Persuasive Advertising - J. Scott Armstrong [77]
When an advertiser decides to use distraction, most of the other principles in this book become irrelevant.
5.1.2. For products offering clear benefits, consider distraction only if the message will be understood
For important decisions, distraction should be limited to ads for products that are obviously in the customers’ best interests. For example, it can be beneficial in promoting messages that conflict with harmful attitudes or behavior, such as in ads promoting smoking cessation. In this situation, ensure that the message is clear.
When people have a misperception about a product, distraction could be used to disarm people and thus to avoid counter-arguments. For example, many people have poor perceptions of soy as a food. Distraction might be used so they do not think about these perceptions.
Evidence on the effects of distraction for high-involvement products
College fraternity members were shown a 12-minute film in which a college professor argued that fraternities encourage cheating, dishonesty, social snobbishness, and racial discrimination, and therefore should be abolished. A second film used the same soundtrack superimposed on an entertaining short film about a different topic. Which film was more effective in changing attitudes of the fraternity members, the straight film or the distracting film?
By showing the subjects something that was irrelevant to the message, the second film disrupted counter-arguing. This led to a higher rate of attitude changes among the fraternity members who watched the distracting film (Festinger and Maccoby 1964).
Attempts to replicate this study led to five failures. In these failed replications, the distraction had interfered with the comprehension of the primary message. However, in four studies where the subjects understood the message, the replications were successful (Osterhouse and Brock 1970).
What is the best strategy for a panhandler (a street beggar) to use: to ask for “a quarter or loose change” or to ask for either “17 cents” or “37 cents”?
5.1.3. When customers might resist traditional appeals, surprise them with an unusual approach
An Ogilvy ad showed a man with an eye patch wearing Hathaway shirts. Why the eye patch? It might distract customers and reduce counter-arguments such as, “That shirt is too expensive.”
By surprising the customer, an ad might encourage people to think about an offer they would have otherwise ignored. The surprise might also distract customers from thinking about objections.
Instead of a traditional appeal about safety, a Volvo car ad said: “It does 60 to 0 in four seconds flat.”
Evidence on the effects of a surprising approach
Back to the panhandler question: In a field experiment, panhandlers made either typical requests (e.g., for a quarter or loose change) or strange requests (e.g., for 17 cents or 37 cents) of 289 passers-by. With the strange request, the total panhandler revenues were 19 percent higher (Santos, Leve, and Pratkanis 1994).
Which ad will sell more?
A. “For a package of eight note cards, the price is $3. It’s a bargain.”
B. “For a package of eight note cards, the price is 300 pennies. That’s $3. It’s a bargain.”
5.1.4. For low-involvement goods that are for immediate sale, consider disruption then reframing of an offer
Davis and Knowles (1999) observed that people often respond to sales pitches in a mindless fashion, not attending to the specifics of an offer, but making decisions based on pre-existing attitudes. These researchers explored ways to disrupt a customer’s mindlessness, and then give them new information, a technique they called the “reframe.” They found that an unusual or unexpected phrase or wording made the next sentence in a pitch much more persuasive. It was not the disruption by itself that increased persuasiveness; the disruption made the next sentence more persuasive. This is called the disrupt-then-reframe (DTR)