brand personality of products placed in television

Brand Personality of Products Placed in Television Programs:The Effect of Involvement with the Product and the Program

Author

Love, Anita, E. Voges, Kevin, Pope, Nigel

Published

2012

Journal Title

Research Journal of Social Science & Management

Copyright Statement

© The Author(s) 2012. For information about this journal please refer to the publisher’swebsite or contact the authors. Articles are licensed under the terms of the Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricteduse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properlycited.

Downloaded from

http://hdl.handle.net/10072/49634

Link to published version

http://www.theinternationaljournal.org/ojs/index.php?journal=tij&page=article&op=view&path[]=1065

Griffith Research Online

https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 02, Number: 04, August-2012 Page 43

Abstract—A Solomon Four Group experimental design was

used to test four hypotheses examining the effect of

involvement with the product and involvement with the

program on perceptions of brand personality, following

exposure to a “product used by character” scenario in a

popular television soap opera. One specific instance with a

specific brand was investigated. The hypotheses were tested

using Multiple Analysis of Variance (MANOVA). Results

indicated that a used-by-character placement can lead to

changes in consumer perceptions of the personality of the

brand, with minor adjustments in perceptions of the

personality traits of a brand resulting from a single product

placement exposure. Results also indicate that this effect is

not dependent on a consumer’s level of involvement in the

product category. Further, these results were found

irrespective of a consumer’s level of involvement in the

program itself. This suggests that product placement may be

used to facilitate change in perceptions of the personality of

a brand across the entire viewing audience, not just those

who hold a personal attachment to the program itself.

Index Terms—Advertising, Brand personality, Brand

placement, Involvement, Television

I. INTRODUCTION

roduct Placement, also known as Brand Placement, has

received increased attention in the last two decades as a

valuable enhancement to the marketing communications

efforts of an organisation (DeLorme, Reid & Zimmer, 1994;

Karrh, 1998). Product placement practice is defined as “the

paid inclusion of branded products or brand identifiers,

through audio and/ or visual means, within mass media

programming” (Karrh, 1998, p. 33). This inclusion can be

seen across a broad range of entertainment media, from

films and television programs, to computer games, music

and music videos, books, and more recently blogs and video

sharing websites such as YouTube.

Television is currently the leading placement media,

Manuscript received May 30, 2012. Paper titles should be written in

uppercase and lowercase letters, not all uppercase. Avoid writing long

formulas with subscripts in the title; short formulas that identify the elements are fine (e.g., "Nd–Fe–B"). Do not write “(Invited)” in the title.

Full names of authors are preferred in the author field, but are not required.

Put a space between authors’ initials. Author is with).

Author, Jr.,).

Author).

attracting 71.4% of placement spending in 2006 (PQ Media,

2007). Global product placement expenditure was estimated

at $3.07 billion in 2006, and is forecast to grow to $7.44

billion in 2010 (PQ Media, 2007). An interesting

characteristic of this industry is that some placements are

motivated by artistic rather than commercial reasons.

Adding the ‘exposure value’ of these unpaid placements, the

placement market is estimated to be valued at $13.96 billion

by 2010 (PQ Media, 2007).

Although product placement has been the subject of

much practitioner and academic interest over the last two

decades, few empirical studies have examined the effect of

product placement on the personality of the placed brand.

This paper reports the effect of product placement on

consumer perceptions of the personality of the placed brand.

II. BRAND PERSONALITY

The concept of brand personality is based on the human

propensity to attach human characteristics to inanimate

objects (Aaker, 1995; Freling & Forbes, 2005). Anecdotal

evidence of such a propensity is common, particularly in

regards to objects with which consumers have a firm

attachment: a computer may be described as

‘temperamental’, a mobile phone as ‘sexy’, and a pair of

stiletto shoes as ‘daring’. Early concepts of brand

personality were based on the “Big Five” factor model of

human personality: Extroversion, Agreeableness,

Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability and Openness

(Goldberg, 1990).

More recent development of the construct is based on

Aaker’s (1995) formative work in the area. For example,

Keller and Richey (2006) discuss the ‘core dimensions’ of

heart (passionate and considerate), mind (creative and

disciplined) and body (agile and collaborative), and the

“interactive effects of these such that the effects of one trait

can be enhanced by the existence of another.”

III. INVOLVEMENT

Involvement is defined as “a person’s perceived relevance

of the object based on inherent needs, values and interests”

(Zaichowsky, 1985, p. 342). The involvement could be with

a specific product or brand, the product category, or the

communication messages relating to these products, brands

or product categories. Generalised product categories differ

Anita Love, Lecturer in Marketing, Department of Marketing, Griffith University, Australia

Kevin E. Voges, Associate Professor in Marketing, Department of Management, University of

Canterbury, New Zealand &

Nigel K. Ll. Pope, Associate Professor in Marketing, Department of Marketing, Griffith University,

Australia.

Brand Personality of Products Placed in Television

Programs: The Effect of Involvement with the

Product and the Program

P


in their level of involvement, which leads to distinctions in

the purchase decision process for these products (Assael,

Pope, Brennan & Voges, 2007). A ‘high involvement’

product will lead to a more extensive information search, a

more careful and systematic evaluation of alternatives, and

increased post-purchase dissonance or uncertainty. High

involvement products are typically characterised by high

levels of risk and personal relevance. Some individual’s

level of involvement reflect their current need or

consumption situation (Laurent & Kapferer, 1985), but

others may hold an enduring involvement with a product

category, leading to heightened levels of attention to

information about products within that category and regular

communication with others about the products (Richins &

Bloch, 1986).

Involvement with a viewed television program motivates

consumers to increase their level of attention to the

information presented, and their subsequent comprehension

of that information (Celsi & Olson, 1988). Television

program involvement has been examined in the advertising

literature in relation to whether a consumer’s involvement

(and arousal) in a television program is maintained during

commercial breaks in that program, and the effect this has

on processing of the advertising messages shown (Lloyd &

Clancy, 1991; Lord & Burnkrant, 1993; Tavassoli, Shultz &

Fitzsimons, 1995).

IV. HYPOTHESES

H1: An individual exhibiting a high level of enduring

involvement with a product category will report a

different perception of the personality of a brand from

that category, placed in a television program, than an

individual exhibiting a low level of enduring

involvement.

H2: An individual’s level of involvement with a product

category will influence that individual’s perception of

the personality of a brand (from that category) placed

in a television program.

H3: An individual’s involvement with a television program

will influence that individual’s perception of the

personality of a brand placed in that television

program.

H4: An individual’s involvement with a television program

will influence that individual’s intention to purchase a

brand placed in that television program.

V. METHODOLOGY

A. Experimental Design

The hypotheses were examined using a Solomon Four

Group experimental design. The Solomon Four Group is a

robust experimental design which involves selecting four

test groups, two are administered the treatment, and two act

as the control groups (Solomon, 1949). The design is

illustrated in Table 1.

This design controls for interactive testing effects of

administering the pre-test, and provides evidence of the

interaction between the action (or treatment) and observed

effect through the use of control groups, as the data can be

examined for effects of both the treatment and pre-treatment

survey. The design also enhances external validity, controls

for extraneous variables and increases the ability of the

researcher to infer that a resulting relationship between the

dependent and independent variables is caused by the

experimental treatment (Hair, Bush & Ortinau, 2000). The

design also allows for smaller sample sizes due to the ability

to combine the post-test survey groups in meta-analysis

(Braver & Braver, 1988).

Table 1

Solomon Four Group Design

B. Sample

The participant pool was drawn from undergraduate

students at a large metropolitan university. Student samples

have been utilised in the majority of empirical studies on

consumer perceptions of, and reactions to, product

placement to date (Cowley & Barron; 2008; Gould, Gupta &

Grabner-Kräuter, 2000; Gupta & Gould, 2007; Hong, Wang

& de los Santos, 2008; Law & Braun, 2000; Lee & Faber,

2007; Nebenzahl & Secunda, 1993; Russell, 2002; Sung &

de Gregorio, 2008; Yang & Roskos-Ewoldsen, 2007). In

addition, student samples are often used in experimental

designs due to the homogeneity the student group offers

(level of education, receptiveness to participating in

research, and experience with the product category of the

placed brand). For this experiment, random allocation split

pairs design was used, where participants are paired on the

basis of exhibiting similar characteristics, (in this case,

gender and perceived approximate age), and then randomly

allocated to the four groups.

C. Measures

Brand Personality

An earlier study was undertaken to reduce Aaker’s Brand

Personality Scale, resulting in a 21-item scale reduced from

the original 42-item scale. The measure uses a 5-point Likert

scale ranging from “Not at all descriptive” to “Extremely

descriptive” (Aaker, 1995). Some traits included in the scale

include: Honest, sincere, real, trendy, cool.

Enduring Involvement

The Enduring Involvement Scale (EIS) measures the

motivating factors of enduring involvement: self-expression

and hedonics (Higie & Feick, 1989). The EIS consists of ten

7-point semantic differential items: five pertaining to each

of the two sub-scales – hedonic involvement and self-

expression. Higie and Feick reported high reliability for the

scale with co-efficient alphas of .88 and .91 for the hedonic

and self-expression subscales respectively, and a combined

alpha of .89 (for the product category of computers, used in

this study).

Television Program Involvement

Involvement with the Television Program was measured

using the revised Personal Involvement Inventory (RPII)

(Zaichowsky, 1994). The scale consists of ten 7-point

semantic differential items. Reliability scores of .91 to .96

1 Pretest Treatment Post-Test

2 Treatment Post-Test

3 Pretest Post-Test

4 Post-Test

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 02, Number: 04, August-2012 5

were demonstrated for products and ads, with its ability to

discriminate between high and low involvement groups in

application to involvement with advertisements also

reported (Zaichowsky, 1994). Some adjective pairs were

Boring/ Interesting, Uninvolving/Involving, and

Worthless/Valuable.

D. Method

A brief excerpt of a script for the television program

“Home and Away” was developed specifically for the

purposes of this research. Participants were asked to read

this excerpt, which included a ‘used by character’ inclusion

of a branded product (a Dell laptop computer). On return of

the completed questionnaire, respondents were advised that

the script excerpt provided was a mock excerpt, developed

exclusively for the purpose of the research study.

The type of placement used in the treatment prompt was a

visual used-by-character placement. These placements,

while exhibiting lower levels of cognitive processing than

more prominent placements, may still hold affective and

behavioural outcomes (Auty & Lewis, 2004; Russell, 2002),

through the peripheral route to persuasion in the Elaboration

Likelihood Model. Associating a brand with a character may

infer a subtle endorsement of the brand by the character

(Balasubramanian, Karrh & Patwardhan, 2006; Russell,

2002; Russell & Stern, 2006). Computers, motor vehicles,

mobile phones, fashion items and grocery products

frequently appear as visual only used-by-character

placements in television programs, with no associated verbal

script reference or overt demonstration of product related

attributes. Visual used-by-character product placements

therefore warrant further investigation in product placement

research. Furthermore, as visual only used-by-character

placements are less expensive than their more prominent

counterparts, identifying whether an affective outcome may

result from this type of placement has significant

implications for product placement practitioners.

VI. RESULTS

A. Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1 suggested that an individual’s involvement

with the product category would impact on that individual’s

perception of the personality of a brand from that category.

Data for the two enduring involvement subscales (Hedonics

and Self-Expression) were summated and divided by the

number of items, resulting in a continuous involvement

score for each of the subscales. Mean scores for each of

these subscales were: Hedonics M=5.19, Self Expression

M=4.03 and the summated subscale variables were recoded

as High/Low Involvement. The hypothesis was then tested

using MANOVA; the dependent variables were the five

brand personality dimensions, while the independent

variables were the two High/Low involvement subscale

variables. Results of the analysis revealed there to be no

significant difference between high and low involvement

consumer’s perceptions of the personality of DELL

computers: hedonic involvement: Wilks’ Lambda .858, df

=6, 74, p>.05, self expression: Wilks’ Lambda .879, df =6,

74, p>.05. Between-subjects effects are shown in Table 2.

Examination of between-subjects effects reveal a

difference in perception of the brand personality of DELL

between high and low involvement consumers on the

Excitement dimension (for both the hedonics and self-

expression involvement subscales). Analysis of the mean

scores for high and low involvement consumers (for each of

the subscales) on perceptions of DELL on the personality

dimension Excitement indicated that high levels of hedonic

involvement with computers resulted in perceptions of

greater Excitement than for low involvement consumers,

while the opposite results occurred for self-expression.

Mean scores for the two involvement subscales on

perceptions of the Excitement dimension are reported in

Table 3.

B. Hypothesis 2

Hypothesis 2 proposed that an individual’s level of

involvement with a product category would interact with an

individual’s perception of a brand from that category placed

in a television program. In other words, it was expected that

the difference in perception of the personality of DELL

between the stimulus and non-stimulus groups would be

moderated by an individual’s enduring involvement in

personal computers. Dependent variables were the five

brand personality dimensions and the independent variables

were whether or not the respondent received the stimulus,

and the High/Low involvement subscales measures

discussed above. MANOVA results indicated there was no

interaction of either of the involvement subscales on the

effect of product placement on perceptions of the

personality of the placed brand (Stim Y/N*Hedonic

involvement: Wilks’ Lambda .946, df =6, 96, p>.05;

StimY/N*Self Expression: Wilks’ Lambda .942, df =6, 96,

p>.05). Table 4 reports the between-subjects effects in this

analysis. Hypothesis 2 was rejected.


C. Hypotheses 3 and 4

Hypothesis 3 proposed that involvement with the

television program would interact with the effect of product

placement on perceptions of the personality of a brand

placed in that television program. This hypothesis was tested

using MANOVA, with the dependent variables being the

five brand personality dimensions and purchase intent, and

the independent variables being whether or not the

respondent was exposed to the treatment prompt, and the

two involvement subscales, recoded as high (greater than the

mean scores of 2 and 2.39) and low (lower than the mean

scores) involvement rankings.

The analysis found no interaction effect for either

subscale, (ProgramInvAHi/Lo*StimY/N: Wilks’ Lambda

.935, df=6, 97, p>.05; ProgramInvBHi/Lo*StimY/N: Wilks’

Lambda .879, df=6, 97, p>.05), therefore Hypothesis 3 was

rejected (see Table 5). The results of this analysis also

indicate that there was no interaction effect between the

respondents’ level of involvement with the television

program, and their intention to purchase a brand placed in

that program. Thus Hypothesis 4 was also rejected.

VII. DISCUSSION

A. Involvement with the Product Category of the Placed

Brand

It was hypothesised that an individual with a high level of

enduring involvement in a product category would report a

different perception of the personality of a brand from that

category than an individual exhibiting low levels of product

category involvement.

This hypothesis (Hypothesis 1) was tested using Multiple

Analysis of Variance (MANOVA). The involvement scale

was split into the two sub-scales of hedonics and self-

expression. The mean of each of these sub-scales was then

obtained, and the respondent sample was recoded into two

groups: those exhibiting higher levels of involvement than

the ‘average’ respondent, and those exhibiting lower levels.

These two groups were treated as independent variables; the

dependent variables were the five personality dimensions as

outlined earlier in this chapter. Results of this analysis

revealed no significant difference in perceptions of brand

personality between the two groups, however analysis of

between-subjects effects indicated the presence of an

interaction effect between both the hedonic and self

expressive involvement factors on perceptions of the

‘Excitement’ dimension of the brand’s personality.

Examination of the mean scores showed that respondents

who exhibited a high level of hedonic involvement with

personal computers perceived the brand DELL as more

exciting than those who showed lower levels of hedonic

involvement in the product category. However, those who

showed lower self-expression scores perceived the brand as

more exciting than those with higher levels of self-

expressive involvement in computers. This is a logical

outcome. Individuals with high levels of product category

involvement may perceive the brand as being more exciting

than those with lower levels of involvement in the product

category by nature of their interest in the category itself.

The data was also examined to identify if an interaction

effect was present between the effect of the stimulus, and

consumer involvement with the product category on

perceptions of the personality of the placed brand.

MANOVA results did not indicate the presence of such an

effect. Hypothesis 2 was rejected. This is an interesting

result. It appears from this research that a consumer’s level

of involvement with the product category of the placed

brand did not interact with their perception of the

personality of the brand post-exposure to the brand

placement prompt. Regardless of whether or not the

participant was highly involved with personal computers, no

difference in perceptions of the personality of DELL

between the two groups was identified following the

placement exposure.

B. Involvement with the Television Program

It was hypothesised that an individual’s level of

involvement with a television program would interact with

that individual’s perception of the personality of a brand

placed in that television program. This hypothesis

(Hypothesis 3) was tested using MANOVA, with the

involvement scale split into the two subscales of importance

and interest; those exhibiting higher than the mean scores on

each scale were classified as highly involved in the program,

and those exhibiting lower involvement scores than the

mean on each scale were classified as having low

involvement in the program. The summated and recoded


subscales were treated as the independent variables, with the

five personality dimensions (as previously discussed) and

the purchase intention item treated as the dependent

variables. Results of the analysis indicated no interaction

effect to be present, therefore the hypothesis was not

supported.

Hypothesis 4 contended that an individual’s level of

involvement with a television program would interact with

that individual’s intention to purchase a brand placed in that

television program. Results indicated that no interaction

effect was present, therefore this hypothesis was also

rejected.

VIII. CONCLUSION

Results indicated that a used-by-character placement in a

television soap opera can lead to changes in consumer

perceptions of the personality of the brand. It appears from

this research that minor adjustments in perceptions of the

personality traits of a brand can result from a single product

placement exposure. Results also indicate that this effect is

not dependent on a consumer’s level of involvement in the

product category. Further, these results were found

irrespective of a consumer’s level of involvement in the

program itself, suggesting that this effect is present for both

casual viewers and fans alike. Thus it appears that product

placement may be used to facilitate change in perceptions of

the personality of a brand across the entire viewing

audience, not just those who hold a personal attachment to

the program itself.

A limitation of this research is that this result may be due

to the treatment prompt utilising only a single instance of a

used-by-character placement. It is suggested that future

research seek to identify whether a similar finding would

emerge with multiple placement exposures, and more overt

or plot integrated placement types. Future research could

also consider examining the interaction of product category

involvement on product placement brand effects across

different product placement types, to determine whether the

results identified here is specific to the type of placement

operationalized in the study.

Further research could also determine whether the

presence of an interaction effect between both the hedonic

and self expressive involvement factors on perceptions of

the ‘Excitement’ dimension of the brand’s personality is

specific to the brand under investigation. The outcome in

terms of self-expression may be more indicative of

consumers’ true perceptions of the personality of the brand.

It may be the case that consumers who exhibit greater self-

expressive involvement with this product category are more

discerning about the level of excitement they attach to the

brand when considering it as means of self-expression than

those who hold lower levels of self-expressive involvement

with the product category.

References

[1] Aaker, D. A. (1995), Building Strong Brands, New

York: Free Press.

[2] Assael, H., Pope, N., Brennan, L., and Voges, K.

(2007), Consumer Behaviour (1st Asia-Pacific Edition),

Brisbane: John Wiley and Sons.

[3] Auty, S. and Lewis, C. (2004), “Exploring children’s

choice: The reminder effect of product placement”,

Psychology and Marketing, 21 (9), pp. 697-713.

[4] Balasubramanian, S. K., Karrh, J. A. and Patwardhan,

H. (2006), “Audience response to product placements:

An integrative framework and future research agenda”,

Journal of Advertising, 35 (3), pp. 115-141.

[5] Braver, M. C. W. and Braver, S. L. (1988), “Statistical

treatment of the Solomon Four-Group Design: A meta-

analytic approach”, Psychological Bulletin, 104 (1), pp.

150-154.

[6] Celsi, R. and Olson, J. (1988), “The role of involvement

in attention and comprehension processes”, Journal of

Consumer Research, 15 (Sept), pp. 210-224.

[7] DeLorme, D., Reid, L. and Zimmer, M. (1994), “Brands

in films: Young moviegoers’ experiences and

interpretations”, in King, K., (ed), Proceedings of the

1994 Conference of the American Academy of

Advertising, Athens: Georgia, pp. 60-66.

[8] Freling, T. H. and Forbes, L. P. (2005), “An

examination of brand personality through

methodological triangulation,” Brand Management, 13

(2), pp. 148-162.

[9] Goldberg, L. (1990), “An alternative description of

personality: The Big Five Factor Structure”, Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (6), pp. 1216-

1229.

[10] Gould, S. J., Gupta, P. B. and Grabner-Kräuter, S.

(2000), “Product placements in movies: A cross-

cultural analysis of Austrian, French and American

consumers’ attitudes toward this emerging, international

promotional medium”, Journal of Advertising, 29 (4),

pp. 41-58.

[11] Gupta, P. B. and Gould, S. J. (2007), “Recall of

products placed as prizes versus commercials in game

shows”, Journal of Current Issues and Research in

Advertising, 29 (1), pp. 43-53.

[12] Hair, J. F. Jr., Bush, R. P. and Ortinau, D. J. (2000),

Marketing Research: A practical approach for the new

millenium, Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.

[13] Higie, R. A. and Feick, L. F. (1989), “Enduring

involvement: Conceptual and measurement issues”,

Advances in Consumer Research, 16, pp. 690-695.

[14] Hong, S., Wang, Y. J. and de los Santos, G. (2008),

“The effective product placement: Finding appropriate

methods and contexts for higher brand salience”,

Journal of Promotion Management, 14 (1), pp. 103-

120.

[15] Karrh, J. A. (1998), “Brand placement: A review”,

Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising,

20 (2), pp. 31-49.

[16] Keller, K. L. and Richey, K. (2006), “The importance

of corporate brand personality traits to a successful 21st

century business”, Journal of Brand Management, 14

(1/2), pp. 74-81.

[17] Laurent, G. and Kapferer, J. (1985), "Measuring

consumer involvement profiles", Journal of Marketing

Research, 22, pp. 1-53.


[18] Law, S. and Braun, K. A. (2000), “I’ll have what she’s

having: Gauging the impact of product placement on

viewers”, Psychology and Marketing, 17 (12), pp.

1059-1075.

[19] Lee, M. and Faber, R. J. (2007), “Effect of product

placement in on-line games on brand memory”, Journal

of Advertising, 36 (4), pp. 75–90.

[20] Lloyd, D. and Clancy, K. (1991), “Television program

involvement and advertising response: Some unsettling

implications for copy research”, Journal of Consumer

Marketing, 8 (4), pp. 61-72.

[21] Lord, K. and Burnkrant, R. (1993), “Attention versus

distraction: The interactive effect of program

involvement and attentional devices on commercial

processing”, Journal of Advertising, 22 (1), pp. 47-5.

[22] Nebenzahl, C. and Secunda, E. (1993), “Consumers

attitudes toward product placement in movies”,

International Journal of Advertising, 12 (1), pp. 1-11.

[23] PQ Media (2007), “PQ Media Global Product

Placement Forecast Series 2006-2010: Country-by-

Country Analysis”, Stamford Connecticut, retrieved

from http://www.pqmedia.com/about-press-20070314-

gppf.html.

[24] Richins M. L. and Bloch, P. H. (1986), “After the new

wears off: The temporal context of product

involvement”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13

(Sept), pp. 280-285.

[25] Russell, C. A. and Stern, B. B. (2006), “Consumers,

characters and products: A balance model of sitcom

product placement effects”, Journal of Advertising, 35

(1), pp. 7-21.

[26] Russell, C. A. (2002), “Investigating the effectiveness

of product placements in television shows: The role of

modality and plot connection congruence on brand

memory and attitude”, Journal of Consumer Research,

29 (Dec), pp. 306-318.

[27] Solomon, R. L. (1949), “An extension of control group

design”, Psychological Bulletin, 46, pp. 137-150

[28] Sung, Y. and de Gregorio, F. (2008), “New brand

worlds: College student consumer attitudes toward

brand placement in films, television shows, songs and

video games”, Journal of Promotion Management, 14

(1), pp. 85-101

[29] Tavassoli, N., Shultz, C. and Fitzsimons, G. (1995),

“Program involvement: Are moderate levels best for ad

memory and attitude toward the ad?” Journal of

Advertising Research, 35 (5), pp. 61-71

[30] Yang, M. and Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2007), “The

effectiveness of brand placements in the movies: Levels

of placements, explicit and implicit memory, and brand-

choice behaviour”, Journal of Communication, 57, pp.

469-489.

[31] Zaichkowsky, J. (1985), “Measuring the involvement

construct”, Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (Dec),

pp. 341-352.

[32] Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994), “The personal involvement

inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to

advertising”, Journal of Advertising, 23 (4), pp. 59-70.

***

http://www.pqmedia.com/about-press-20070314-gppf.html

http://www.pqmedia.com/about-press-20070314-gppf.html

brand personality of products placed in television

Documents