of metaphorical advertisements on brand
image has not yet been investigated. This is surprising because the marketing
activities of a company should primarily aim to positively influence the
consumer’s perception and attitudes towards the brand and, thus, the brand
image. Hence, this thesis addresses this knowledge gap. The findings will help
marketers to understand, if and how visual metaphors can allow them to
enhance a company’s brand image.
To investigate the impact of visual metaphors on brand image, a quantitative
research design has been chosen. Thereby, a field experiment with two
treatment groups (i.e. low and medium complex metaphorical adverts) and one
control group (i.e. non-metaphorical adverts) served as the base. In total, 102
people participated in the study. Each participant got tested on only one
treatment and got then compared to those exposed to the other treatments. The
empirical results suggest that visual metaphors can have a positive impact on
the consumer’s perception of a brand. This finding indicates that the riddle
behind the metaphor can make a positive impression for the viewer of the
45
advertisements, and thus enables marketers to establish a positive relationship
between the communicator and the viewer (Berlyne 1974; Huhmann &
Albinsson 2012; McQuarrie & Mick 1999; Norrick 2003; van Mulken et al.
2014).
Based on the comprehensive literature review, it was assumed that the different
complexity levels of the metaphor reveal a significant difference regarding their
impact on the participants’ brand image (see e.g., Huhmann & Albinsson 2012;
McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; van Mulken et al. 2014). The results of this study,
however, do not support the findings of these previous studies. In fact, the
experiment results suggest that the metaphor’s different level of complexity (low
vs. medium) hardly differ in their impact. This finding implies that the level of
a metaphor’s complexity might not in all cases play a decisive role in terms of
its influence on brand image. Instead, the results suggest that the key point to
achieve a positive evaluation of the brand is the metaphorical understanding of
the riddle. In sum, the results of this thesis highlight that the use of visual
metaphors can have positive effects for the underlying company, if
implemented correctly (Chang & Yen 2013; Grey 2000; McQuarrie & Phillips
2005; Norrick 2003).
6.2. Managerial implications
The findings of this thesis provide several practical implications, especially in
helping marketers by using marketing metaphors to establish a positive bond
between the communicating brand and the observer.
Firstly, the comparison of the two levels of complexity (i.e. low vs. medium
complexity) resulted in no significant difference, which shifts the focus of the
metaphor creation to the recipients’ comprehension. Consequently, marketers
should optimize the comprehension of the riddle instead of focusing on the
ultimate level of complexity to trigger the most positive reaction.
Second, the results of this thesis indicate how crucial the riddle of the metaphor
is for a successful implementation. When using marketing metaphors, it is
therefore important to ensure that the interplay between target and source is
understandable. To achieve this, marketers should carefully select the object
whose attributes are transferred to the advertised product. Once a good
selection has been made, it is then necessary to successfully establish a clear link
between the advertised product and the source. It should be apparent to the
viewer (i.e. the consumer) that these two elements share at least one feature
46
attribute. If this circumstance is given, it confers the advert a higher degree of
persuasiveness, and, thus, leads to a better evaluation of the advertised brand.
Thirdly, this thesis indicates that the mere fact that the viewer successfully
solved the riddle has already a positive effect on the brand. Hence, the
favourable attitude change triggered by a visual metaphor is closely linked to the
subjective comprehension of the metaphorical advert. With regard to the
implementation, it should therefore be noted that the precondition for the
viewer to experience pleasure is his/her comprehension of the metaphor.
Marketers should hence focus on the clarity and coherence of the riddle. The
complexity level of the riddle can thereby be adapted by the marketers, for
example, based on the educational level, of the underlying target group.
Overall, the findings of this thesis support a higher performance resulting from
metaphorical adverts over direct and straightforward messages and, thus, draws
attention to the potential of using visual metaphors in the daily advertising
business. Consequently, visual metaphors should therefore be used with
increased frequency to enhance the impact of print advertising.
6.3. Limitations and future research recommendations
Although this thesis was planned and carried out with care, it is subject to some
limitations, which are briefly described here. These limitations open up new
avenues for future research which are discussed in this section.
Firstly, a critical reflection is required concerning the sample of the underlying
field experiment. Strictly speaking, no random selection has been carried out
since the selection of participants comprises only students of the Karlstad
university. Nevertheless, the participants represent typical consumers of these
brands and were queried in their natural surroundings. Thus, further research
could apply the same procedure to a different sample and/or without a
geographical restriction.
The second limitation concerns the application of the experiment. Participants
had to undergo two identical runs of the questionnaire due to the two queried
brands. The same procedure might have led to a research design that was to a
certain extent obvious to the respondents. This may have enabled the
participants to guess which results the researchers were seeking for (i.e. learning
effect). In addition, a psychic phenomenon may have occurred, which can be
described as a prompting character (Hilgert et al. 2016). This refers to the
researchers’ presence which unintentionally might have asked for something
47
specific. Hence, the respondents may have had the intention to help the
researchers by answering in a way they assumed to be helpful (Hilgert et al.
2016). However, to prevent such behaviour or researchers’ bias, a control group
has been used to assure valid results. In addition, no hints were given away, and
after the explanation of the questionnaire, the researchers kept a proper
distance.
In addition, the selection of brands and, thus, advertisements require critical
reflection. As explained in section 5.2., possible reasons for the lack of the
impact’s difference between low and medium complex metaphors might be
related with the style of the selected advertisements. The brands including their
advertisements, however, were carefully chosen based on well-established
criteria (see section 2.4.). An interesting future study could show the visualised
metaphor within an advert by excluding the background and just present the
pure visual metaphor. Thereby, outer factors, like the style or headings of the
advert, could be eliminated. This could be done by using a lab experimental
design.
Moreover, one of the selected brands advertises an alcoholic drink (i.e. beer).
This could lead to the assumption that some of the participants, who
intentionally avoid alcoholic beverages, might not have been able to answer the
questions accordingly. However, for the underlying experiment this fact might
have been of minor importance. To illustrate this, the few interviewed students
who were not beer drinker, were still able to answer the questionnaire in an
appropriate way since they knew Heineken and did not need to be consumers
to answer questions referring to the brand image appropriately. However, this
thesis focused only on two well-known brands in the food industry. Therefore,
it is necessary to further investigate the impact of visual metaphors on other
product categories and industries. In addition, future studies are required that
concentrate on new, less well-known brands to see if there are differences
regarding their impact.
Finally, future research recommendations include the enhanced research on
metaphors’ complexity levels, since there are few previous studies regarding this
topic and, additionally, this thesis contrasts theory concerning those levels and
their different impacts.
48
References
Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. New York: The Free Press.
Allman, H. F., Fenik, A. P., Hewett, K. & Morgan, F. N. (2016). Brand Image Evaluations: The Interactive Roles of Country of Manufacture, Brand Concept, and Vertical Line Extension Type. Journal of International Marketing, 24(2), 40–61.
Amankwaa, L. (2016). Creating Protocols for Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 23(3), 121–127.
Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., Sarshar, M. & Newton, R. (2002). Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the Built Environment: Application of “mixed” Research Approach. Work Study, 51(1), 17–31.
Ang, S. H. & Ching Lim, E. A. (2006). The Influence of Metaphors and Product Type on Brand Personality Perceptions and Attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 35(2), 39–53.
Ashley, A. L. (2004). Figurative Language Effects on the Processing of Persuasive Discourse. University of Memphis.
Baechler, R. & Seiler, G. (2016). Complexity, Isolation, and Variation. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Batey, M. (2014). Creating Meaningful Brands: How Brands Evolve from Labels on Products to Icons of Meaning. In Kompella, K. (ed.) The Definite Book of Branding. California: SAGE Publications, 22–44.
Berlyne, D. (1974). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics. New York: University of Illinois Press.
Bosman, J. & Hagendoorn, L. (1991). Effects of Literal and Metaphorical Persuasive Messages. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 6(4), 271–292.
Bruhn, M. (2009). Mediawerbung. In Bruhn, M., Esch, F.-R. & Langner, T. (eds.) Handbuch Kommunikation. Grundlagen – Innovative Ansätze – Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Gabler, 45–66.
Bulmer, S. L. & Buchanan-Oliver, M. (2004). Meaningless or Meaningful? Interpretation and Intentionality in Post-Modern Communication. Journal of Marketing Communication, 10(1), 1–15.
Burke, K. (1945). A Grammar of Motives. New York: Salem Press Encyclopedia of Literature.
Capelli, S. & Jolibert, A. (2009). Metaphor’s Validity in Marketing Research. Psychology & Marketing, 26(12), 1079–1090.
Carver, R. P. (1978). The Case Against Statistical Significance Testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48(3), 378–399.
Chang, C-T. & Yen, C-T. (2013). Missing Ingredients in Metaphor Advertising: the Right Formula of Metaphor Type, Product Type and Need for Cognition. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55–65.
49
Charness, G., Gneezy, U. & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental Methods: Between-subject and Within-subject Design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1(81), 1–8.
Chen, C.-C., Chen, P.-K. & Huang, C.-E. (2012). Brands and Consumer Behavior. Social Behaviour and Personality, 40(1), 105–114.
Connelly, L. M. (2016). Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research. MEDSURG Nursing, 25(6), 435–436.
Corbett, E. P. J. (1965). Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cornelissen, J. P. (2003). Metaphor as a Method in the Domain of Marketing. Psychology & Marketing, 20(3), 209–225.
Cornelissen, J. P. & Kafouros, M. (2008). Metaphors and Theory Building in Organization Theory: What Determines the Impact of a Metaphor on Theory? British Journal of Management, 4(19), 365–379.
Del Río, B., Vázquez, R. & Iglesias, V. (2001). The Effects of Brand Associations on Consumer Response. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(5), 410–425.
Dennis, M. L. (1990). Assessing the Validity of Randomized Field Experiments: An Example of Drug Abuse Treatment Research. Center for Social Research and Policy Analysis- Research Triangle Institute Evaluation Review, 14(4), 347–373.
DeRosia, E. D. (2008). Rediscovering Theory: Integrating Ancient Hypotheses and Modern Empirical Evidence of the Audience-Response Effects of Rhetorical Figures. In Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (eds.) Go Figure: New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 21–34.
Dobni, D. & Zinkhan, G. M. (1990). In Search of Brand Image: A Foundation Analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 17(1), 110–119.
Esch, F.-R. (Ed.) (2005). Moderne Markenführung. Grundlagen - Innovative Ansätze - Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
Esch, F.-R., Langner, T. & Rempel, J. E. (2005a). Ansätze zur Erfassung und Entwicklung von Markenidentität. In Esch, F.-R. (ed.) Moderne Markenführung. Grundlagen - Innovative Ansätze - Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, 103–130.
Esch, F.-R., Wicke, A. & Rempel, J. E. (2005b). Herausforderungen und Aufgaben des Markenmanagements. In Esch, F.-R. (ed.) Moderne Markenführung. Grundlagen - Innovative Ansätze - Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, 3–55.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A. & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical Power Analyses Using G*Power 3.1: Tests for Correlation and Regression Analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.
Forceville, C. (2008). Pictorial and multimodal metaphor in commercials. In McQuarrie, B. & Phillips, J. (eds.) Go Figure! New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric. Armonk N.Y.: Routledge, 272–310.
Gkiouzepas, L. & Hogg, M. K. (2011). Articulating a new framework for visual metaphors in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 103–120.
Gratzer, K. & Tesfaye, B. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility – a case study on private and public corporations in Sweden. Stockholm: South Stockholm University.
50
Grey, W. (2000). Metaphor and Meaning. Minerva: An Internet Journal of Philosophy, 4, 1–7.
Hansen, F. & Christensen, L. B. (2003). Branding and Advertising. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur Press.
Hilgert, L., Kroh, M. & Richter, D. (2016). The Effect of face-to-face Interviewing on Personality Measurement. Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 133–136.
Hitchon, J. (1991). Effects of Metaphoric vs. Literal Headlines on Advertising Persuasion. Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 752–753.
Hoeken, H., Swanepoel, P., Saal, E. & Jansen, C. J. M. (2009). Using Message Form to Stimulate Conversations: The Case of Tropes. Communication Theory, 19(1), 49–65.
Huhmann, B. A. & Albinsson, P. A. (2012). Does Rhetoric Impact Advertising Effectiveness with Liking Controlled? European Journal of Marketing, 46(11/12), 1476–1500.
Hunt, K. A. & Keaveney, S. M. (1994). A Process Model of the Effects of Price Promotions and Brand Image. Psychology & Marketing, 11(6), 511–532.
Jeong, S.-H. (2008). Visual Metaphor in Advertising: Is the Persuasive Effect Attributable to Visual Argumentation or Metaphorical Rhetoric? Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(1), 59–73.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.
Kim, J., Baek, Y. & Choi, Y. H. (2012). The Structural Effects of Metaphor-elicited Cognitive and Affective Elaboration Levels on Attitude toward the Ad. Journal of Advertising, 41(2), 77–96.
Kisielius, J. & Sternthal, B. (1986). Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(4), 418–431.
Korstjens, I. & Moser, A. (2017). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 1–5.
Kotler, P. & Keller, K. L. (2012). Marketing Management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214–222.
Lagerwerf, L. & Meijers, A. (2008). Openness in Metaphorical and Straightforward Advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 37(2), 19–30.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lee, G. C. & Leh, F. C. Y. (2011). Dimensions of Customer-Based Brand Equity: A Study on Malaysian Brands. Journal of Marketing Research and Case Studies,, 1–10.
Low, G. S. & Lamb Jr., C. W. (2000). The Measurement and Dimensionality of Brand Associations. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(6), 350–370.
Lutz, K. A. & Lutz, R. J. (1977). Effects of Interactive Imagery on Learning: Application to Advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 493–498.
51
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. & Mick, D. G. (2009). A Laboratory Study of the Effect of Verbal Versus Repetition when Consumers are not Directed to Process Advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 287-31.
McQuarrie, E. F. & Phillips, B. J. (2005). Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7–20.
Meenaghan, T. (1995). The Role of Advertising in Brand Image Development. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 4(4), 23–34.
Mick, D. G. (1992). Levels of Subjective Comprehension in Advertising Processing and Their Relations to Ad Perceptions, Attitudes, and Memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 411-424.
Miletsky, J. I. & Smith, G. (2009). Perspectives on Branding. Boston: Course PTR.
Morgan, S. E. & Reichert, T. (1999). The Message is in the Metaphor: Assessing the Comprehension of Metaphors in Advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 1–12.
Morrison, B. J. & Dainoff, M. J. (1972). Advertisement Complexity and Looking Time. Journal of Marketing Research, 9(4), 396–400.
Mothersbaugh, D., Huhmann, B. & Franke, G. (2002). Combinatory and Separative Effects of Rhetorical Figures on Consumers’ Effort and Focus in Ad Processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 589–602.
Nandan, S. (2004). An Exploration of the Brand Identity–Brand Image Linkage: A Communications Perspective. Brand Management, 12(4), 264–278.
Nelson, M. R. & Hitchon, J. C. (1995). Theory of Synesthesia Applied to Persuasion in Print Advertising Headlines. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 72(2), 346–360.
Newman, I. & Benz, C. R. (1998). Qualitative-Quantitative Research Methodology: Exploring the Interactive Continuum. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issues in Conversational Joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(9), 1333–1359.
Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J. & MacInnis, D. J. (1986). Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management. Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 135–145.
Park, H.-J. & Rabolt, N. J. (2009). Cultural Value, Consumption Value, and Global Brand Image: A Cross-National Study. Psychology & Marketing, 26(8), 714–735.
52
Phillips, B. J. (1997). Thinking Into It: Consumer Interpretation 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.
Phillips, B. J. (2003). Understanding Visual Metaphor in Advertising. In Scott, L. M. & Batra, R. (eds.) Persuasive Imagery: A Consumer Response Perspective. Mahwah, NF: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
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.
Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (2009). Impact of Advertising Metaphor on Consumer Belief. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 49–61.
Pieters, R. & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention Capture and Transfer in Advertising: Brand, Pictorial, and Text-Size Effects. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 36–50.
Revilla, M., Saris, W. & Krosnick, J. (2014). Choosing the Number of Categories in Agree-Disagree Scales. Sociological Methods & Research, 43(1), 73–97.
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.
Sakr, A. (2016). The Effect of Visual Metaphor on Advertising Response: an Integrative Framework. Birmingham: Aston University.
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H. & Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research. Quality & Quantity, 36(1), 43–53.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students. 6th edition. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Savin, N. E. (1980). The Bonferroni and the Scheffé Multiple Comparison Procedures. Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 255–273.
Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in Advertising: The need for a Theory of Visual Rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 252–273.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Shan, C., Mingyang, Y. & Xue, K. (2017). Effects of Metaphor Advertising on Brand Extension Evaluation: Construal Level as Mediator. Social Behavior & Personality: an international journal, 45(6), 967–985.
Shank, M. D. & Langmeyer, L. (1993). Does Personality Influence Brand Image? The Journal of Psychology, 128(2), 157–164.
Sopory, P. (2008). Metaphor and Intra-Attitudinal Structural Coherence. Communication Studies, 59(2), 164–181.
53
Stathakopoulos, V., Theodorakis, I. G. & Mastoridou, E. (2008). Visual and Verbal Rhetoric in Advertising: The Case of Resonance. International Journal of Advertising, 27(4), 629–658.
Stern, B. B. (1990). Beauty and Joy in Metaphorical Advertising: The Poetic Dimension. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 71–77.
Till, B. D., Baack, D. & Waterman, B. (2011). Strategic Brand Association Maps: Developing Brand Insight. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 20(2), 92–100.
Todorov, V. & Filzmoser, P. (2010). Robust Statistic for the One-way MANOVA. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 54(1), 37–48.
Toncar, M. & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer Responses to Tropes in Print Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55–65.
van Mulken, M., van Hooft, A. & Nederstigt, U. (2014). Finding the Tipping Point: Visual Metaphor and Conceptual Complexity in Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 333–343.
van Reijmersdal, E. A., Neijens, P. C. & Smit, E. G. (2007). Effects of Television Brand Placement on Brand Image. Psychology & Marketing, 24(5), 403–420.
Vandebosch, H. (2008). Captive Population. In Given, L. M. (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles, London: SAGE Publications.
Wänke, M., Herrman, A. & Schaffner, D. (2007). Brand Name Influence on Brand Perception. Psychology & Marketing, 24(1), 1–24.
Yu, C. (2009). Metaphors in Food Advertising Slogans. Kristianstad: Kristianstad University College.
Zaltman, G. & Coulter, R. H. (1995). Seeing the Voice of the Customer: Metaphor-Based Advertising Research. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(4), 35–51.
Zhou, L., Yang, Z. & Hui, M. K. (2010). Non-local or Local Brands? A Multi-level Investigation into Confidence in Brand Origin Identification and its Strategic Implications. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(2), 202–218.
Zymner, R. (1993). Ein fremdes Wort: Zur Theorie der Metapher. Zeitschrift für Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft, 25, 3–33.
54
Appendix
Appendix A: Questionnaire
55
56
– Advertisement treatment –
– Follow-up questions –
57
58
– Advertisement treatment –
59
– Follow-up questions –
60
Appendix B1: Treatment group 1 - ads with metaphors of low complexity
Heineken:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f3/36/7d/f3367dc862422a35824d4bb644be52e8.jpg
Heinz Ketchup:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/04/98/cd/0498cdd66d92739bbe7b9fac5a5646b2.jpg
61
Appendix B2: Treatment group 2 - ads with metaphors of medium complexity
Heineken:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b9/6d/5f/b96d5f80c4df3426b4e6294380d6e325.jpg + customisation of the lettering ”be fresh” from another Heineken advertisement
Heinz Ketchup:
https://wba-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Heinz-European-ad.jpg
62
Appendix B3: Control group - non-metaphorical ads
Heineken:
https://naotw-pd.s3.amazonaws.com/nairo_aotw.jpg
Heinz Ketchup:
https://themarketingagenda.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/heinz-header-2.png?w=1200