心理学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (2): 331-348.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0331 cstr: 32110.14.2025.0331
• 研究报告 • 上一篇
周寿江1, 赵一晨2, 张瑾瑜3, 康琪(Khloe Qi KANG)4
收稿日期:
2023-07-11
发布日期:
2024-12-20
出版日期:
2025-02-25
基金资助:
ZHOU Shoujiang1, ZHAO Yichen2, ZHANG Jinyu3, Khloe Qi KANG4
Received:
2023-07-11
Online:
2024-12-20
Published:
2025-02-25
摘要:
谐音早已成为一种广泛使用的重要广告语言工具, 但尚未有研究考察谐音对广告效果的影响。基于失谐理论, 本文通过7个实验(N = 2456), 考察了谐音对广告评价的影响, 以及其作用机制和边界条件。结果发现, 谐音能够促使消费者产生更为积极的广告评价, 且这一影响藉由新颖性、有趣性的链式中介而实现。然而, 谐音对广告评价的这一积极效应会受到消费者新颖性寻求水平、产品消费风险、广告诉求的调节。具体而言, 当消费者的新颖性寻求水平较低, 或者产品消费风险很高、广告突出权威性时, 谐音对广告评价的这一影响会受到削弱。本文结论不仅丰富了谐音启动和失谐理论方面的研究, 也为企业广告实践和营销沟通提供了行之有效的管理洞察。
中图分类号:
周寿江, 赵一晨, 张瑾瑜, 康琪(Khloe Qi KANG). (2025). 将错就“措”还是改“谐”归正? 谐音对消费者广告评价的影响. 心理学报, 57(2), 331-348.
ZHOU Shoujiang, ZHAO Yichen, ZHANG Jinyu, Khloe Qi KANG. (2025). Correcting missteps or embracing humor? The impact of homophony on consumer Ad evaluation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(2), 331-348.
序号 | 组别 | 美观度 | 合理性 | 失谐 | 信息寻求 | 解决难度 | 失谐解决 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
实验2(N = 101) | 谐音 | 5.76 (1.11) | 5.63 (0.81) | 4.31 (1.50)* | 5.49 (1.19)* | 3.69 (1.60)* | 5.65 (0.88) |
规范 | 5.71 (1.07) | 5.81 (0.72) | 3.50 (1.83)* | 4.87 (1.73)* | 3.04 (1.40)* | 5.57 (0.97) | |
实验3(N = 150) | 谐音: 水果 | 5.69 (1.12) | 5.77 (1.07) | 4.05 (1.91)* | 4.84 (1.67)* | 3.51 (1.83)* | 5.58 (0.89) |
规范: 水果 | 5.56 (1.14) | 5.49 (1.05) | 3.43 (1.80)* | 4.28 (1.78)* | 2.96 (1.48)* | 5.77 (1.00) | |
谐音: 运动自行车 | 5.61 (1.08) | 5.84 (0.90) | 3.99 (2.05)* | 4.71 (1.77)* | 3.71 (1.70)* | 5.61 (0.94) | |
规范: 运动自行车 | 5.52 (1.16) | 5.64 (1.09) | 3.35 (1.83)* | 4.12 (1.82)* | 3.17 (1.55)* | 5.38 (1.08) | |
谐音: 止咳糖浆 | 4.92 (1.39) | 5.23 (1.48) | 4.64 (1.62)* | 5.31 (1.52)* | 4.21 (1.49)* | 5.51 (1.04) | |
规范: 止咳糖浆 | 4.76 (1.42) | 5.12 (1.36) | 4.07 (1.39)* | 4.76 (1.41)* | 3.69 (1.52)* | 5.29 (1.22) | |
实验4(N = 150) | 谐音 | 5.63 (1.15) | 5.44 (1.28) | 4.44 (1.33)** | 5.67 (1.34)* | 3.56 (1.63)* | 5.63 (0.96) |
规范 | 5.29 (1.32) | 5.35 (1.15) | 3.84 (1.41)** | 5.09 (1.44)* | 3.00 (1.31)* | 5.45 (1.07) | |
实验5(N = 146) | 谐音 | 4.84 (1.24) | 5.04 (1.15) | 4.07 (1.65)* | 5.26 (1.58)* | 4.34 (1.61)* | 4.82 (1.19) |
规范 | 5.04 (1.22) | 5.22 (1.10) | 3.53 (1.56)* | 4.71 (1.53)* | 3.78 (1.59)* | 5.06 (1.08) | |
实验6(N = 149) | 谐音(权威) | 5.05 (1.03) | 5.07 (1.47) | 4.30 (1.64)** | 5.18 (1.63)* | 4.20 (1.62)*** | 5.24 (0.97) |
规范(权威) | 5.27 (1.14) | 5.32 (1.39) | 3.39 (1.75)** | 4.61 (1.74)* | 3.00 (1.60)*** | 5.39 (0.99) | |
谐音(不权威) | 5.51 (1.24) | 5.03 (1.39) | 4.54 (1.82)* | 5.15 (1.30)* | 4.16 (1.66)* | 5.39 (1.07) | |
规范(不权威) | 5.64 (1.02) | 5.29 (1.12) | 3.95 (1.61)* | 4.60 (1.63)* | 3.64 (1.42)* | 5.57 (0.72) |
表1 实验2-6前测结果
序号 | 组别 | 美观度 | 合理性 | 失谐 | 信息寻求 | 解决难度 | 失谐解决 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
实验2(N = 101) | 谐音 | 5.76 (1.11) | 5.63 (0.81) | 4.31 (1.50)* | 5.49 (1.19)* | 3.69 (1.60)* | 5.65 (0.88) |
规范 | 5.71 (1.07) | 5.81 (0.72) | 3.50 (1.83)* | 4.87 (1.73)* | 3.04 (1.40)* | 5.57 (0.97) | |
实验3(N = 150) | 谐音: 水果 | 5.69 (1.12) | 5.77 (1.07) | 4.05 (1.91)* | 4.84 (1.67)* | 3.51 (1.83)* | 5.58 (0.89) |
规范: 水果 | 5.56 (1.14) | 5.49 (1.05) | 3.43 (1.80)* | 4.28 (1.78)* | 2.96 (1.48)* | 5.77 (1.00) | |
谐音: 运动自行车 | 5.61 (1.08) | 5.84 (0.90) | 3.99 (2.05)* | 4.71 (1.77)* | 3.71 (1.70)* | 5.61 (0.94) | |
规范: 运动自行车 | 5.52 (1.16) | 5.64 (1.09) | 3.35 (1.83)* | 4.12 (1.82)* | 3.17 (1.55)* | 5.38 (1.08) | |
谐音: 止咳糖浆 | 4.92 (1.39) | 5.23 (1.48) | 4.64 (1.62)* | 5.31 (1.52)* | 4.21 (1.49)* | 5.51 (1.04) | |
规范: 止咳糖浆 | 4.76 (1.42) | 5.12 (1.36) | 4.07 (1.39)* | 4.76 (1.41)* | 3.69 (1.52)* | 5.29 (1.22) | |
实验4(N = 150) | 谐音 | 5.63 (1.15) | 5.44 (1.28) | 4.44 (1.33)** | 5.67 (1.34)* | 3.56 (1.63)* | 5.63 (0.96) |
规范 | 5.29 (1.32) | 5.35 (1.15) | 3.84 (1.41)** | 5.09 (1.44)* | 3.00 (1.31)* | 5.45 (1.07) | |
实验5(N = 146) | 谐音 | 4.84 (1.24) | 5.04 (1.15) | 4.07 (1.65)* | 5.26 (1.58)* | 4.34 (1.61)* | 4.82 (1.19) |
规范 | 5.04 (1.22) | 5.22 (1.10) | 3.53 (1.56)* | 4.71 (1.53)* | 3.78 (1.59)* | 5.06 (1.08) | |
实验6(N = 149) | 谐音(权威) | 5.05 (1.03) | 5.07 (1.47) | 4.30 (1.64)** | 5.18 (1.63)* | 4.20 (1.62)*** | 5.24 (0.97) |
规范(权威) | 5.27 (1.14) | 5.32 (1.39) | 3.39 (1.75)** | 4.61 (1.74)* | 3.00 (1.60)*** | 5.39 (0.99) | |
谐音(不权威) | 5.51 (1.24) | 5.03 (1.39) | 4.54 (1.82)* | 5.15 (1.30)* | 4.16 (1.66)* | 5.39 (1.07) | |
规范(不权威) | 5.64 (1.02) | 5.29 (1.12) | 3.95 (1.61)* | 4.60 (1.63)* | 3.64 (1.42)* | 5.57 (0.72) |
[1] | Abolhasani, M., & Golrokhi, Z. (2022). Eat to the beat: Musical incongruity resolution in restaurant advertising. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 34(5), 567-591. |
[2] | Assaker, G., Vinzi, V. E., & O’Connor, P. (2011). Examining the effect of novelty seeking, satisfaction, and destination image on tourists’ return pattern: A two factor, non-linear latent growth model. Tourism Management, 32(4), 890-901. |
[3] | Baxter, S., Ilicic, J., & Kulczynski, A. (2017). You see Froot, you think fruit: Examining the effectiveness of pseudohomophone priming. European Journal of Marketing, 51(5/6), 885-902. |
[4] | Beuckels, E., Hudders, L., Cauberghe, V., Bombeke, K., Durnez, W., & Morton, J. (2021). To fit in or to stand out? An eye- tracking study investigating online banner effectiveness in a media multitasking context. Journal of Advertising, 50(4), 461-478. |
[5] | Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, R. C. (2001). The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers’ evaluations of product incongruity: Preference for the norm. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 439-449. |
[6] |
Cloninger, C. (1994). Temperament and personality. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 4(2), 266-273.
doi: 10.1016/0959-4388(94)90083-3 pmid: 8038587 |
[7] | Davis, D. F., & Herr, P. M. (2014). From bye to buy: Homophones as a phonological route to priming. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(6), 1063-1077. |
[8] | De Cicco, R., Iacobucci, S., & Pagliaro, S. (2021). The effect of influencer-product fit on advertising recognition and the role of an enhanced disclosure in increasing sponsorship transparency. International Journal of Advertising, 40(5), 733-759. |
[9] | Eisend, M. (2022). The influence of humor in advertising: Explaining the effects of humor in two-sided messages. Psychology & Marketing, 39(5), 962-973. |
[10] | Evanschitzky, H., Iyer, G. R., Pillai, K. G., Kenning, P., & Schütte, R. (2015). Consumer trial, continuous use, and economic benefits of a retail service innovation: The case of the personal shopping assistant. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 459-475. |
[11] |
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
doi: 10.3758/bf03193146 pmid: 17695343 |
[12] | Fisher, R. J., & Dubé, L. (2005). Gender differences in responses to emotional advertising: A social desirability perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 850-858. |
[13] | Flavell, J. H. (1977). Cognitive development. Hoboken, NJ: Prentice-Hall. |
[14] | Fleck, N., Korchia, M., & Le Roy, I. (2012). Celebrities in advertising: Looking for congruence or likability? Psychology & Marketing, 29(9), 651-662. |
[15] | Förster, J., Marguc, J., & Gillebaart, M. (2010). Novelty categorization theory. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(9), 736-755. |
[16] |
Goodman, G. S. (1980). Picture memory: How the action schema affects retention. Cognitive Psychology, 12(4), 473-495.
pmid: 7418366 |
[17] | Halkias, G., & Kokkinaki, F. (2014). The degree of ad-brand incongruity and the distinction between schema-driven and stimulus-driven attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 397-409. |
[18] | Hayes, A. F. Ed. (2018). Introduction to mediation, Moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. |
[19] | Heckler, S. E., & Childers, T. L. (1992). The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: What is incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 475-492. |
[20] | Hino, Y., Kusunose, Y., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2013). The processing advantage and disadvantage for homophones in lexical decision tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(2), 529-551. |
[21] | Hirschman, E. C. (1980). Innovativeness, novelty seeking, and consumer creativity. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 283-295. |
[22] | Hoang, C., Knöferle, K., & Warlop, L. (2023). Using different advertising humor appeals to generate firm-level warmth and competence impressions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 40(4), 741-759. |
[23] | Ilicic, J., Baxter, S. M., & Kulczynski, A. (2018). To meet or meat? Homophones in advertising encourage judgments and behaviors in children. Journal of Advertising, 47(4), 378-394. |
[24] | Ji, M., Wong, I. A., Eves, A., & Scarles, C. (2016). Food- related personality traits and the moderating role of novelty-seeking in food satisfaction and travel outcomes. Tourism Management, 57, 387-396. |
[25] | Kim, C., Costello, F. J., & Lee, K. C. (2020). The unobserved heterogeneneous influence of gamification and novelty- seeking traits on consumers’ repurchase intention in the omnichannel retailing. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1664. |
[26] | Kim, T., & Kim, O. (2018). Effects of ironic advertising on consumers’ attention, involvement and attitude. Journal of Marketing Communications, 24(1), 53-67. |
[27] | Kulczynski, A., Ilicic, J., & Baxter, S. M. (2017). Pictures are grate! Examining the effectiveness of pictorial-based homophones on consumer judgments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 286-301. |
[28] | Lee, E. -J., & Schumann, D. W. (2004). Explaining the special case of incongruity in advertising: Combining classic theoretical approaches. Marketing Theory, 4(1-2), 59-90. |
[29] | Lee, E., Tinkham, S., & Edwards, S. M. (2005). The multidimensional structure of attitude toward the ad: Utilitarian, hedonic, and interestingness dimensions. In American Academy of Advertising. Conference. Proceedings (p. 58-66). American Academy of Advertising. |
[30] | Lee, J., & Kim, H. (2022). How to survive in advertisement flooding: The effects of schema-product congruity and attribute relevance on advertisement attitude. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 21(2), 214-230. |
[31] | Lee, Y. -A., Binder, K. S., Kim, J. -O., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1999). Activation of phonological codes during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(4), 948-964. |
[32] | Lee, Y. H., & Mason, C. (1999). Responses to information incongruency in advertising: The role of expectancy, relevancy, and humor. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(2), 156-169. |
[33] | Li, H., & Lo, H. -Y. (2014). Do you recognize its brand? The effectiveness of online in-stream video advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 44(3), 208-218. |
[34] | Li, P., & Yip, M. C. (1996). Lexical ambiguity and context effects in spoken word recognition:Evidence from Chinese. In G. Cottrell (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 228-232). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. |
[35] | Li, P., & Yip, M. C. (1998). Context effects and the processing of spoken homophones. Reading and Writing, 10(3-5), 223-243. |
[36] | Li, Y., & Li, D. (2013). The influence of idiom modifications in advertising on consumers’ attitude towards advertising and perception of firm. Management Review, 25(8), 132-141. |
[李研, 李东进. (2013). 变异成语对消费者广告态度和企业感知的影响. 管理评论, 25(8), 132-141.] | |
[37] | Liu, S., Bi, X., & He, K. (2017). The impact of internet language copy on consumers’ attention and perceptions of the advertisement. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(12), 1590-1603. |
[刘世雄, 毕晓培, 贺凯彬. (2017). 网络语言文案对广告注意和感知的影响. 心理学报, 49(12), 1590-1603.] | |
[38] | Lukatela, G., & Turvey, M. T. (1994). Visual lexical access is initially phonological: I. Evidence from associative priming by words, homophones, and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123(2), 107-128. |
[39] |
Ma, L., Ma, Y., He, X., Liu, H., & Zhang, J. (2019). Processing of Chinese homophonic two-part allegoric sayings: Effects of familiarity and homophone. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(12), 1306-1317.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01306 |
[马利军, 马云霄, 何晓清, 刘海涛, 张静宇. (2019). 相对熟悉度和同音线索在谐音型歇后语理解中的作用. 心理学报, 51(12), 1306-1317.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01306 |
|
[40] | Mandler, G. (1982). The structure of value:Accounting for taste. In M. S. Clark, & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and cognition: The 17th annual Carnegie symposium on cognition (pp. 3-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. |
[41] | Meyers-Levy, J., & Tybout, A. M. (1989). Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 39-54. |
[42] | Min Jung, J., Polyorat, K., & Kellaris, J. J. (2009). A cultural paradox in authority-based advertising. International Marketing Review, 26(6), 601-632. |
[43] | Mitas, O., & Bastiaansen, M. (2018). Novelty: A mechanism of tourists’ enjoyment. Annals of Tourism Research, 72, 98-108. |
[44] | Mohanty, P. (Pam), & Ratneshwar, S. (2016). Visual metaphors in Ads: The inverted-U effects of incongruity on processing pleasure and Ad effectiveness. Journal of Promotion Management, 22(3), 443-460. |
[45] | Moore, R. S., Stammerjohan, C. A., & Coulter, R. A. (2005). Banner advertiser-web site context congruity and color effects on attention and attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 71-84. |
[46] | Noseworthy, T. J., Murray, K. B., & Di Muro, F. (2018). When two wrongs make a right: Using conjunctive enablers to enhance evaluations for extremely incongruent new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(6), 1379-1396. |
[47] | Pérez, A., & Rodríguez del Bosque, I. (2015). How customer novelty seeking influences customer CSR perceptions. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 33(4), 486-507. |
[48] | Qu, Q. Q., Liu, W. L., & Li, X. S. (2018). The functional unit of phonological encoding in Chinese spoken production: study on phonemes. Advances in Psychological Sciences, 26(9), 1535-1544. |
[屈青青, 刘维琳, 李兴珊. (2018). 汉语言语产生的语音加工单元——基于音位的研究. 心理科学进展, 26(9), 1535-1544.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01535 |
|
[49] | Schweizer, T. S. (2006). The psychology of novelty-seeking, creativity and innovation: Neurocognitive aspects within a work-psychological perspective. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(2), 164-172. |
[50] | Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C. R., & Owen, W. J. (2007). Multiple meanings are not necessarily a disadvantage in semantic processing: Evidence from homophone effects in semantic categorisation. Language & Cognitive Processes, 22(3), 453-467. |
[51] | Spiller, S. A., Fitzsimons, G. J., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & McClelland, G. H. (2013). Spotlights, floodlights, and the magic number zero: Simple effects tests in moderated regression. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(2), 277-288. |
[52] | Sung, B., Hartley, N., Vanman, E., & Phau, I. (2016). How can the word “NEW” evoke consumers’ experiences of novelty and interest? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 166-173. |
[53] | Sung, B., Vanman, E. J., & Hartley, N. (2022). Revisiting (dis)fluency: Metacognitive difficulty as a novelty cue that evokes feeling-of-interest. Psychology & Marketing, 39(8), 1451-1466. |
[54] | Taylor, N., & Noseworthy, T. J. (2020). Compensating for innovation: Extreme product incongruity encourages consumers to affirm unrelated consumption schemas. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(1), 77-95. |
[55] | Van den Bos, W., & Hertwig, R. (2017). Adolescents display distinctive tolerance to ambiguity and to uncertainty during risky decision making. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 40962. |
[56] | Wang, L., & Dong, M. (2022). Does “male beauty” really work: The impact of male endorsements on female consumers’ evaluation of female-gender-imaged product. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(2), 192-204. |
[王丽丽, 董梦璐. (2022). “美男诱惑”真的奏效吗:男性代言女性产品对女性消费者产品评价的影响. 心理学报, 54(2), 192-204.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00192 |
|
[57] | Wang, Z., Mao, H., Li, Y. J., & Liu, F. (2017). Smile big or not? Effects of smile intensity on perceptions of warmth and competence. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), 787-805. |
[58] | Yip, M. C. W., & Zhai, M. (2018a). Context effects and spoken word recognition of Chinese: An eye-tracking study. Cognitive Science, 42(S4), 1134-1153. |
[59] | Yip, M. C. W., & Zhai, M. (2018b). Processing homophones interactively: Evidence from eye-movement data. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 9812. |
[60] | Yoon, H. J. (2013). Understanding schema incongruity as a process in advertising: Review and future recommendations. Journal of Marketing Communications, 19(5), 360-376. |
[61] |
Zhan, J., Yu, H., & Zhou, X. (2013). fMRI evidence for the interaction between orthography and phonology in reading Chinese compound words. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 753.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00753 pmid: 24319418 |
[62] |
Ziegler, J. C., Tan, L. H., Perry, C., & Montant, M. (2000). Phonology matters: The phonological frequency effect in written Chinese. Psychological Science, 11(3), 234-238.
pmid: 11273409 |
[1] | 黄韫慧, 肖友凯, 初星宇, 卢玥. 语义还是谐音:品牌个性与双关类型的匹配[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(11): 1604-1618. |
[2] | 冉雅璇, 张谱月, 陈斯允, 项典典. 有“新”同享:共有消费促进对不熟悉产品的选择*[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(8): 979-995. |
[3] | 江红艳, 张婧, 孙配贞, 江贤锦. 感性还是理性?文化衍生的权力感对广告诉求偏好的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(6): 684-702. |
[4] | 朱振中, 刘福, Haipeng (Allan) Chen. 能力还是热情?广告诉求对消费者品牌认同和购买意向的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(3): 357-370. |
[5] | 马利军, 马云霄, 何晓清, 刘海涛, 张静宇. 相对熟悉度和同音线索在谐音型歇后语理解中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(12): 1306-1317. |
[6] | 庞隽;毕圣. 广告诉求-品牌来源国刻板印象匹配度对品牌态度的影响机制[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(3): 406-416. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||