Assessing the Imagination Scale’s Nomological Validity: Effect of Hedonic versus Utilitarian Product Types and Abstract versus Concrete Advertising Execution

Ike Janita Dewi; Swee Hoon Ang

doi:10.22146/gamaijb.51111

Assessing the Imagination Scale’s Nomological Validity: Effect of Hedonic versus Utilitarian Product Types and Abstract versus Concrete Advertising Execution

Ike Janita Dewi, Swee Hoon Ang

(Submitted 2 November 2019)

(Published 30 August 2020)

Abstract

This research builds on a study of advertisement-evoked imagination scale developed by Dewi and Ang (2015). The imagination scale contains four types of imagination, that is, benefit-anticipatory imagination, emotional-bonding imagination, symbolic imagination, and mind-wandering imagination.In this paper, the proposed constructs of the imagination types are related to other relevant constructs existing in marketing literature.The purpose of this research is twofold. First, it establishes the nomological validity of the imagination measures by placing it in the context of hedonic-utilitarian concepts proposed by Holbrook and Hirschman (1983). Second, the research empirically studies the effect of situational factor, that is concrete versus abstract advertisement execution, on imagination elicitation. The study is an experiment which employs mixed factor design involving eight sub-groups of participants. Results of the research demonstrate the nomological validity of the imagination scale where the four types of imagination were elicited in response to hedonic/utilitarian product depicted in the ad and situational factors (that is, abstract versus concrete ads).

Keywords

Imagination, hedonic, utilitarian, abstract, concrete ads.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.22146/gamaijb.51111

References

Abraham, Anna. 2014. The Imaginative Mind. Human Brain Mapping, 37, 4197–4211.

Abraham, Magid M. and Leonard M. Lodish. 1990. Getting the Most Out of Advertising and Promotions. Harvard Business Review, 3 (May/June), 50-63.

Alesandrini, K. L., & A. A Sheikh. 1983. Research on imagery: Implications for advertising. In Anees A. Sheikh (Ed), Imagery: Current theory, research, and application (pp. 135–147). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Algom, D., & I. Lewin. 1981. An experimental cross- Validation of mental imagery.Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 1(1), 49–65.

Antrobus, J. S., J.L. Singer, & S. Greenberg. 1966. Studies in the stream of consciousness: Experimental enhancement and suppression of spontaneous cognitive processes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 23, 397–417.

Babin, B. J., W.R. Darden, & M. Griffin. 1994. Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656.

Batra, R., & O.T. Ahtola. 1990. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitude. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159–170.

Breckler, S. J. & E.C. Wiggins. 1989. Affect versus evaluation in the structure of attitude. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(3), 253–271.

Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1191–1205.

Burton, S. & D.R. Lichtenstein. 1988. The effect of ad context on attitude toward the advertisement. Journal of Advertising, 17(1), 3–11.

Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & G. Laurent. 1998. Hedonic and utilitarian consumer benefits of sales promotion. Working Paper. London: Centre for Marketing, London Business School.

Crites, Jr., S. L., L.R. Fabrigar, & R.E. Petty. 1994. Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitude: A conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(6), 619–634.

Dewi, I. J. & S.H. Ang. 2001. Between imagination and reality: A study on the comparative effectiveness of advertising and product trial. In P. M. Tidwell, & T. E. Muller (Eds.), Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer Research, 1, 74–80, Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research.

--------(2015). The conceptualization and development of advertisement-evoked imagination scale. Asia Marketing Journal, 17(2), 15–37.

Dhar, R., & K. Kertenbroch. 2000. Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, XXXVII (February), 60–71.

Edell, J. A. & M.C. Burke. 1987. The power of feelings in understanding advertising effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 421–433.

Edell, J. A., & R. Staelin. 1983. The information processing of pictures in print advertisements, Journal of Consumer Research, 10(1), 45–61.

Edell, Julie A. and Marian Chapman Burke. 1987. The Power of Feelings in Understanding Advertising Effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (December), 421-433.

Edwards, K. 1990. The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 202–216.

Fishbein, Martin. & I. Azjen. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. MA: Addison Wesley.

Giorgi, Amedeo. 1987. Phenomenology and the research tradition in the psychology of the imagination. In Edward L. Murray (Ed), Imagination and Phenomenological Psychology (pp. 126-136). Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.

Hamlyn, D.W. 1994. Imagination. In S. Guttenplan (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of mind (pp. 361–365).Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Hirschman, E. C., & M.B. Holbrook. 1982. Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46 (3), 92–101.

Hirschman, Elizabeth C and Morris B. Holbrook. 1982. Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods and Propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer), 92-101.

Hoch, Stephen J. & Young-Won, Han. 1986. Consumer learning: advertising and the ambiguity of product experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(September), 221-233.

Holbrook, M. B. & E.C. Hirschman. 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140.

Holbrook, M. B., & W.L. Moore. 1981. Feature interactions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (June), 404-420.

Janiszewski, Chris. 1990. The influence of print advertisement organization on affect toward a brand name. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(June), 53–65.

Jenkins, Rebecca & Molesworth, Mike 2017. Conceptualizing Consumption in the Imagination: Relationships and Movements between Imaginative Forms and the Marketplace, Marketing Theory, 18(3), 327-347.

Kempf, Deanna S. 1999. Attitude formation from product trial: distinct roles of cognition and affect for hedonic and functional products. Psychology and Marketing, 16(1), 35–51.

Leopold, Claudia & Mayer, Richard. 2014. An Imagination Effect in Learning from Scientific Text. Journal of Educational Psychology, June, 1-17.

Lindaeur, M. 1983. Imagery and the arts. In. A. A. Sheikh (Ed), Imagery: Current theory, research, and application. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Mano, H., & R.L. Oliver. 1993. Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: Evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 451–466.

Meyers-Levy, J., & A.M. Tybout. 1989. Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 39–54.

Mitchell, A. A. & J.C. Olson. 1981. Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318–332.

Orbach, Mikulincer M.I. (1995). Attachment styles and repressive defensiveness: the accessibility and architecture of affective memories, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(5), 917-925.

Pearson, Joel, Naselaris, Thomas, Holmes, Emily A., & Kosslyn, Stephen M. 2015. Mental Imagery: Functional Mechanisms and Clinical Applications. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(10), 590-602.

Petty, Richard E. & J.T. Cacioppo. 1986. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19 (December), 123-205.

Phillips, B.J. 2017. Consumer Imagination in Marketing: ATheoretical Framework, European Journal of Marketing, 51 (11/12), 2138-2155.

Sartre, J.-P. (1972). The psychology of imagination. London, UK: Methuen & Co. Ltd.

Singer, J. L. (1975). The inner world of daydreaming. New York, NY: Harper and Row Publishers.

Smith, R. E. (1993). Integrating information from advertising and trial: processes and effects on consumer response to product information. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 204–219.

Smith, R.E. & W.R. Swinyard. 1982. Information response model: an integrated approach. Journal of Marketing, 46 (Winter), 81-93.

Spangenberg, E. R., K.E. Voss & A.E. Crowley. 1997. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of attitude: A generally applicable scale. In M. Brucks, & D. J. MacInnis (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, 24 (pp. 235–241). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.

Sutherland, M. B. 1971. Everyday imagining and education. London, UK: Routledge.

Swanson, G. E. 1978. Travels through Inner space: Family structures and openness to absorbing experiences. American Journal of Sociology, 83(4), 890–919.

Thomas, Nigel J.T. 2014. The Multidimensional Spectrum of Imagination: Images, Dreams, Hallucinations, and Active, Imaginative Perception. Humanities, 3, 132–184.

Trafimow, David & P. Sheeran. 1998. Some tests of the distinction between cognitive and affective beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 378-397.

Unger, Lynette S. and Jerome B. Kernan. 1983. On the Meaning of Leisure: An Investigation of Some Determinants of the Subjective Experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (March), 381- 392.

Valkenburg, P. M. & T.H.A van der Voort. 1994. Influence of tv on daydreaming and creative imagination: A review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 116(2), 316–339.

Zaichkowsky, J. L. 1985. Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341–352.

Zajonc, R. B. 1980. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35 (2), 151–175.

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.