Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Advertising Evoked Personal Nostalgia Intensity: Scale Development and Validation John B. Ford, Ph.D. Old Dominion University Altaf Merchant, Ph.D. University of Washington, Tacoma Kathryn Braun-LaTour, Ph.D. University of Nevada, Las Vegas Michael S. Latour, Ph.D. University of Nevada, Las Vegas This paper is under review at Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1 Introduction During times of crises, whether financial or political, marketers’ main communication response has been to reassure consumers by making them feel safe and secure (Boyle 2009; Elliott 2009). More often than not, the technique used for this is nostalgic advertising. Examples include Disney’s “Remember the Magic” campaign, Pepsi’s Generation Campaign featuring Britney Spears wearing clothing and signing songs from different decades, the reviving of old spokespersons (Colonel Sanders and KFC, Dave Thomas and Wendy’s) and jingles (Bumble Bee Tuna bringing back its song from the 1970s ). 2 Introduction More generally, the use of nostalgic advertising is seen as a means to reconnect the consumer to the brand (Sujan, Bettman and Baumgartner 1993). In a content analysis of over 1,000 U.S. TV ads, Unger, McConocha and Faiere (1991) found that nostalgia was used via theme, copy or music in ten percent of the advertising. While there are measures that have been developed to assess attitudes towards advertising as well as identifying individual differences in reaction to nostalgic messages (i.e., nostalgia proneness, Batcho 1995; Holbrook 1993), but there are as yet no measures that can capture the complexities involved in evoking consumers’ personal nostalgia. 3 Introduction For a nostalgia-inducing ad to be effective, we believe that it should accomplish three things: 1) it must evoke consumers’ personal memories of the past, 2) it must conjure up emotions that motivate the consumer to act upon or change their current state, and 3) the elicited memories and feelings should provoke a closer association to the advertised brand. Recently, Pascal, Sprott and Muehling (2002) developed a 10-item single dimension scale to measure ad-evoked nostalgia; however, this scale does not tap into all the various cognitive and emotional dimensions of the nostalgic experience. Our scale development builds on prior work by comprehensively deconstructing the personal nostalgia experience through the measurement of nostalgia as evoked by marketing communications. 4 Types of Nostalgia Personal Nostalgia A longing for the actual “lived” past (Baker and Kennedy, 1994) Reliving memories Vicarious Nostalgia A longing for a period outside the individuals living memory (Goulding, 2002) Fantasy 5 Literature Review Measures of Advertising Effectiveness Attitude towards ad (Bush, Smith and Martin 1999), ad effectiveness (Moreau, Markman and Lehmann 2001), persuasiveness (Reichert, Heckler and Jackson 2001), ad-evoked cognitive processing (McQuarrie and Mick 1999), adevoked emotions (Aaker and Williams 1998), ad-evoked mood (Ellen and Bone 1998) Nostalgia Proneness (Holbrook 1993; Batcho 1995) Personal Nostalgia Experience Uni dimensional (Pascal et al. 2002) Two dimensional (Baumgartner 1992) No scale to measure the intensity of advertising evoked personal nostalgia 6 Contribution Our scale builds on past nostalgia research by: Comprehensively deconstructing the personal nostalgia experience Developing a reliable metric that measures all the dimensions of the nostalgic experience Personal Nostalgia Experience There are cognitive as well as affective dimensions to the experience of nostalgia (Baumgartner, 1992). Summoning up of the images of the past (MacInnis and Price, 1987, McDermott, 2002) Recall of the past leads to the evoking of both happy and sad emotions (Bernsten and Rubin, 2002). Warmth, comfort, joy - remembering the past Pain, sadness, regret - sense of loss (Holak and Havlena, 1998). 8 Study 1 - Item generation: Thirteen focus groups (N= 58) and literature review Focus groups lasted 2-3 hours with respondents from a variety of age groups, income levels and educational backgrounds. Age range was from 19 to 60, and discussions were moderated by two researchers and audio recorded and transcribed. The objective of the study was to enhance the understanding of the personal nostalgia experience and to generate an exhaustive list of manifestations of the personal nostalgia experience. In order to trigger a personal nostalgia experience, the participants were asked to think of any piece of music, items, events, etc. that might make them nostalgic. They were then asked to think of what it reminded them of and how they felt. 9 Study 2 – Content Validity 107 items generated (Literature review 36, Focus groups 71) (Churchill 1979). Five behavioral researchers served as expert judges to assess content validity by rating how well each item represented its respective dimension and to look for any problematic item overlaps. Only those items that were classified as representative or highly representative were retained (Zaichowsky 1985). This led to 65 items being retained from the full set of 107. 10 Study 2 – Content Validity Four factors were identified: Past Imagery – it was like a flashback, there was a montage of images, it was a dreamlike experience, the images were like flashing pictures (Evoked imagery…….) Physiological - my breathing became steady/slow, I could smell the scents of my past, I laughed, I felt a sinking feeling, I had sweaty palms Positive emotions - serene, comfort, pleasant, gratitude, spiritual, warm, relaxed, secure. Negative emotions - anxiety, guilty, sorry, blue, depressed, regret. 11 Study 3 – Item reduction and EFA Stimuli Six press ads were developed (nostalgic and non-nostalgic versions, across different product categories- Cookies, Disney, PBS) Seven iterative focus groups (41 consumers) for development of ads Pretested quantitatively among 50 consumers. Two items, “this ad made me nostalgic’ and “this ad brought back memories from the past,” were utilized as a manipulation check, and respondents indicated how likely they were to agree/disagree with each statement (5-point scale). Manipulation checks indicated a significant difference across advertisements for nostalgia. 12 1 version Nostalgic Nostalgic version Relive the wonderful memories of the past ! Homemade Cookies ® are so fresh and delicious that they will remind you of the cookies made at home by Mom. Homemade Cookies ® 13 Non-Nostalgic version Enjoy the fresh and delicious taste ! Homemade Cookies ® are so fresh and delicious that the taste is unbeatable. Bite into it and enjoy the taste. Homemade Cookies ® 14 Study 3 – Item Reduction and EFA EFA (N=190; student data) Each respondent was exposed to one of the six ads and responded to the 65item personal nostalgia intensity scale as well as the nostalgia proneness scale. The four factors were selected on the bases of scree plot and interpretability. 34 items retained Statistical criteria for item retention: a) item-to-total correlation above 0.35, b) an average interitem correlation above 0.30, and c) a factor loading above 0.45 (DeVellis 2003; Spector 1992). Past Imagery (14) with Cronbach Alpha=.96; Physiological (9) with cronbach Alpha=.92; Positive emotions (5) with Cronbach Alpha=.87; Negative emotions (6) with cronbach Alpha=.85. The four factors explained 63% of the variance. 15 Table 1 – Advertising Personal Nostalgia Intensity Scale Items and Factor Loadings Item Past Imagery Study 3: EFA .96a, .58b I could see many images 0.82 The image/s were vivid 0.82 One image led to another 0.81 The images were impressionistic 0.80 There was a montage of images 0.79 The image/s were sharp 0.78 I relived the event from my past 0.77 It was like a flashback 0.77 The image/s were like flashing pictures 0.77 I was transported to the past 0.73 I remembered a specific event 0.69 The images were distinct 0.67 The memories were in bits and pieces 0.65 It was a dreamlike experience Physiological reactions 0.61 .92a, .57b I was sweating 0.88 My breathing became steady/slow 0.86 My stomach was churning 0.78 My heart was pounding 0.77 There were tears in my eyes 0.73 I laughed/smiled 0.70 I could feel shivers/trembling 0.69 I could taste/smell/hear things from my past 0.69 I had goosebumps 0.68 16 •a=Cronbach’s α estimates •b=Average variance extracted *** all loadings significant at p<.001 Table 1 – Advertising Personal Nostalgia Intensity Scale Items and Factor Loadings Positive emotions .87a, .59b Peaceful 0.86 Calm 0.84 Relaxed 0.78 Pleasant 0.75 Warm 0.58 Negative emotions .85a, .54b Anxiety 0.84 Tensed 0.83 Sadness 0.76 Guilty 0.69 Depressed 0.69 Regret 0.55 •a=Cronbach’s α estimates •b=Average variance extracted *** all loadings significant at p<.001 17 Study 3 – Item Reduction and EFA Bi-variate correlations were calculated for the advertising personal nostalgia intensity scale and the two scales for nostalgia proneness (Batcho 1995; Holbrook 1993). Correlations between the components of the nostalgia intensity scale were significant. The correlations between the components of the nostalgia intensity scale were higher than the correlations between the components of the nostalgia intensity scale and the two nostalgia proneness scales indicating initial evidence for discriminant validity. 18 Table 2 – Correlations Matrix 2 Past imagery 1 1.000 3 4 5 6 Physiological reactions .378** 1.000 Positive emotions .447** .229** 1.000 Negative emotions .180* .454** .166* 1.000 Nostalgia proneness (Holbrook 1993) .112a .149* .078 .150* 1.000 Nostalgia proneness (Batcho 1995) .156* .168* .040 .138* .491** 1.000 Numbers in italics represent correlations between the nostalgia proneness scales and the four subscales of personal nostalgia intensity. ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). 19 Study 4 - Confirmatory Factor Analysis There was a unique opportunity to test this scale using the 2009 Pepsi Superbowl TV commercials. Pepsi launched the nostalgic “Refresh Anthm” commercial based on the classic song “Forever Young.” Sung by original lyricist, Bob Dylan, and rapped by Black Eyed Peas. The old and new commercials were fused into a visual collage of iconic images celebrating past and present generations. Pepsi also launched a non-nostalgic commercial in support of the movie, McGruber. Each commercial lasted 60 seconds. Both Ads were pretested among 60 undergraduate students with 33 shown the nostalgic ad and 27 the McGruber ad. A single-item measure, “this ad makes me nostalgic,” was used, and the results showed the “Refresh Anthem” ad was perceived significantly more nostalgic than the McGruber ad; thus the manipulation worked as expected. 20 Study 4 - Confirmatory Factor Analysis CFA (N=200; non-student data using an online consumer panel) Half saw the Pepsi nostalgic ad; remaining saw non-nostalgic Pepsi ad After seeing the ad, the respondents completed the advertising personal nostalgia intensity scale. Half were male, and the mean age of the respondents was 49 years. Fit indices: χ2 (488) =1323, Normed χ2 (χ2 /d.f.)=2.7, CFI=0.93, IFI=0.94, TLI=0.92, GFI=0.83, RMSEA=0.058 21 Study 4 - Confirmatory Factor Analysis Past Imagery(14 items) Physiological (9 items) α=.96 Spearman-Brown=.94 Positive emotions (5 items) α=.94 Spearman-Brown=.82 α=.93 Spearman-Brown=.88 Negative emotions (6 items) α=.95 Spearman-Brown=.93 22 Past Imagery It was like a flashback I relived the event from my past I was transported to the past I remembered a specific event The images were distinct The memories were in bits and pieces It was a dreamlike experience The image/s were vivid I could see many images One image led to another The images were impressionistic There was a montage of images The image/s were sharp The image/s were like flashing pictures Physiological reaction I was sweating My breathing became steady/slow My stomach was churning My heart was pounding There were tears in my eyes I laughed/smiled I could feel shivers/trembling I could taste/smell/hear things from my past I had goosebumps 23 Positive emotions Peaceful Calm Relaxed Pleasant Warm Negative emotions Anxiety Tensed Sadness Depressed Guilty Regret Study 4 - Confirmatory Factor Analysis Several alternative measurement models were examined (Anderson and Gerbing 1988). Model 1 is the base model (4 factors correlated) Model 2 is a one-factor model. Model 3 has 4 factors uncorrelated. Model 4 has the correlation between positive emotions and negative emotions set to 1.0. Model 5 has the correlation between positive emotions and physiological reactions set to 1.0. Model 6 has the correlation between negative emotions and physiological reactions set to 1.0. Model 7 has the correlations between positive emotions, negative emotions and physiological reactions all set to 1.0. The results demonstrate discriminant validity for the separate factors of 25 advertising personal nostalgia intensity. Dimensionality Description Model 1b Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7 b = base model *** significantly worse fit than base model (p<.001) χ2 df CFI NFI IFI TLI RMSEA Δ χ2/df Base model - 4 factors correlated 1323 488 0.93 0.90 0.93 0.92 0.058 1 factor model 3426 494 0.76 0.73 0.76 0.73 0.127 2103/6*** 4 factors - uncorrelated Correlation between positive and negative emotions set to 1 Correlation between positive emotions and physiological reaction set to 1 Correlation between negative emotions and physiological reaction set to 1 Correlation between positive, negative emotions and physiological reaction set to 1 2141 494 0.86 0.83 0.86 0.85 0.095 818/6*** 1348 489 0.92 0.89 0.92 0.91 0.069 25/1*** 1357 489 0.92 0.89 0.92 0.91 0.069 34/1*** 1347 489 0.92 0.89 0.92 0.91 0.069 24/1*** 1358 491 0.92 0.89 0.91 0.91 0.068 35/1*** 26 Study 4 - Confirmatory Factor Analysis In addition to the thirty-four item advertising personal nostalgia intensity scale, a single item validation for each of the subscales was assessed using the procedures recommended by Bagozzi (1993). The respondents were presented at the conclusion of each survey with a description of the four nostalgia intensity dimensions and asked to indicate to what extent they were experiencing each of the dimensions, using 5point agree-disagree scales. Pair wise correlations between the four dimensions and the single item convergent validity measure were .70, .44, .57 and .44 for past imagery, physiological reactions, positive emotions and negative emotions respectively. These correlations offer initial evidence of convergent validity. 27 Study 4 - Confirmatory Factor Analysis Past nostalgia research has indicated that younger people typically get less nostalgic than older individuals (Batcho 1995; Davis 1979). Some researchers have also argued that reminiscing is a powerful way for older adults to generate positive emotional experiences (Kennedy, Mather and Carstensen 2004). Thus, we can predict that older respondents would score higher levels of advertising evoked personal nostalgia intensity as compared to their younger counterparts. The mean age of the sample here was 49, and as anticipated, the results of the ANOVA between the two age groups (49 and under vs. over 49), reveals significantly higher scores for older respondents for all four of the dimensions involved. This demonstrates known group validity. 28 Study 5 – Convergent Validity Data were collected from 41 undergraduate students to investigate the convergent validity of the four factors on the personal nostalgia intensity scale. The constructs that were studied were advertising personal nostalgia intensity and antiquarianism (a construct found to be related to nostalgia proneness by Schindler and Holbrook 2003which focuses on the consumer’s disposition towards antiques and other things like old clothes, old buildings, historic places, etc.). Both constructs in question were measured using two techniques: a) responses to scales and b) ratings by two judges. The students first responded to the 10-item antiquarianism scale (McKechnie 1977), and then they saw the nostalgic cookie ad developed for study 2. They were then asked to describe in detail their thoughts and feelings about the ad (Cacioppo and Petty 1981). 29 Study 5 – Convergent Validity The students then were asked to respond to the 34-item personal nostalgia intensity scale. At the end of the survey, they were then asked to write about any antique that belonged to them or to a friend or relative. Their thought/feeling listings were then analyzed using two judges (graduate students each given definitions of each of the four factors of personal nostalgia intensity and antiquarianism. The judges were told to analyze the descriptive reactions to the cookie ad and the description about the antique as reported by the original respondents. The two judges independently highlighted the manifestations related to each of the four factors of the personal nostalgia intensity scale, and they then counted the number of manifestations for each of the four categories for each of the respondents. 30 Study 5 – Convergent Validity Finally, the judges counted the number of thoughts related to the description of the antique for each of the respondents. As a result, a single item measure was arrived at for each of the four subscales of the advertising personal nostalgia intensity scale as well as for the antiquarianism scale. The reliability coefficients were .96, .80, .93 and .83 for the past imagery, physiological reactions, positive emotions and negative emotion respectively and .86 for the antiquarianism scale. Intercoder reliability was acceptable (from .76-.85). 31 Study 5 – Convergent Validity The convergent correlations between the respondent and external judge ratings for the dimensions were .74 (past imagery), .70 (physiological reactions), .73 (positive emotions) and .65 (negative emotions), which are all significant and provide evidence of convergent validity. Also, the correlations between the respondent and external judge ratings were higher than the correlations with the other factors of the nostalgia scale or the antiquarianism scale, which provides evidence of discriminant validity (DeVellis 2003). 32 Convergent and Discriminant Validity Multitrait-Multimethod Technique N=41 Scale Responsesa Respondents (method 1) Past Imagery Physiological Positive emotions Negative emotions Past Imagery .96c Physiological .56* .80 Positive emotions .77* .74* .93 Negative emotions .34* .29 .17 .83 Antiquarianism .13 .25 .12 -.03 Antiquarianism .86 Judges (method 2) Past Imagery .74* Physiological .53* .70* Positive emotions .60* .62* .73* Negative emotions .22 .20 -.15 .65* Antiquarianism .06 .08 .09 -.05 .54* a.Respondents’ scores for the four subscales represent method 1 of our multitrait-multimethod analysis b.External judges’ ratings (method 2) provide further convergent validity estimates to the respondent scores on the four subscales. c.Bold numbers reflect reliability estimates (α) for each of the four subscales and for the antiquarianism scale. * p<.05 Study 6 – Criterion-Related Validity The six print advertisements developed for study 3 were used for this study. Data were collected from 171 consumers using an online consumer panel. The sample contained a balanced age and gender mix. Each respondent was exposed to one ad and then completed the advertising personal nostalgia intensity scale. In addition, respondents answered a series of questions relating to their behavioral intentions (attitude towards the ad and attitude towards the brand). We hypothesized positive effects from the four dimensions of advertising evoked personal nostalgia intensity on Attitude towards the ad which in turn would have a positive effect on the attitude towards the brand which would result in higher levels of behavioral intentions. 34 Criterion-related Validity (N=171; non-student sample) Past Imagery Demographics (Age, Gender, Income) .72*** Physiological Reactions Ad Attitude .68 .40*** Positive Emotions .85*** Brand Attitude .72 .69*** Behavioral Intentions .48 .67*** .39*** Negative Emotions χ2(df)=140(29); CFI=.91, GFI=.91, IFI=.91, NFI=.89 ***p<.001 Study 7 – Nomological Validity This final study involved a proposed series of relationships between advertising evoked personal nostalgia and its antecedents and consequences. Antecedents: Nostalgia proneness, loneliness, brand loyalty. Consequences: Perceived social support, brand bonds, and innovativeness. The propositions: P1: Higher levels of the consumer’s nostalgia proneness will generate more advertising evoked personal nostalgia P2: Higher levels of the consumer’s loneliness will generate more advertising evoked personal nostalgia P3: Higher levels of the consumer’s loyalty towards the focal brand will generate more advertising evoked personal nostalgia for that brand Study 7 – Nomological Validity The propositions: P4: Higher levels of advertising evoked personal nostalgia will generate higher levels of perceived social support P5: Higher levels of advertising evoked personal nostalgia will generate higher levels of bonds with the focal brand P6: Higher levels of advertising evoked personal nostalgia will generate lower levels of consumer innovativeness Study 7 – Nomological Validity Data were collected from 166 consumers using an online consumer panel. The sample contained a balanced age and gender mix. Loyalty for the focal brand (Pepsi) was determined by asking the respondents, “Out of the last ten times you would have had a soda, how many times did you drink Pepsi Cola?” Loneliness was measured using the 20-item loneliness scale developed by Russell, Peplau and Cutrona 1980. Nostalgia proneness was measured using the 20-item scale developed by Batcho (1995). The respondents were then exposed to the nostalgic Pepsi “Refresh Anthem” TV commercial, after which they were asked to fill out the advertising personal nostalgia intensity scale. Perceived social support was measured with the Sarason et al.1983 scale, innovativeness was measured using the Gielens and Steenkamp scale (2007), and bond with the focal brand was measured using Aaker, Fournier and Brasel (2004). 38 Study 7 – Nomological Validity Good model fit was shown using AMOS 16 (χ2(df)=51(14); CFI=.93, GFI=.94, IFI=.94, NFI=.92). The findings: The path coefficients between nostalgia proneness and the four factors were .50 (past imagery), .21 (physiological reactions), .45 (positive emotions) and .11 (not significant for negative emotions). The more that the consumer feels lonely, the more that he or she will experience past imagery, physiological reactions and negative emotions after watching a nostalgic ad. Past imagery and positive emotions evoked by the nostalgic ad led to higher levels of perceived social support. Past imagery, physiological reactions, positive emotions and negative emotions associated with personal nostalgia enhance the bonding with the focal brand. Higher levels of past imagery, physiological reactions and negative emotions associated with advertising evoked personal nostalgia led to higher levels of consumer innovativeness. 39 Study 7 – Nomological Validity Another test to the scale was to predict consumer choice of the advertised brand, and the respondents were asked that if the research agency were to consider offering then $5 as a gift option, would they choose a coupon for Pepsi or a gift card for $5? A multiple discriminant analysis was run with brand choice as the dependent variable (1=Pepsi gift coupon, 0=choosing the non-Pepsi gift card). The four dimensions of advertising evoked personal nostalgia intensity were included as independent variables in the discriminant model, and the analysis showed that all four variables had acceptable loadings on the discriminant function (greater than .40), the Wilks Lambda was .93, and the classification index of brand choice was 71.7% which is significantly better than chance. Finally, we tested the nomological network using the Pascal, Sprott and Muehling 92002) 10-item measure of nostalgia in place of our measure. Everything else was kept the same in the model. The model fit was significantly worse. The alternative measure was unable to decouple the various elements of the nostalgic experience. 40 Figure 4 – Advertising Personal Nostalgia Intensity scale and Relationships with Other Constructs Antecedents Nostalgia Proneness Focal Construct .50a(7.31)* Consequences .27(4.17)* Past Imagery .21(2.95)* .48(8.25)* .32(4.68)* .11(1.50) Social Support .45(6.58)* .00(.04) Physiological Reactions .16 (2.35)* .18(2.65)* Loneliness .29(5.50)* .13(2.26)* -.10(-1.47) .36(5.22)* Brand Bonds .23(3.95)* .40(7.65)* Positive Emotions .17(2.61)* Brand loyalty .09(1.38) .25(3.75)* .10(1.62) .26(3.94)* -.19(-2.96)* Negative Emotions Innovativeness .22(3.67)* .14(2.18)* a standardized path estimates; figures in parentheses are t values; * t values significant at p<.05 41 Summary of studies undertaken Study 1 Nature of study Sample size Type of sample Literature review Qualitative 2 Quantitative 5 expert judges 3 Quantitative 190 Student 200 Nonstudent 5 6 7 Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Findings/Results 36 items identified from extant literature 13 focus groups: 58 consumers 4 Objectives 41 171 166 Nonstudent Explore dimensions and generate list of items 4 dimensional construct, 71 items generated Content validity: how well each item represented its respective dimension and if there were any overlaps between the items 65 items retained out of a pool of 107 EFA: Scale refinement 4 factors, 34 items retained CFA: Dimensionality. Acceptable reliabilities of sub-scales, and fit with 4 factor model Student Convergent and discriminant validity Acceptable results using MultitraitMultimethod technique Nonstudent Criterion-related validity: We expected that the advertising evoked nostalgia would have an impact on Aad, Ab and BI. Path co-efficients were statistically significant (SEM). Nonstudent Nomological validity: propose a series of relationships between advertising personal nostalgia intensity and its antecedents and consequences. Path co-efficients were statistically significant (SEM). 42 Key findings and Implications This study adds to the nostalgia literature by: Identifying an additional factor (physiological reactions) in the nostalgic experience Broadening the affective component to separate both positive and negative emotions. Developing a reliable metric that measures all the dimensions of the nostalgic experience On a practical level, the scale can be used by marketers to gauge how effective their marketing communications are in evoking consumer nostalgia. Trigger and measure specific aspects (emotions/past imagery/physiological reactions) of the nostalgia evoked by advertising Key findings and Implications Advertising research has moved away from looking at whether an advertisement “is liked” toward looking at how an advertisement “engages” consumers. One way to engage the consumer is to make the advertising content personally relevant to them by invoking situations or events that the consumer his/herself has experienced in the past (i.e., through personal nostalgia).