The use of symbols,
relationships and emotions in advertising has grown over the years, and so has
the level of sophistication. There is less text and more association. From a
research perspective, the complexity of evaluating advertising and measuring
its impact has increased considerably. Emotions and symbols are harder to gauge
than persuasion or salience.
Salience is measured by metrics such as top-of-mind,
spontaneous and aided brand awareness. Persuasion is usually measured in terms
of pre/post shift in disposition to purchase brand. Note, however, that claimed
disposition to purchase normally turns out to be higher than actual behaviour
might suggest. What consumer claim they will do is usually not the same as what
they actually do.
The likeability of an ad is usually measured in
terms of rating on a set of attributes that relate to affinity. Imagery can be
measured using the methods described in Chapter Brand Sensing. Symbolism however is relatively hard to gauge
because it is often non-verbal and difficult to describe. As such, it is not
always feasible to assess the full significance of symbols and their impact in advertising.
Consumers’ relationships with brands are complex in
nature, and consequently difficult to describe or measure. And with regard to
emotions, verbal responses do not usually elicit their true nature. Moreover, consumers
often find it hard to verbalize emotions, and they may not even be conscious of
their existence. In light of this, indirect interviewing methods and
non-verbal, physiological approaches are gaining acceptance. Details about these
measurement methods and the prevailing techniques in advertising evaluation are
covered in the next chapter, Advertising Analytics.
