MRG Meeting – Persuasion Or Enhancement

Last night’s MRG meeting, taken by Andy Farr of Millward Brown, was entitled “Persuasion or Enhancement? – An Experiment.” The purpose of the evening was to put forward evidence that most advertising does not persuade people when they are exposed to it but instead influences the conclusions they reach later when they try the products or services.

Farr began by saying he saw the evening as an opportunity to throw some experimental data “into the melting pot.” The two theories of persuasion and enhancement were then explained. The persuasion theory suggests that opinions about a brand improve as people watch an ad. Farr said that most people within the advertising industry use this theory. The enhancement theory, on the other hand, implies that opinions of a brand are formed when purchasing decisions are taken and not at the time that the ads are seen. In this case an ad enhances over the long-term and does not necessarily produce a quick response.

Farr claimed that the persuasion model leads to the conclusion that effective advertising is constantly finding new things to say. He challenged this by using the example of the Andrex Puppy, if this theory were true there would be no role for the puppy in the Andrex ads. He also pointed out that it is very difficult to reposition brands despite new advertising that says something different about the brand. If the persuasion theory were true then this would not be so difficult.

Millward Brown’s experimental research to back up their enhancement theory was then explained. The research involved a sample of 1000 women aged 16-54 within the ABC1C2D groups. The respondents were told they were testing a satellite TV programme and were given a video of the programme to watch. The video included two ad breaks with test ads for the brands being used in the research, it also included dummy ads for other brands not being used.

The respondents were then asked to complete a detailed questionnaire. A thank you basket of groceries was then left with them, some baskets included a sample of the brands being tested. Two weeks later the respondents were interviewed by telephone and were asked which brand they would buy next time they were purchasing a particular product brand.

The sample was split into four groups of 250. One group saw the ad, another was given the sample, the third was exposed to both the ad and the sample and the final group saw neither the ad or the sample. Four different brands were used in the experiment; Foxes Crunch Biscuits, Needlers Sensations, Aqua Libra and Wisdom Reflex. They were all low penetration brands so as to give both potential persuasion and enhancement.

The results produced a negative effect for the persuasion model, with the group who had seen only the ad less likely to buy the particular product brand than those who had not seen the ad. Positive results were achieved for the enhancement model with the respondents who had seen the ad and tried the sample more likely to buy the product than those who had only been exposed to the sample.

Enhancement Model Results - Those Likely To Buy Product

Millward Brown’s conclusions from the research were that perceptions are more readily influenced by enhancement when the brand is tried, than by persuasion at the time when the ad is seen. Farr suggested that to accept this conclusion would mean a conceptual shift for many in the advertising industry.

Farr ended by pointing to three implications;

• Ad effects are smoothed. The full effects are seen when the product is tried.

• It is remembered ad messages and images that enhance perceptions reached during trial.

• Ad generated expectations need to fit with the reality of the product.

In the question session at the end of the meeting Jenny Beck asked if there had been any similar research into other media such as press and was enhancement likely to be lower or higher for press ads. Farr responded by saying that there had been no specific press research but that he believes the enhancement effect of press advertising could be more immediate, as it has the potential to communicate immediately.

Mike Goodman then questioned the brands that had been chosen for the experiment. He felt that a more positive result for the persuasion model could have been achieved if different product groups had been chosen. He believed the products chosen were peripheral and that products that are bought/chosen more frequently are more sensitive to advertising.