Schema strength, processing opportunity, and the rewarding nature of incongruity resolution in advertising

References

• Alba, J.W., and L. Hasher. 1983. Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin 93, no. 2: 203–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alden, D.L., A. Mukherjee, and W.D. Hoyer. 2000. The effects of incongruity, surprise and positive moderators on perceived humor in television advertising. Journal of Advertising 29, no. 2: 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baek, T.H., and K.W. King. 2015. When comparative valence frame affects brand extension evaluations: The moderating role of parent-extension fit. International Journal of Advertising 34, no. 2: 382–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, I.E., and A.A. Mitchell. 1989. The effect of advertising on attitude accessibility, attitude confidence, and the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Consumer Research 16, no. 3: 269–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boush, D.M., and B. Loken. 1991. A Process-tracing study of brand extension evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research 28 no. 1: 16–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgers, C., E.A. Konijn, G.J. Steen, and M.A.R. Iepsma. 2015. Making ads less complex, yet more creative and persuasive: The effects of conventional metaphors and irony in print advertising. International Journal of Advertising 34, no. 3: 515–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callister, M.A., and L.A. Stern. 2008. Inspecting the unexpected: Schema and the processing of visual deviations. In Go figure! New directions in advertising rhetoric, eds. McQuarrie E.F. and Phillips B.J., 137–156. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, M.C., and K.L. Keller. 2003. Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research 30, no. 2: 292–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrillat, F., A. D'Astous, and J. Lazure. 2013. For better, for worse? What to do when celebrity endorsement goes bad. Journal of Advertising Research 53, no. 1: 15–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowley, E., and A.A. Mitchell. 2003. The moderating effect of product knowledge on the learning and organization of product information. Journal of Consumer Research 30, no. 3: 443–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crocker, J. 1984. A schematic approach to changing consumers' beliefs. Advances in Consumer Research 11: 472–7.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlén, M., and F. Lange. 2004. To challenge or not to challenge: Ad-brand incongruency and brand familiarity. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 12, no. 3: 20–35.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlén, M., F. Lange, H. Sjödin, and F. Törn. 2005. Effects of ad-brand incongruency. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising 27, no. 2: 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlén, M., S. Rosengren, F. Törn, and N. Öhman. 2008. Could placing ads wrong be right? Advertising effects of thematic incongruence. Journal of Advertising 37, no. 3: 57–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delgado-Ballester, E., A. Navarro, and M. Sicilia. 2012. Revitalising brands through communication messages: The role of brand familiarity. European Journal of Marketing 46, no. 1/2: 31–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiske, S.T., and S.E. Taylor. 1991. Social cognition (1st ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, D., S. Shapiro, and M. Brucks. 2009. Memory issues pertaining to social marketing messages about behavior enactment versus non-enactment. Journal of Consumer Psychology 19, no. 4: 629–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodstein, R.C. 1993. Category-based applications and extensions in advertising: Motivating more extensive ad processing. Journal of Consumer Research 20, no. 1: 87–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halkias, G. 2015. Mental representation of brands: A schema-based approach to consumers' organization of market knowledge. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24, no. 5: 438–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halkias, G., and F. Kokkinaki. 2013. Increasing advertising effectiveness through incongruity-based tactics: The moderating role of consumer involvement. Journal of Marketing Communications 19, no. 3: 182–97.
   Google Scholar
• Halkias, G., and F. Kokkinaki. 2014. The degree of ad–brand incongruity and the distinction between schema-driven and stimulus-driven attitudes. Journal of Advertising 43, no. 4: 397–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han, S., J. Choi, H. Kim, J.A. Davis, and K.-Y. Lee. 2013. The effectiveness of image congruence and the moderating effects of sponsor motive and cheering event fit in sponsorship. International Journal of Advertising 32, no. 2: 301–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A.F., and K.J. Preacher. 2010. Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research 45: 627–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heckler, S.E., and T.L. Childers. 1992. The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: What is incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research 18, no. 4: 475–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heine, S.J., T. Proulx, and K.D. Vohs. 2006. The meaning maintenance model: On the coherence of social motivations. Personality and Social Psychology Review 10, no. 2: 88–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heintzelman, S.J., and L.A. King. 2014. (The feeling of) meaning-as-information. Personality and Social Psychology Review 18, no. 2: 153–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, P.W., J.L. Giese, and J.A. Cote. 2004. Impression management using typeface design. Journal of Marketing 68, no. 4: 60–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houston, M.J., T.L. Childers, and S.E. Heckler. 1987. Picture-word consistency and the elaborative processing of advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research 24, no. 4: 359–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jhang, J.H., S.J. Grant, and M.C. Campbell. 2012. Get it? Got it. Good! Enhancing new product acceptance by facilitating resolution of extreme incongruity. Journal of Marketing Research 49, no. 2: 247–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanseng, E.J., and H. Sivertsen, 2011. Rethinking the schema-incongruity effect in consumer judgments. Advances in Consumer Research 39: 525–6.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Y.H., and C. Mason. 1999. Responses to information incongruency in advertising: The role of expectancy, relevancy, and humor. Journal of Consumer Research 26, no. 2: 156–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J.-G., and E. Thorson. 2008. The impact of celebrity-product incongruence on the effectiveness of product endorsement. Journal of Advertising Research 48, no. 3: 433–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehnert, K., B.D. Till, and B.D. Carlson. 2013. Advertising creativity and repetition: Recall, wearout and wearin effects. International Journal of Advertising 32, no. 2: 211–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loken, B. 2006. Consumer psychology: Categorization, inferences, affect, and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology 57: 453–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacInnis, D.J., C. Moorman, and B.J. Jaworski. 1991. Enhancing and measuring consumers' motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information from ads. Journal of Marketing 55, no. 4: 32–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandler, G. 1982. The structure of value: Accounting for taste. In Affect and cognition: The Seventeenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, eds. Clark M.S. and Fiske S.T., 3–36. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Maoz, E., and A.M. Tybout. 2002. The moderating role of involvement and differentiation in the evaluation of brand extensions. Journal of Consumer Psychology 12, no. 2: 119–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazodier, M., and P. Quester. 2014. The role of sponsorship fit for changing brand affect: A latent growth modeling approach. International Journal of Research in Marketing 31, no. 1: 16–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McQuarrie, E.F., and D.G. Mick. 1992. On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research 19, no. 2: 180–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, J., and A.M. Tybout. 1989. Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research 16, no. 11: 39–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Micelli, G., I. Scopelliti, M.A. Raimondo, and C. Donato. 2014. Breaking through complexity: Visual and conceptual dimensions in logo evaluation across exposures. Psychology & Marketing 31, no. 10: 886–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noseworthy, T.J., K. Finlay, and T. Islam. 2010. From a commodity to an experience: The moderating role of thematic positioning on congruity-based product judgment. Psychology & Marketing 27, no. 5: 465–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noseworthy, T.J., and R. Trudel. 2011. Looks interesting, but what does it do? Evaluation of incongruent product form depends on positioning. Journal of Marketing Research 48, no. 6: 1008–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozanne, J.L., M. Brucks, and D. Grewal. 1992. A study of information search behavior during the categorization of new products. Journal of Consumer Research 18, no. 4: 452–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peracchio, L.A., and J. Meyers-Levy. 1994. How ambiguous cropped objects in ad photos can affect product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research 21, no. 1: 190–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peracchio, L.A., and A.M. Tybout. 1996. The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research 23, no. 3: 177–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Percy, L. 1982. Psycholinguistic guidelines for advertising copy. Advances in Consumer Research 9: 107–11.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, B. and E.F. McQuarrie. 2009. Impact of advertising metaphor on consumer belief: Delineating the contribution of comparison versus deviation factors. Journal of Advertising 38, no. 1: 49–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pieters, R., and L. Warlop. 1999. Visual attention during brand choice: The impact of time pressure and task motivation. International Journal of Research in Marketing 16, no. 1: 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puligadda, S., W.T. Ross, and R. Grewal. 2012. Individual differences in brand schematicity. Journal of Marketing Research 49, no. 1: 115–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanbonmatsu, D.M., and R.H. Fazio. 1990. The role of attitudes in memory-based decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59, no. 4: 614–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schützwohl, A. 1998. Surprise and schema strength. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 24, no. 5: 1182–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segev, S., W. Wang, and J. Fernandes. 2014. The effects of ad-context congruency on responses to advertising in blogs: Exploring the role of issue involvement. International Journal of Advertising 33, no. 1: 17–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolzenberg, R.M. 1980. The measurement and decomposition of causal effects in nonlinear and nonadditive models. Sociological Methodology 11: 459–88.
   Google Scholar
• Sujan, M. 1985. Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research 12, no. 1: 31–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, D.V., and R.W. Hamilton. 2006. The effects of information processing mode on consumers’ responses to comparative advertising. Journal of Consumer Research 32, no. 4: 530–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Törn, F. 2012. Revisiting the match-up hypothesis: Effects of brand-incongruent celebrity endorsements. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising 33, no. 1: 20–36.
   Google Scholar
• Törn, F., and M. Dahlén. 2008. Effects of brand incongruent advertising in competitive settings. European Advances in Consumer Research 8: 234–9.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Hende, E.A., and R. Mugge (2014). Investigating gender‐schema congruity effects on consumers’ evaluation of anthropomorphized products. Psychology & Marketing 31, no. 4: 264–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, R.T., D.W. Baack, and B.D. Till. 2015. Creativity, attention and the memory for brands: An outdoor advertising field study. International Journal of Advertising 34, no. 2: 232–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar