Persuasive Advertising - J. Scott Armstrong [55]
An analysis of non-experimental data and three lab experiments, one of which was conducted in Hong Kong, provided further support. Subjects exposed to scarcity appeals based on purchase quantity limits, time limits, or purchase pre-conditions (“Only available with a minimum purchase of $25”) had higher purchase intentions, but only if the price reductions were substantial. The scarcity conditions apparently led to an evaluation of the offer (Inman, Peter, and Raghubir 1997).
There is less need to provide good reasons for scarcity of low-involvement products. In a lab experiment, 145 subjects were shown ads for 2-liter bottles of soda. Some ads advertised no limit on the soda, some a limit of two bottles, and others a limit of four. Intended purchasing behavior was substantially higher when the limit was four than when it was two or had no limit. This is only profitable if the restriction is set a bit higher than the number that consumers would normally plan to purchase (Lessne and Notarantonio 1988).
2.4. Attribution
it is generally an inducement to profess to supply only to connoisseurs, for all think
of themselves as such, and, if not, the sense of want arouses the desire.
Baltasar Gracián, 1649
In 1968, Jane Elliott demonstrated the power of attribution by her “blue eye versus brown eye” demonstration with third graders in the Riceville Elementary School in Iowa. She began by telling the students that “brown-eyed people have more [melanin] in their eyes—so brown-eyed people are better than those with blue eyes.” The resulting behavior in the children was remarkable. Brown-eyed children did better than blue-eyed children on tests that same day. The next day, she said that she had made a mistake and that science actually showed that blue-eyed children were better. This led to a reversal of behavior; blue-eyed children did better that day. The blue-eye versus brown-eye demonstration was repeated in classrooms across the country. The demonstration created a rift between Elliott and the school board that lasted for decades. However, the children remembered the exercise long after as an important learning experience.
The attribution principle been called the Pygmalion principle (after George Bernard Shaw’s play, later adapted as My Fair Lady). Academics sometimes refer to it as “labeling.”
2.4.1. Attribute favorable behavior or traits to the target market
In the early 1990s, The Economist ran a campaign praising its readers. One ad said: “A poster should contain no more than eight words, which is the maximum the average reader can take in at a single glance. This, however, is a poster for Economist readers.” A billboard ad said, “If you’re already a reader, ask your chauffeur to hoot as you pass this poster.” A third ad said, “‘I never read the Economist’”— attributed to a “Management trainee, age 42.”
The idea behind attribution is to compliment potential customers as having traits that would lead to a certain type of behavior. Attribution tends to bring favorable responses if people are flattered and made to feel confident. People seem willing to accept nearly any reason to explain why they have certain good traits.
Attribution is expected to be more effective if it is not viewed as manipulative. Thus, it would be most effective for social causes, such as requests for charity donations.
Advertisers have long used attribution. In the 1880s, the John Wanamaker department store ran the following ad: “Rhinestones have their place, just as diamonds have their place. Ladies who use both know very well how to draw the line between them.” In 1903, the inventor of Shredded Wheat advertised that it “sells chiefly to the best classes. The man with the dinner pail doesn’t eat it.” A 1950 Bell Telephone print ad read, “Your cooperation is always a big help in maintaining good telephone service and we want you to know how much we appreciate it.”
Attribution lies behind what is probably the most famous TV commercial of all time—Apple’s 1984. It ran nationally