The Effects of Pranks in Social Media on Brands

References

• Baltes BB, Dickson MW, Sherman MP, Bauer CC, La Ganke JS. Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behav Hum Decis Processes 2002;87:156–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batra R, Ahuvia A, Bagozzi R. Brand love. J Marketing 2012;76(2):1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger AA. An Anatomy of Humor, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Bettman JR. An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice, Reading: Addison Wesley Publishing, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Blackford BJ, Gentry J, Harrison RI, Carlson L. The prevalence and influence of humor violence in super bowl commercials. J Advertising 2011;40(4):123–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brakus J, Schmitt BH, Zarantonello L. Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? J Marketing 2009;73:52–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun A, Preiser S. The impact of disparaging humor content on the funniness of political jokes. Humor 2013;26(2):249–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodie RJ, Hollebeek LD, Jurić B, Ilić A. Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. J Serv Res. 2001;14:252–271.
   Google Scholar
• Brown MR, Bhadury RK, Pope KL. The impact of comedic violence on viral advertising effectiveness. J Advertising 2010;39(1):49–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butland MJ, Ivy DK. The effects of biological sex and egalitarianism on humor appreciation: Replication and extension. J Social Behav Personality 1990;5:353–366.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell J, Cothren D, Burg A. The perpetuation of entrained behavior during computer-mediated communication. Social Influence 2010;5(1):59–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsberg BE’S Channel. Carlsberg stunts with bikers in cinema. September 22, 2011: [ URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS3iB47nQ6E], accessed on February 10, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Chan K, Li L, Diehl S, Terlutter R. Consumers’ response to offensive advertising: a cross cultural study. Int Marketing Rev. 2007;24(5):606–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang PL, Chieng MH. Building consumer–brand relationship: a cross-cultural experiential view. Psychol Marketing 2006;23(11):927–959.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay A, Basu K. Humor in advertising: The moderating role of prior brand evaluation. J Marketing Res. 1990;27(4):466–476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaudhuri A, Holbrook MB. The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. J Marketing 2001;65:81–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow WS, Shi S. Investigating customers’ satisfaction with brand pages in social networking sites. J Comput Inf Syst. 2015;55(2):48–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan CP, Nelson JE. Effects of humor in a radio advertising experiment. J Advertising 1985;14(2):33–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisend M. A meta-analysis of humor in advertising. J Acad Marketing Sci. 2009;37:191–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisend M. How humor in advertising works: A meta-analytic test of alternative models. Marketing Lett. 2011;22:115–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyssel F, Bohner G. The rating of sexist humor undertime pressure as an indicator of spontaneous sexist attitudes. Sex Roles 2007;57:651–660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson MA, Ford TE. Disparagement humor: A theoretical and empirical review of psychoanalytic, superiority, and social identity theories. Humor 2008;21(3):283–312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Reading: Addison Wesley Publishing, 1975.
   Google Scholar
• Ford TE. Effects of sexist humor on tolerance of sexist events. Personality Social Psychol Bull. 2000;26:1094–1107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gackenbach J. (ed.). Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Transpersonal Implications, Academic Press Elsevier, London, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Gelb BD, Zinkhan GM. Humor and advertising effectiveness after repeated exposures to a radio commercial. J Advertising 1986;15:15–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grüner CR. The game of humor: A comprehensive theory of why we laugh, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Hackley C, Hackley RA. Advertising and Promotion, Sage Publications, London, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen J, Strick M, Van Baaren R, Hooghuis M, Wigboldus D. Exploring memory for product names advertised with humour. J Consum Behav. 2009;8:135–148.
   Google Scholar
• Haythornthwaite C, Nielsen AL. Revisiting computer-mediated communication for work, community and learning. In: Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal implications, J. Gackenbach, ed., Academic Press Elsevier, London, 2007, 167–186.
   Google Scholar
• Hoch SJ, Deighton J. Managing what consumers learn from experience. J Marketing 1989;53:1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoch SJ, Ha Y. Consumer learning: Advertising and the ambiguity of product experience. J Consumer Res. 1986;13:221–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman DL, Novak TP. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: conceptual foundations. J Marketing 1996;60(3):50–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland J, Baker SM. Customer participation in creating site brand loyalty. J Interact Marketing 2001;15(4):34–45.
   Google Scholar
• Huffman C, Houston MJ. Goal-oriented experiences and the development of knowledge. J Consum Res. 1993;20:190–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpinska-Krakowiak M, Modlinski A. Prankvertising – pranks as a new form of brand advertising online. Modern Manage Rev. 2014;21(3):31–44.
   Google Scholar
• Keller KL. Building customer-based brand equity: a blueprint for creating strong brands. Marketing Science Institute Working Paper 01–107, 2001, 1–31.
   Google Scholar
• Keller KL. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. J Marketing 1993;57:1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lafrance M, Woodzicka JA. No laughing matter: Women’s verbal and nonverbal reactions to sexist humor. In Prejudice: The target’s perspective, J. Swim and C. Stangor, eds., Academic Press, San Diego,1989, 61–80.
   Google Scholar
• Lammers HB, Liebowitz L, Seymour GE, Hennessey JE. Humor and cognitive response to advertising stimuli: A trace consolidation approach. J Bus Res. 1983;11(2):173–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim WM. The influence of internet advertising and electronic word of mouth on consumer perceptions and intention: Some evidence from online group buying. J Comput Inf Syst. 2015;55(4):81–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKenzie SB, Lutz RJ, Belch GE. The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. J Marketing Res. 1986;23(2):130–143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madden TJ, Weinberger MG. The effects of humor on attention in magazine advertising. J Advertising 1982;11(3):8–14.
   Google Scholar
• Martin RA. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Matzler K, Grabner-Kräuter S, Bidmon S. Risk aversion and brand loyalty: the mediating role of brand trust and brand affect. J Prod Brand Manage. 2008;17(3):154–162.
   Google Scholar
• Moore TE, Griffiths K, Payne B. Gender, attitudes towards women, and the appreciation of sexist humor. Sex Roles 1987;16(9/10):521–531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park CW, MacInnis DJ, Priester J, Eisingerich AB, Iacobucci D. Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. J Marketing 2010;74:1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan K, Kanjorski J. The enjoyment of sexist humor, rape attitudes, and relationship aggression in college students. Sex Roles 1998;38:743–756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samson AC, Grohs JJ. Humour as emotion regulation: The differential consequences of negative versus positive humour. Cognition Emotion 2012;26(2):375–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schouten A, Valkenburg P, Peter J. An experimental test of processes underlying self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication. Cyberpsychology 2009; 3(2) article 3.
   Google Scholar
• Song Y, Hur W, Kim M. Brand trust and affect in the luxury brand – customer relationship. Social Behav Personality 2012;40(2):331–338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spotts HE, Weinberger MG, Parsons AL. Assessing the use and impact of humor on advertising effectiveness: A contingency approach. J Advertising 1997;26:17–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart DM, Furse DH. Effective Television Advertising, Chicago: D.C. Heath and Company, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Strick M, Holland RW, Van Baaren R, Van Knippenberg A. Those who laugh are defenseless: how humor breaks resistance to influence. J Exp Psychol. 2012;18(2):213–223.
   Google Scholar
• Strick M, Holland RW, Van Baaren R, Van Knippenberg A, Dijksterhuis A. Humor in advertising: An associative processing model. Eur Rev Social Psychol. 2013;24:32–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira TS, Stipp H. Optimizing the amount of entertainment in advertising. What’s so funny about tracking reactions to humor? J Advertising Res. 2013;9:286–296.
   Google Scholar
• The Science of sharing. An Unruly White Paper: [ URL: http://markedsforing.dk/sites/default/files/unruly_scienceofsharing_whitepaper_2013_email.pdf.], accessed on March 15, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas CA, Esses VM. Individual differences in reactions to sexist humor. Group Processes Intergroup Relations 2004;1:89–100.
   Google Scholar
• Unger LS. Observations: a cross-cultural study on the affect-based model of humor in advertising. J Advertising Res. 1995;35(1):66–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang HC, Pallister JG, Foxall GR. Innovativeness and involvement as determinants of website loyalty: I. A test of the style/involvement model in the context of Internet buying. Technovation 2006;26:1357–1365.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger MG, Campbell L. The use and impact of humor in radio advertising. J Advertising Res. 1991;31:44–52.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger MG, Gulas CS. The impact of humor in advertising: A review. J Advertising 1992;21:35–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberger MG, Swani K, Yoon HJ, Gulas CS. Understanding responses to comedic advertising aggression: the role of vividness and gender identity. Int J Advertising 2016;1–26. doi:10.1080/02650487.2016.1186411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkie W. Consumer Behavior, Wiley & Sons, New York, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Zaichkowsky JL. The personal involvement inventory: reduction, revision and application to advertising. J Advertising 1994;23(4):59–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Zinkhan GM. Humor in television advertising. Adv Consum Res. 1991;18:813–818.
   Google Scholar
• Zillmann D. Disparagement humor. in: Handbook of Humor Research, PE. McGhee and JH. Goldstein, eds., Springer, New York, 1983, 85–107.
   Google Scholar
• Zillmann D, Cantor JR. A disposition theory of humor and mirth. In: Humor and laughter: Theory, research and applications, A. Chapman and HC. Foot, eds., Wiley & Sons, New York, 1996 [ 1976], 93–116.
   Google Scholar