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
www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 02, Number: 04, August-2012 Page 44
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 Page 45
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.
www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 02, Number: 04, August-2012 Page 46
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
www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 02, Number: 04, August-2012 Page 47
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.
www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 02, Number: 04, August-2012 Page 48
[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.
***