Surface-structure transformations and advertising slogans: The case for moderate syntactic complexity

被引:30
作者
Bradley, SD
Meeds, R
机构
[1] Cornell Univ, Dept Commun, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA
[2] Kansas State Univ, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1002/mar.10027
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Since its introduction in 1957, Noam Chomsky's theory of transformational grammar has been the subject of much psycholinguistic research. Through several metamorphoses, the theory has remained controversial as to whether it represents how the mind actually processes language. Psycholinguists have studied this area over several decades. Syntactic structure has been studied in terms of recall and effects on reaction time to secondary tasks, but little is known about syntactic structure and attitude formation. Advertising researchers have looked at the effects of many types of complexity (e.g., semantic and visual), but few have investigated the effects of syntactic complexity on attitude formation. This study used a within-subjects experiment to examine how surface-structure transformations affected readers' comprehension, recognition, recall, and attitudes toward slogans. As expected, syntactic complexity did not affect the comprehension of advertising slogans, but simple-syntax versions-especially the active voice-showed an advantage in recognition. Slogans with moderate syntactic complexity showed a significant positive effect on free morphemic recall and attitude toward the advertisement, but a high degree of syntactic manipulations resulted in significantly lower free morphemic recall and attitudes toward the ad, suggesting a possible curvilinear relationship. These findings and implications for advertising professionals and educators are discussed. (C) 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:595 / 619
页数:25
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   TECHNICAL WORDING IN ADVERTISING - IMPLICATIONS FOR MARKET-SEGMENTATION [J].
ANDERSON, RE ;
JOLSON, MA .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 1980, 44 (01) :57-66
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1972, Language and Mind, Enlarged Edition
[3]  
Batra R., 1983, INFORMATION PROCESSI, P127
[4]   THE ROLE OF GRAMMARS IN MODELS OF LANGUAGE USE [J].
BERWICK, RC ;
WEINBERG, AS .
COGNITION, 1983, 13 (01) :1-61
[5]  
Bresnan J., 1978, LINGUISTIC THEORY PS, P1
[6]   EFFECTS OF TEXT STRUCTURE ON USE OF COGNITIVE CAPACITY DURING READING [J].
BRITTON, BK ;
GLYNN, SM ;
MEYER, BJF ;
PENLAND, MJ .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1982, 74 (01) :51-61
[7]   EFFECTS OF NEED FOR COGNITION ON MESSAGE EVALUATION, RECALL, AND PERSUASION [J].
CACIOPPO, JT ;
PETTY, RE ;
MORRIS, KJ .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1983, 45 (04) :805-818
[8]  
Carroll D.W., 1999, PSYCHOL LANGUAGE, V3rd
[9]  
CHAMBLEE R, 1993, J ADVERTISING RES, V33, P23
[10]  
CHOMSKY N, 1976, LINGUIST ANAL, V2, P303