Nonconformity Advertising to Teens

Yeqing Bao and Alan T Shao Journal of Advertising Research Vol. 42, No. 3, May/June 2002

Title: Author(s): Source: Issue:

Nonconformity Advertising to Teens Yeqing Bao and Alan T Shao Journal of Advertising Research Vol. 42, No. 3, May/June 2002

Nonconformity Advertising to Teens

Yeqing Bao University of Alabama and Alan T. Shao University of North Carolina Americans prefer to give names like 'Baby Boomers,' 'Generation X,' and 'Generation Y' to generations to describe certain time periods. The Baby Boomers are those U.S. citizens born between 1946 and 1964. During this time period, over 76 million people were born in the United States. In the 1980s, when many of the boomers found high-paying jobs, they were characterized as being massive in numbers and a group that sought to show off their wealth through material possessions. Generation X are those U.S. citizens born between 1965 and 1979. Through the years, they have been stereotyped as lazy, unmotivated know-it-alls who resolve not to form a long-term allegiance with any one company or agency. Generation Y are the kids of today. They are the offspring of the Baby Boomers so they are sometimes called 'Echo Boomers.' These children (ages 1 to 20) are huge in numbers and market potential. There are 80 million people in this age group and they spend roughly $600 billion annually. They are used to having many possessions. When the children of the Baby Boomers were younger they received four times the number of toys that their parents did 20 years earlier. In 1972, the average child received $50 in toys during the year. In 1992, when the Echo Boom arrived, that amount jumped to over $200 per child per year (Gronbach, 2000). Whether or not these portrayals of each generation are accurate is debatable. But one thing is for certain-the sector receiving the bulk of attention from today's marketers are teenagers in Generation Y. There are 31 million people in the United States between 12 and 19 years of age, according to Teenage Research Unlimited. In 1999, this group spent $153 billion, an 8.5 percent jump from the previous year. And the teenage market will grow to 35 million in 2010, making it the largest teen population in U.S. history (Barrett, 2000). Despite the tremendous potential, teenagers are more difficult to market to than past generations. With advances in technology, today's teens have access to more information than previous generations. They are literally inundated with information through a variety of media such as televisions, radios, magazines, and the internet. This makes them more attuned to purchasing but also more sophisticated and skeptical (McLaughlin, 2000). It is difficult to convince today's teens that a particular product or service is the one to buy. Campaigns targeting the masses simply don't work on them. In order to succeed within this segment, it is imperative for advertisers to conduct extensive marketing research (Bruss, 2000).

Downloaded from warc.com

The current research evaluates the effectiveness of a Unique Selling Proposition (USP) advertising campaign (Reeves, 1961) run by the Carolina Beverage Corporation toward the teenage market. More specifically, two tests were conducted. First, a two-wave field study was conducted before and after a major campaign to examine whether their USP strategy was effective in improving adolescent consumers brand awareness, brand attitude, and product trial. Then, a laboratory study was administrated to further test whether such improvements could be causally attributed to the new campaign. This research should be of interest to (1) marketers looking for an effective advertising strategy to reach the teen market, (2) advertising creative members developing creative ideas to target the teen market, and (3) researchers trying to understand the impact of advertising on adolescents. Background Research is abundant on the effectiveness of advertising targeted at consumers (see Vakratsas and Ambler, 1999, for a comprehensive review). However, research examining the effectiveness of advertising strategy that targets the teenage market is relatively scarce. This may be attributed to the recent findings that teens are skeptical about advertising. Skepticism implies that they recognize that advertisers have specific motives, such as persuading consumers, and thus that advertisers' communications may be biased and varied in their truthfulness (Mangleburg and Bristol, 1998). The bulk of studies that have looked into advertising strategy targeting teenagers concentrate on antismoking campaigns (Novelli, 1999; Siegel, 2000). Other studies have described the teen generation as more discriminating and headstrong than previous generations (Gallo, 1993). Furthermore, the current teen generation does not respond to lectures from parents. Instead, they are extremely prone to the views of peers, whose opinions are one of the most important in forming their brand preferences (Keillor, Parker, and Schaefer, 1996). This seems to imply that advertisements using teenagers as spokes-people could be more effective than those using other people to target teens. The teenage sector is the target market of choice for most soft-drink companies. As noted earlier, the sector is huge in numbers and potential. This applies to soft-drink consumption in particular. 'The largest consumers of carbonated soft drinks are kids in their teens,' says Scott Jacobson, a Coke spokesman in Atlanta (Baker, 1997). According to a study conducted by Teenage Research Unlimited, 'In the last 90 days, teens bought these items: a cola (34%), a lemon-lime soda (17%), a fast-food hamburger (53%), a CD (55%) an antiperspirant (30%), breath mints (43%), and a phone card (14%)' (Weissman, 1999). Teens spend $105.1 billion on day-to-day expenditures and roughly $53.8 billion on food and items for their families. They also influence $278.1 billion in parental purchases. This is a powerful segment that will continue to grow, according to a Rand Youth Poll (Holleran, 1999). A report by the Center for Science in the Public Interest noted that the average 13-to 18-year-old male who is a soft-drink consumer consumes more than three 12-ounce cans per day, and 10 percent drink seven or more cans a day. The average female consumer of soft drinks in the same age group drinks more than two cans per day, and 10 percent drink five or more cans a day (Food Service Director, 1999). The company Carolina Beverage Corporation (CBC hereafter) of Salisbury, North Carolina, is the parent company for Cheerwine and Diet Cheerwine soft drinks, as well as Cool Moon, a citrus-flavored soft drink, and Blue Mist, a purified drinking water. The company was established in 1917 when Cheerwine was initially formulated and distributed in selected regions of North Carolina. The company has been a family owned and operated business for over 85 years. Today the great-grandson of the
Downloaded from warc.com

company's founder runs the business operations. Cheerwine is primarily distributed in North Carolina and South Carolina, but secondary demand exists in Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Cheerwine is bottled and distributed by 24 different bottlers and distributors. The campaign A major advertising campaign was administered on television and radio stations as well as billboards in the two Carolina regions during the four months between March and August 1999. The goal of the campaign was to increase brand awareness and usage of Cheerwine among high school students in selected regions of North and South Carolina where Cheerwine is considered new to the market. Prior to March, CBC promoted Cheerwine throughout their other markets using the slogan, 'It's a Carolina Thing.' The slogan ran for several years but eventually had little impact on sales. So a new slogan 'Now That Would Be Different!' was introduced in April 1999. The plan was to appeal to teenagers wanting to be unique. Advertisements to promote Cheerwine starred two teenagers, Matt and Jeff. Of the two, Matt was more laid back. He was often the voice of reason in Jeff's bizarre world of trying too hard to be different. Throughout multiple radio and television advertisements, Jeff refused to forget the fads and listen to Matt whose idea of being different was as simple as drinking an ice-cold, bubbly red Cheerwine. Once again, the intent of the advertisements was to position Cheerwine as a product that would make teenagers their target market feel unique. As they said in their promotions, 'After all, it'll satisfy even the strongest thirst for nonconformity.' Hypothesis development Our hypotheses come from the Unique Selling Proposition (USP). This concept, developed by Rosser Reeves (1961), former head of the Ted Bates advertising agency, basically states that purchasers of a unique product will receive specific benefits from buying and using the product. Reeves believed that 7 out of every 10 advertisements were nothing but fluff. So he advocated that companies create a meaningful way to set their products apart from others and thus encourage people to choose their products (Well, Burnett, and Moriarty, 1992; Trout, 2000). Reeves' proposition that marketers offer products different from their competitors' offerings can be accomplished by developing products that have a special formula, design, or feature protected by a patent or copyright. It is crucial that the product is unique and important to the prospect. A USP can be an outright statement or simply implied. Today's teens seem to be an ideal target to apply the USP. They tend to be characterized by individual taste, style, and attitude, e.g., body piercing. No one group rules. An overwhelming 45 percent like trying new products before they become popular (Scotti, 2000). They want to be 'cool' and 'sweet'; that is, they want to be exclusive and cutting edge. In order to connect with them, advertising has to be different and needs to capitalize on a product's unique characteristics (Omelia, 1998). As the USP strategy was originally proposed, it was implied to be based on a unique physical product characteristic and/or benefit (Frazer, 1983). However, for today's teen, casting on a unique physical product characteristic is not enough. In today's highly competitive market, teens have too many choices, most of which possess distinct product advantage. So besides the USP, advertising needs to further emphasize that the unique product could help teens stand out, to be 'cool.' As stated by Jim Trebilcock, senior vice president of marketing at Cadbury/Schweppes, 'You have to deliver in an entertaining way and be different. They have so many choices today, and if you're going to be middle-of-the-road and not press the envelope, you're not going to reach them' (Bruss, 2000).
Downloaded from warc.com

Nonconformity advertising seems to serve this purpose. In such advertisements, nonconformity, one important characteristic of today's teens, is delineated. The advertising stresses that even teens with a strong need for nonconformity would like to use this unique product, because it strengthens their 'cool' image. Further, by using similar age spokespersons in the advertising, it is expected that teenagers will identify with the image and accept the product. Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses are offered: H1: Advertisements that realize a Unique Selling Proposition through nonconformity advertising will sway teenagers in terms of improving their brand awareness. H2: Advertisements that realize a Unique Selling Proposition through nonconformity advertising will sway teenagers in terms of improving their brand attitude. H3: Advertisements that realize a Unique Selling Proposition through nonconformity advertising will sway teenagers in terms of improving their product trial. CBC's Cheerwine soft drink with a powerful cherry taste possesses a unique taste. Their new campaign focused on this special attribute and tried to project a unique selling proposition through nonconformity advertising. This campaign provides an appropriate case to test the effectiveness of the above research hypotheses. Methodology Two studies were conducted to test whether the USP through nonconformity advertising is effective in targeting the teenage market. Study 1 was a field study with data collected before and after the CBC advertising campaign. It examined the association between the advertising campaign and the change of consumers brand perception in the marketplace. Study 2 was a laboratory study with environmental factors controlled. It further inspected the causal effect of the advertising message on consumers' brand perception in a laboratory setting. Study 1 Sample A two-wave study was conducted to permit pre- and post-advertising campaign measurements. The first wave took place in March 1999 and the second in August of the same year. Since Cheerwine's target market is the adolescent consumer, highschool students served as subjects in the study. Six high schools (four of them participated in both waves) from the targeted areas participated in the study. An examination of the ethnic and gender proportions of the student body in the high schools indicated they were representative of Cheerwine's target market. Each school was given an honorarium of $250 for their cooperation. In total, 1,008 students participated the first wave and 1,268 students participated the second wave. Table 1 exhibits the demographic information of the subjects. Table 1: demographic information of subjects in study 1
Firstwave(%) Second wave (N = 1,008) (%) (N = 1,268) 41.3 58.7 33.0 49.5 2.1 2.7 43.5 56.4 35.4 55.5 2.7 1.1
Downloaded from warc.com

Gender Ethnic origin

Male Female African American Caucasian Hispanic Asian/Pacific

Age category Years living in Carolinas

American Indian Other No response 1213 years 1415 years 1617 years 18 years and over No response Less than 2 24 57 810 More than 10 No response

1.4 3.9 7.4 1.2 28.5 45.6 19.0 5.7 4.9 4.5 8.3 7.9 68.8 5.6

1.1 4.1 10.6 1.9 45.2 45.0 7.8 10.2 5.1 5.6 6.4 9.1 73.3 10.2

Given that adolescents are a highly sensitive consumer group, no identification was ever used in the study in order that subjects would not feel uncomfortable in responding to the questions. In the second wave, subjects were asked whether they completed the first study in March. Approximately a quarter of them (26.6 percent) said 'yes,' 54.9 percent said no, and the remainder said they could not remember. More than two-thirds of subjects (73.0 percent in the first wave and 78.2 percent in the second wave) indicated that they had tried Cheerwine before. In addition, as showed in Table 1, the majority of subjects (95 percent) in both waves have lived in the Carolinas for at least two years. It is clear that the majority of respondents have had ample opportunity to be exposed to advertising campaigns and products of Cheerwine and thus were able to give valid responses regarding this brand. Questionnaire design The first measurement instrument was developed through a multi-tier process. One of the authors developed an initial draft of the survey, which was read by managers at Wray Ward Laseter, the advertising agency responsible for developing and implementing the advertising campaigns. They recommended some minor categorical and grammatical changes. The president of CBC then read the instrument. Once again, a few minor categorical changes resulted. The second questionnaire was developed following the completion of the first wave of data collection. Some additional items inquired about subjects' perception of Cheerwine's advertising campaign. Subjects were queried about their general soft-drink preference and purchase behavior, their perception regarding soft-drink advertisements, and their perceptions regarding Cheerwine and its advertisements. Finally, demographic information was gathered. Measures Brand Awareness was measured by (1) teenagers' perception of Cheerwine's availability in stores and restaurants, (2) their perception of Cheerwine's taste, and (3) their perception of Cheerwine's affordability. Specifically, subjects in both waves were asked to indicate their agreement on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 strongly disagree, and an extra indicator for 'don't know') with statements 'It's easy to find in stores,' 'It's easy to find in restaurants,' 'It's got an unusual taste,' 'It's not a soft drink,' and 'It's inexpensive.' Brand Attitude was measured by asking subjects' agreement with two statements: 'I like its taste' on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree, and an extra indicator for 'don't know') and your preference toward Cheerwine' on a 4point scale (1 = excellent, 4 poor, and an extra indicator for 'never tried it'). Product Trial was measured by the number of subjects who indicated that they had never tried Cheerwine before. This was
Downloaded from warc.com

embedded in one of the statements for brand attitude as 'your preference toward Cheerwine.' Further, in the second wave, subjects were asked whether they remembered seeing any advertising of Cheerwine products in the past four months (choices = yes, no, or don't know), and if yes, where they came across it (choices = television, newspaper, radio, magazine, outdoor billboards, internet, in-store sweepstakes, and other), and what the message was (subjects were asked to specify). Analysis In order to measure the effectiveness of the advertising campaigns, subjects' brand awareness, brand attitude, and product trial were compared before and after the campaign. Furthermore, subjects in the second wave who reported remembering Cheerwine's advertising were compared to those who did not remember and who did not know regarding their brand awareness, brand attitude, and product trial. Comparisons were conducted using ANOVA for means and Z test and x2 test for percentages (Lehmann, Gupta, and Steckel, 1998). Results Table 2 exhibits respondents' brand awareness, brand attitude, and product trial in both waves. Overall, subjects in the second wave appeared to have greater brand awareness than those in the first wave in terms that Cheerwine has an unusual taste and is easy to find in stores and restaurants. However, subjects' perception regarding whether Cheerwine is a soft drink did not change. There is no difference either between subjects' perception about Cheerwine's affordability. Subjects in both waves tend to agree that Cheerwine is inexpensive. There is no change in subjects' brand attitude toward Cheerwine. But the number of subjects who have never tried Cheerwine did crease in the second wave, suggesting that the campaign was effective in eliciting product trial. table 2: subjects' perception of cheerwine in both waves
Advertising Statement effectiveness Brand awareness It's easy to find in stores. It's easy to find in restaurants. It's got an unusual taste. It's not a soft drink. It's inexpensive. Brand attitude I like its taste. Subjects' preference toward Cheerwine. Product triala Never tried it. Mean score Mean score F-value of (March) (August) difference 3.42 4.14 2.47 3.75 2.40 2.22 2.26 27.00% 2.70 3.70 2.28 3.70 2.46 2.28 2.28 21.80% 15.10*** 63.52*** 11.03** .70 1.30 .95 .23 Z = 2.85**

Note: a Number indicating the percentage of subjects who never tried it and difference is Z-value. **p < .01 ***p < .001

In the second wave, 187 subjects reported that they remembered the advertising of Cheerwine products in the last four months, 768 indicated that they did not remember, 195 said they did not know, and the rest did not respond to this item. These subjects' perception of Cheerwine is categorized in Table 3. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) denoted that brand awareness, brand attitude, and product trial are different among those who remembered, who did not remember, and who did not know.
Downloaded from warc.com

Specifically, regarding brand awareness, post hoc analysis indicated that those who remembered Cheerwine's advertising hold firmer belief than those who did not remember that Cheerwine is easy to find in stores, that Cheerwine has an unusual taste, and that Cheerwine is a soft drink. But there is no difference between their perception of Cheerwine's availability in restaurants and its affordability. In terms of brand attitude, those who remembered the advertising like Cheerwine's taste and prefer it more than those who did not remember. Finally, product trial is clearly higher among those who remember the advertising than among those who either didn't remember or did not know. table 3: subjects perception of cheerwine in the second wave
Mean score ANOVA

Remember any advertising of Cheerwine products?b Yes (n = 187) 2.55c 3.74c 2.04c 3.95c 2.38 1.97c 2.01c 12.83%c No (n = 768) 2.84d 3.80c 2.27d 3.69d 2.49 2.38d 2.33d 22.79%d Don't know F-value (n = 195) 2.39c 3.26d 2.49d 3.52d 2.48 2.18cd 2.30d 26.15%d 10.47*** 13.32*** 6.11** 4.92** .50 7.55** 6.76** X2 = 11.44**

Advertising Statement effectiveness Brand awareness It's easy to find in stores.

It's easy to find in restaurants. It's got an unusual taste. It's not a soft drink. It's inexpensive. Brand attitude I like its taste. Subjects' preference toward Cheerwine Product triala Never tried it.

Note: a Number indicating the percentage of subjects who never tried it and difference is X2-value. b Number in each cell does not add up to sample size N = 1268 to non-response. cd In the same row, scores with different letters indicate significant difference. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Results in Tables 2 and 3 combined seem to indicate that the advertising campaign was effective in improving teenagers' brand awareness in terms of Cheerwine's availability in stores and its unique taste, partially supporting H1. Overall, the USP campaign did not change teenagers brand attitudes. For those who remember the advertising, it did improve their brand attitudes. Thus, H2 is not supported. Finally, overall product trial increased after the advertising campaign and more so for those who remembered Cheerwine's advertising. Thus, H3 is fully supported. Discussion Data from the field study showed that the USP campaign through nonconformity advertising seems to be successful in increasing consumers brand awareness and initiating their product trial. However, as in most field studies, we were not able to control the potential confounding impact of other environmental factors, including but not limited to the economy, weather, company's distribution effort, and competitors' marketing behavior during the advertising campaign period. Thus, at best, the field study has revealed an association between the USP campaign and the change of consumer's brand perception. It is inappropriate to conclude any causality from the study. To further explore whether the USP campaign's impact is causal, a second study was conducted in the laboratory setting. Study 2
Downloaded from warc.com

Experimental design and procedure A between-subject experiment was designed in which two groups listened to a radio program. For Group 1, the radio program contains a Pepsi-Cola advertisement, a pop song by Uncle Cracker, and an outdated Cheerwine advertisement (the old advertisement with the slogan 'It's a Carolina Thing.'). For Group 2, the radio program includes the same Pepsi advertising, the pop song, and the USP nonconformity advertising (the new advertisement with the slogan of 'Now That Would Be Different!'). Experiments were conducted in a North Carolina high school. In total, the experiment took about half an hour. Subjects were informed of the procedure in advance. They were asked to first fill out Part I of a questionnaire in which information was asked regarding their beverage consumption and soft-drink preference, as well as recent exposure to soft-drink radio advertisements. After completion, Part I was collected. Subjects were then instructed to take a brief break by listening to the radio program. Next, Part II of the questionnaire was distributed in which information was asked about subjects' response to the radio program and their soft-drink preference, as well as their demographics. Subjects were dismissed after completion. Sample As in Study 1, the subjects in Study 2 were high-school students. All students were recruited from a local high school that did not participate in Study 1. An honorarium of $100 was given to the school for its support. In total, Group 1 had 104 students and Group 2 had 76 students. Respondents' ages ranged from under 12 to 18 and over, with the majority (83.0 percent) between 14 and 17. Approximately half of them were male (54.7 percent). Most of them (72.1 percent) were of Caucasian background, and more than half of them (60.3 percent) reported having lived in the Carolinas for more than 10 years. Overall, subjects showed similar demographic composition to those in Study 1. Measures The focal measures in Study 2 were subjects' brand preference and their purchasing likelihood before and after listening to the radio program. Brand Preference was measured by asking the subjects to indicate their preference toward various brands of soft drinks. Response was on a 4-point scale (1 = excellent, 4 = poor, with an extra indicator for 'never tried it'). Purchasing Likelihood was measured with two items. Item 1 asked, 'How likely are you to purchase the following brands of soft drinks on your next trip?' and item 2 asked, 'How likely are you to recommend to your best friend the following brands of soft drinks?' Both items were rated on a 5-point scale with 1 as very likely and 5 as very unlikely. The two items exhibited good reliability across two groups (Cronbach a = .92 and .87 in Part I versus .84 and .91 in Part II, respectively). For manipulation check purposes, in Part II subjects were also asked to identify brands in the radio advertising and whether they have heard about the advertisements before. Analysis To ensure respondent confidentiality, the school authority urged experiment administrators to avoid using codes on the questionnaire to identify individuals. Thus, it was not possible to match an individual's responses to Part I with the same individual's responses to Part II. Hence, analysis was conducted on a group basis, even for the same group's results before and after the experimental treatment. ANOVA was applied to compare means.
Downloaded from warc.com

Results For Group 1, the majority of subjects (87.5 percent) recognized Cheerwine in the radio program. Approximately half (49.5 percent) reported having heard and slightly less than half (41.6 percent) reported not having heard the advertisement before. The remaining respondents indicated that they did not know. For Group 2, more than two-thirds (68.0 percent) of the subjects accurately reported Cheerwine in the radio program. One-third of the subjects recorded having heard and slightly more than half (54.2 percent) recorded not having heard the advertisement before. The rest of the respondents indicated that they did not know. Overall, most subjects in both groups appeared to have paid close attention to the experiment treatment (the radio program). Respondents' brand preference and purchasing likelihood before and after listening to the radio program are listed in Table 4. After being exposed to the radio program, there is no change in Group l's brand preference and purchasing likelihood. As a contrast, Group 2 indicates both greater brand preference and higher purchasing likelihood. The change of brand preference is marginally significant and that of purchasing likelihood is significant. table 4: advertising effects in the laboratory study
Before ad exposure After ad exposure

F-value of pnb Mean S.D. nb Mean S.D. difference value 104 2.23 .91 95 2.40 1.08 1.45 .11 2.75 3.90 .23 .74 .10 .05

Group Brand 1 preferencea Purchasing likelihood Group Brand 2 preference Purchasing likelihood

108 6.34 2.86 104 6.21 2.89 90 94 2.28 1.10 61 6.33 3.10 72 1.97 1.17 5.35 3.28

Note: a Lower mean indicates greater brand performance or higher purchasing likelihood. b Sample size varies in each cell due to retreat of some subjects during Part II as well as missing values.

Discussion Further analysis showed that there is no difference between Group 1's brand preference, as well as purchasing likelihood, and those of Group 2 before the radio program (F = .11, p = .75 and F = .00, p = .98, respectively). This indicates the equivalence of the two groups before they were exposed to the experimental treatment. Given the equivalence of the experimental settings, it could be inferred that it is the radio program that caused the difference between Group 1 and Group 2's response variation before and after the radio program. Since the only difference between the two groups' radio program is Cheerwine's advertising, it is concluded that the new nonconformity advertising is more effective than the old descriptive advertising in improving teenagers' brand preference and purchasing likelihood. Post analysis As exhibited in Table 3, in the second wave of Study 1, 16.3 percent of respondents (n = 187) indicated that they remembered the advertisement of Cheerwine products. Among them, television was the most often named media regarding where they
Downloaded from warc.com

10

were exposed to the advertisements. Radio was the second most often named medium. A summary of responses is listed in Table 5. table 5: media vehicles where teenagers came across advertising of Cheerwine
Media vehicle Television Radio Outdoor billboards Print magazine In-store sweep stakes Internet Newspaper Other Number of respondents a 93 76 52 12 8 6 5 5

Note: a Number added up to exceed 187 because subjects could choose multiple items.

When asked to write down the advertising message, only 60 responses were obtained among the 187 subjects who remembered the advertising of Cheerwine products. The most responses (n = 21) stated that they couldn't remember the message they were exposed to. Another 16 subjects wrote 'Cheerwine It's a Carolina thing.' An additional 13 respondents wrote 'Cheerwine is different' and 10 wrote that the message was 'Buy it.' General discussion Integrating Study 1 and Study 2, our results showed that overall, CBC's new advertising campaign adopting the USP strategy was effective in partially improving teenagers' brand awareness in terms of its unique taste as well as availability in stores and restaurants. Further, product trial increased after the campaign but brand attitude did not. This seems to correspond well with the low-involvement hierarchy model (CEA) formulated by Vakratsas and Ambler (1999). The model suggests that for lowinvolvement products, most of the time advertising increases consumers' awareness, which stimulates product trial, and consumers form product preference based on the product experience. Compared to product-usage experience, advertising alone has much less impact on brand preference formation. This was well exhibited in our Study 2 where the increment of purchasing likelihood of Cheerwine is significant while the increment of brand preference is only marginally significant. For new users, advertising frames usage experience and for re-users, it reinforces existing habits (Ehrenberg, 1994; Pechmann and Stewart, 1989). When advertising precedes product trial, it tends to mitigate a negative trial effect but has little impact on product beliefs and brand attitudes when trial is positive (Smith, 1993). In the current study, Cheerwine is a soft drink, a typical low-involvement product. Thus, it is no surprise that our results match the CEA model. In our post analysis of Study 1, recall of the advertising was rather low. This may be due to the response format because the query asked the subjects to write down the message information rather than to select from multiple choices. Students did not appear to be very motivated to write long sentences, because only a fraction of those who said they remembered the advertisement actually wrote down the message information. This considered, it remains clear that Cheerwine advertisements did not make a memorable impact on teenagers. However, for those who reported remembering Cheerwine's advertising, their brand attitude was more favorable than those who reported not remembering the advertisement. The former probably identify more with the spokesperson in the advertisements and thus possess a more favorable attitude toward the advertising than do the latter. As a result, they remember the advertising longer than the latter. For these respondents, the advertising probably works in a way corresponding to the persuasive hierarchy model (Vakratsas and Ambler, 1999).

Downloaded from warc.com

11

Vakratsas and Ambler (1999) proposed that in evaluating the effectiveness of advertising, a three-dimensional (Cognition, Experience, and Affect) model which states that the importance of each dimension depends on context and product-works better than hierarchical models. If the previous conjecture stands, then the current study seems to support Vakratsas and Ambler's proposition. The post analysis presents a finding not closely related to the current topic, yet is valuable for adverting media strategy toward the teen market. Our data shows that television and radio are the top two media where teenagers come across advertising. This echoes the findings in Ferle, Edwards, and Lee's (2000) study. Conclusions and implications The introduction of the Unique Selling Proposition in advertising occurred nearly four decades ago. However, as indicated by many researchers and practitioners, its benefit still stands tall (Bungey, 1997; Collier, 1996; Cram, 1997; Twivy, 1994). The current study is based on the USP strategy but adds a new dimension (nonconformity advertising) and examines the effectiveness of this new approach in targeting the teen market. Our results suggest that advertising that incorporates USP through nonconformity strategy is partially effective in improving teenagers' brand awareness (availability and unique taste in our case). Further, it is particularly effective in stimulating product trial. Product trial is a goal of most promotion efforts, so this finding should not be understated. While advertisers are worried about the difficulty of targeting the lucrative teen market, the USP strategy seems to be a reasonable strategy to implement. We found that, overall, teenagers' awareness of Cheerwine's unique taste significantly increased after the four-month advertising campaign. However, this uniqueness did not translate into a significant increase in brand preference. The increase in product trial probably benefits more from the nonconformity image than from the unique taste. Thus, for advertising agencies, our results suggest that integrating nonconformity strategy with USP might provide more persuasion toward teenage consumers. Our results also show that, albeit the rapid development of high technology, television and radio remain the top two media where teenagers come across advertising. Thus, when targeting the teen market, media planners should make television and radio exposure a priority. Certainly the internet is increasing in popularity among all age groups, so managers should continually monitor its growth and decide when it makes sense to promote their products online. With all of these implications, one caution must be made and that is for marketers and researchers not to overgeneralize the results, because obviously the current study embraces a limitation but provides avenues for future research. Future research Our results suggest that USP with nonconformity advertising is effective in improving product trial as well as brand perception of taste and availability. But this result is only for a single product category. More research is needed to see whether other product categories will result in similar results. Second, the USP with nonconformity advertising as a new strategy appears promising in targeting the teenage market. However, this study only examines a single campaign, although it exhibited effectiveness in both the field study and the laboratory test. Repetition research is greatly needed before firms can confidently apply this strategy. In addition, researchers should explore how other advertising elements such as different execution style and/or media strategy influence the process of
Downloaded from warc.com

12

brand perception change. Third, we have studied only the teenage market in this study. Researchers should examine other consumer segments to determine whether they derive similar findings. No doubt such research will be very useful in extending this study's managerial value.
References

Baker, Frank. 'Coke, Pepsi Slugging It Out on Campus for the Teen Vote.' Business First Columbus 13, 44 (1997): 7B. Barrett, Amy. 'To Reach the Unreachable Teen.' Business Week, September 18, 2000. Bruss, Jill. 'Tough to Get By.' Beverage Industry 91, 5 (2000): 44. Buncey, Michael. 'USP's Benefit Still Stands Tall in Noisy 1990s.' Advertising Age, March 3, 1997. Collier, Reginald. 'Beer Titans Revisit Unique Selling Proposition.' Marketing News, October 21, 1996. Crain, Rance. 'Tragos Reignites Anew the Debate over Unique Selling Proposition.' Advertising Age, July 7, 1997. Ehrenberg, Andrew S. C. 'Justifying Advertising Budgets.' Admap, January 1994. Ferle, Carrie L., Steven M. Edwardss, and Wei-Na Lee. 'Teens' Use of Traditional Media and the Internet.' Journal of Advertising Research 40, 3 (2000): 5565. Food Service Director. 'Kids Now Drink 2x More Soda Products Than Milk.' 12, 1 (1999): 10+. Frazer, Charles F. 'Creative Strategy: A Management Perspective.' Journal of Advertising 12, 4 (1983): 3641. Gallo, Joanne. 'Adolescent Angst.' Back StageSHOOT 34, 38 (1993): 46 (4). Gronbach, Ken. 'Generation Y Not Just Kids'.' Direct Marketing 63, 4 (2000): 3637+. Holleran, Joan. 'Teen Angst.' Beverage Industry 90, 3 (1999): 46. Keillor, Bruce D., R. Stephen Parker, and Allen Saefer. 'Influences on Adolescent Brand Preferences in the United States and Mexico.' Journal of Advertising Research 36, 3 (1996): 4756. Lehmann, Donald R., Sunil Gupta, and Joel H. Steckel. Marketing Research: Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1998. Mangleburg, Tamara F., and Terry Bristol. 'Socialization and Adolescents' Skepticism toward Advertising.' Journal of Advertising 27, 3 (1998): 1121. McLaughlin, Rachel. 'Targeting Teens.' TM 23, 1 (2000): 84, 87. Novelli, Wiliam D. 'Don't Smoke, Buy Marlboro.' British Medical Journal 318, 7193 (1999): 1296. Omelia, Johanna. 'Understanding Generation Y: A Look at the Next Wave of US Consumers.' Global Cosmetic Industry 163, 6 (1998): 9092. Pechmann, Cornelia, and David W. Sewart. 'Advertising Repetition: A Critical Review of Wearin and Wearout.' In Current
Downloaded from warc.com

13

Issues and Research in Advertising, 1989. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan: 28589. Reeves, Rosser. Reality in Advertising. New York, NY: Knopf, 1961. Scotti, Elena. 'The Same, Only Different.' Brandweek, May 29, 2000. Siegel, Michael. 'The Impact of an Anti-smoking Media Campaign on Progression to Established Smoking: Results of a Longitudinal Youth Study.' American Journal of Public Health 90, 3 (2000): 380+. Smith, Robert F. 'Integrating Information from Advertising and Trial: Processes and Effects on Consumer Response to Product Information.' Journal of Marketing Research 30, 2 (1993): 20419. Trout, Jack. 'How Growth Destroys Differentiation.' Brandweek, April 24, 2000. Twivy, Paul. 'Why Clients and Agencies Await the USP Rebirth.' Advertising, February 17, 1994. Vakratsas, Demetrios, and Tim Ambler. 'How Advertising Works: What Do We Really Know?' Journal of Marketing 63, 1 (1999): 2643. Weissman, Rachel X. 'The Little Brand Fights Back.' American Demographics, July 1999.

NOTES & EXHIBITS

Yeqing Bao
Yeqing Bao is an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He received his Ph.D. in marketing in 2001 from Virginia Tech.

baoy@email.uah.edu

Alan T. Shao
Alan T. Shao is a professor of marketing at the University of North Carolina, Charlotte. He received his Ph.D. in marketing in 1989 from the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.

atshao@email.uncc.edu

Downloaded from warc.com

14

Copyright Advertising Research Foundation 2002 Advertising Research Foundation 432 Park Avenue South, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10016 Tel: +1 (212) 751-5656, Fax: +1 (212) 319-5265 www.warc.com All rights reserved including database rights. This electronic file is for the personal use of authorised users based at the subscribing company's office location. It may not be reproduced, posted on intranets, extranets or the internet, e-mailed, archived or shared electronically either within the purchasers organisation or externally without express written permission from Warc.

Downloaded from warc.com

15