TOWARDS A STRUCTURAL THEORY OF CREATIVITY IN PRINT ADVERTISING: THE REMOTE ASSOCIATE MATCHING MODEL
Lawrence Ang, PhD
Macquarie Graduate School of Management Macquarie University
Abstract
The aim of this paper however is to present a structural model of creativity in print advertising called the Remote Associate Matching (RAM) model. This model states that the essence of creativity lies in being able to associate seemingly remote, or unusual ideas together, such that they are linked to an attribute or benefit of the advertised product. Three essential components of the RAM model are the conveyor (ie the unusual picture in the ad), the
product-representation (ie the advertised product or service), and the attribute prompt (ie the headline or copy).
Introduction
Creativity in advertising is considered to be an important aspect of advertising. And yet as rightly pointed out by Reid, King and DeLorne (1998), it is probably the least understood area of advertising management. White (1972) calls creativity the “X” factor, alluding to its
seemingly unknown quality. As we move towards the new millennium, creativity in advertising still arouses debate and rhetoric (Lukas, 1998). Part of the reason why little
progress has been made in this area is because no structural model of advertising creativity has been put forward. Without a structural model, it is difficult to understand how the various elements of an ad contribute to the perception of creativity and hence make empirical testing possible.
The RAM model
Aaker and Stayman (1990) found in a factor-analytical study that people tend to use words like, ‘clever, imaginative, original, humorous’ to describe an underlying dimension that the author calls the ‘creative’ dimension. The aim of this paper is go beyond this perception and present a structural model of creativity in print advertising called the Remote Associate Matching (RAM) model. Developed by the author (Ang, 1995), it has its roots in Mednick's (1962) theory of creativity.
Unusual picture (ie conveyor)
Product picture/ logo(ie product representation) H eadline or copy (ie attribute-benefit prompt) Match 1. 2. 5. 3. 4.
attention C ognitive puzzle
search activation
Figure 1
According to RAM, a print ad is perceived to be creative (ie. clever, imaginative and amusing) when a seemingly unusual, unrelated or remote picture, termed conveyor, can be linked to an attribute or benefit of the advertised product using the headline or copy. By an unusual visual, it means the picture may be unique or rarely seen in advertising, or/and the object depicted in the visual may be unbelievable or unrealistic, or/and the object may be something that is not normally associated with the product category. For example, an ad for Ford has a picture of a juggler balancing a number of hoops (as often seen in circus). At first glance, one may wonder why a juggler is used in a car ad? The ad is unusual because one would not normally associate a juggler with a car, a remote visual. The headline reads, “Fordcare presents a co-ordinated approach to car buying”. It is only by reading the headline that the link between juggling and the benefit of a ‘co-ordinated approach’ to buying a car becomes apparent. Suddenly, the selling point of the ad (ie the benefit) becomes clear. Thus, the creative idea is to use the unusual nature of the conveyor to attract the attention of the reader. And since the relationship to the product is a puzzle, it will motivate the reader to search for the attribute-benefit of the product. When this is found, (ie. usually in the headline or copy), the match between the unusual visual and the product is said to occur. This is called resolution. Figure 1 above illustrates the process.
Hypotheses
It is hypothesised that an ad will be perceived to be more creative (i.e. clever, imaginative and amusing) if the visual is extremely unusual (without arousing negative feelings) and yet can be linked to the product attribute or benefit. Linkage or resolution will make the ad more comprehensible - that is making the selling point of the product clear. This will influence brand attitude positively. However, if the link cannot be established, then understanding the selling point of the ad will suffer and hence the brand attitude effects will be attenuated. To test this model, experimental print ads are developed using the structural model as a guide.
Experimental Manipulation Manipulation of remoteness
A total of six print ads were created using the product categories of chilli sauce and soft drinks. There were three ads for each product category, such that each was increasingly more remote than the other. All the ads show a main picture and a headline and were pretested with a total of 84 subjects. They were equally clear and of high quality (using an 11-point scale). The first ad simply shows the product, the second ad shows the product accompanied by a non-remote conveyor, while the last ad shows the product with a remote conveyor. The tables below illustrate the various ad concepts together with the accompanying headline.
Headline = Drink that gives you that extra energy
Can of drink Drink + Young woman lifting weights
Drink + Old woman lifting a sofa with one finger
Total remoteness score
(average) 3.1 4.4 7.6
Headline = It is hot
Bottle of sauce Chilli sauce + Chillies Chilli sauce + Burning chopstick
Total remoteness score
(average) 2.7 3.5 7.1
Unusualness was pretested by asking a total of 84 subjects to rate each ad on two 11-point scales (from 0 to 10) anchored on the following adjectives:
• common-unique advertising, and often-rarely seen in other advertising
• believable-unbelievable and realistic-unrealistic
• finally the extent to which the conveyor and the product were likely to be associated or occur together in the same ad
The three measures were averaged to form a single index, called ‘remoteness’ shown in the tables above. The greater the remoteness index, the more unusual the ad is said to be. Analysis of variance revealed that remoteness was well manipulated for both product categories. In the case of the chilli sauce, the remoteness scores for the three advertisements were 2.7, 3.5, and 7.1. Simple main effects test revealed a significant overall difference
[F(2,81) = 88]. Similarly, in the case of the soft drink, the increasing remoteness scores of 3.1, 4.4. and 7.6 also revealed a significant overall difference [F(2,81) = 129]. Contrast testing also revealed significant differences (p<.05) between each type of ad for both product categories.
Manipulation of resolution
It is well known within the cognitive as well as in the advertising literature that the more unusual the picture, the longer people tend to fixate to try to understand it (Berlyne, 1960; Houston, Childers, 1987; Ratneshwar and Chaiken, 1991; Goodstein, 1993). Thus to manipulate resolution, the time of ad exposure was varied, such that in the resolution
condition, subjects were given adequate time to process the ad (15 seconds), while in the non-resolution condition, the exposure time was considerably limited (4 seconds). In other words, the shorter the time, the more difficult it is for comprehension to occur. To further increase the difficulty of resolution, all the target ads were inserted in a stream of distractor ads.
Results
The results showed that the predicted effect was consistently supported across the two product categories. That is, as ads became more and more remote, subjects perceived them as more creative (ie. clever, imaginative and amusing, measured on a 11-point scale, 0 to 10). But this only occurs in the 15-second condition (mean = 2.3, 3.1, 7.3 for chilli sauce; 1.0, 2.7, and 7.8 for soft drink).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Bottle of sauce Chillies Burning
chopstick Creativity ratings 4 seconds 15 seconds (t=7.9, r=2.8) * 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Can of drink Young woman Old woman
Creativity ratings 4 seconds 15 seconds (t=8.7, r=.27) * * (t=3.6, r=.26)
Figure 2. Creativity ratings for different types of chilli sauce advertisements exposed for 4 and 15 seconds (asterisk means a sig. contrast)
Figure 3. Creativity ratings for different types of soft drink advertisements exposed for 4 and 15
seconds(asterisk means a sig. contrast)
Simple effects test revealed this to be significant [F(2,63) = 48.5 for chilli sauce; F(2,63) = 93 for soft drink] overall. In the 4-second condition, where there was less time to process the ad, the creativity effect of the remote conveyors became attenuated for both product categories (mean = 2.5, 2.7, 3.1 for chilli sauce; 2.1, 2.2, 2.8 for soft drink) with no overall significant difference (p>.05) in the simple effects test [F(2,63) < 1 for chilli sauce and soft drink] (see figure 2 & 3).
Brand attitude effects
The same phenomenon is also seen in brand attitude. That is the more remote the conveyors of the ad were, the higher were the brand attitude ratings, but only when the ads were exposed for 15 seconds (mean = 0.3, 1.0, and 2.6 for chilli sauce; mean = -2.2, 0.6 and 2.1 for soft drink). Simple effects test revealed this to be significant overall (p<.05) for both product categories [F(2,63) = 9.5 for chilli sauce; F(2,63) = 18]. However when the ads were exposed for four seconds, brand attitude actually decreased (mean = 0.4, 0.1, and -1.9 for the chilli sauce; 0.2, -0.5, and -2.9 for soft drink), when subjects have less time to process the ad. Simple effects test revealed this to be significant overall [F(2,63) = 5.1 for chilli sauce; F(2,63) = 6.5 for soft drink] (see figures 4 and 5).
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Bottle of sauce Chillies Burning
chopstick
Brand attitude ratings
4 seconds 15 seconds (t=3.7, r=.26) * (t=2.9, r=.24) * -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Can of drink Young woman Old woman
Brand attitude ratings
4 seconds 15 seconds (t=3.4, r=.25) * * (t=4, r=.26) (t=2, r=.21) *
Figure 4. Brand attitude ratings for different types of chilli sauce advertisements exposed for 4 and 15 seconds (asterisk means a sig.
contrast)
Figure 5. Brand attitude for different types of soft drink advertisements exposed for 4 and 15 seconds (asterisk means a sig. contrast)
Conclusion
In summary, this paper presents a new way of conceptualising and achieving creativity in print advertising. The hypotheses were supported, that is the more remote or unusual the visual, the more likely it is perceived to be creative, provided a product attribute-benefit link can be made. The RAM model is more precise and measurable than what has been conceptualised in the past including the schema-related concepts like incongruency-relevance (eg. Heckler and Childers, 1992), which have been criticised for being vague (Ang, 1995; see also Eysenck and Kean, 1990 and Sadoski, Paivio and Goetz, 1991). This serves to demystify how and why creativity works in print advertising. It is hoped that this paper will stimulate more interest in creativity research into advertising in the new millennium.
References
Aaker, D.A. and Stayman, D.M. (1990). Measuring audience perceptions of commercials and relating them to ad impact. Journal of Advertising Research, 30, 7-17
Ang (1995). Towards a theory of creativity in print advertising: The case of the Remote Associate Matching model. PhD thesis submitted to UNSW.
Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity. New York: McGraw Hill.
Eysenck, M. W., & Kean, M. T. (1990). Cognitive Psychology: A student's handbook. East Sussex: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goodstein, R. C. (1993). Category-based Applications and Extensions in Advertising: Motivating More Extensive Ad Processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(June), 87-99. Heckler, S. E., & Childers, T. L. (1992). The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: What is incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research,
18(March), 475-492.
Lukas, P. (1998). Admen’s Creative Glut. Fortune, June 8, 24-25.
Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220-232.
Ratneshwar, S., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Comprehension's role in persuasion: The case of its moderating effect on the persuasive impact of source cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 52-62.
Reid, L., King, K. and DeLorme, D. (1998). Top-Level Agency Creatives Look at Advertising Creativity Then and Now. Journal of Advertising, 27 (2), 1-16
Sadoski, M., Paivio, A., & Goetz, E. T. (1991). A Critique of Schema Theory in Reading and a Dual Coding Alternative. Reading Research Quarterly, 26(4), 463-484.
White, G. (1972). Creativity: The X factor in advertising theory. Journal of Advertising, 1(1), 28-32.
