Emotion and Reason
From Butterworth-Heinemann, a division of Elsevier. Emotion and Reason in Consumer Behavior by Arjun Chaudhuri. Copyright 2006. For more information about this book and other similar titles, please visit www.books.elsevier.com.
The Nature of Affect
Although feelings are intrinsic to human beings, the study of affect (Emotion III) in specifically market persuasion situations has only recently begun. There was some interest during the 1950s and 1960s regarding emotional exploitation in advertising, but, in general, the role of affect in marketing applications did not begin to be studied until the early 1980s. This was probably because affects or feelings are difficult to assess because they are not amenable to control and evaluation as are the more often mentioned thoughtful, rational processes. Since then, the marketing literature has established that affective executions of ads lead to more favorable attitudes for the product, because the liking for an advertisement gets conditioned onto the brand itself and becomes part of the attitude to the brand (Gorn, 1982). This may take place in the total absence of rational beliefs and product attributes. Some social psychologists disagree with this and consider affects to occur after rational processing has taken place (i.e., affects are dependent on reason because they occur after and as a result of rational processing). On the other hand, work done in the field by Zajonc (1980) bears out the independent nature of affective judgments. Zajonc has shown that affects may indeed precede rational processing. Moreland and Zajonc (1977) exposed subjects to Japanese ideographs and recorded a variety of recognition and liking judgments. Experimental evidence was obtained to show that reliable affective discrimination (like-dislike ratings) can be made in the total absence of a rational process such as recognition memory. Characteristics of the affective component as described by Zajonc (1980) are:
Affects are primary. They govern our first response to the environment and determine out subsequent relations with it. Very often we delude ourselves that we have arrived at a decision in a rational manner, whereas in reality, the decision has been made on an "I like it" basis. We may justify our choices by various reasons but it is the affective that has proved decisive.
Affects are basic. Affective responses are universal among the animal species, irrespective of language or reason. Affects existed before language was evolved and before rational abilities were developed.
Affects are inescapable. These experiences of affect occur with little control over them on our part. We may control the expression of emotion but we cannot escape the experience itself.
Affects are irrevocable. Once an evaluation is formed on the basis of an affective response, it is not readily revoked. There is permanence to affect as, for example, in the abiding nature of our first impressions of people.
Affective judgments are irrevocable because they "feel" valid and we believe them to be "true." Feelings may then well represent basic reality.
Affects implicate the self. Affects identify the state of the person with relation to the object.
Affects are difficult to verbalize. The communication of affect relies largely on nonverbal channels. Expressions of surprise, anger, delight, and serenity are very similar across cultures.
Affects may become separated from content and still remain. The feelings caused by a book or movie are often readily accessible, though the contents may have been forgotten.
The last point indicates Zajonc's main tenet that affective reactions need not depend on cognition. In the 1977 experiment mentioned before, Moreland and Zajonc showed 20 slides to pairs of subjects for 2 seconds each and at varying frequencies (0, 1, 3, 9, 27). Affect and recognition ratings were then taken. A strong path (.96) from stimulus exposure directly to subjective affect, independent of recognition, was found. Affective reactions to a stimulus may then be acquired by virtue of experience with that stimulus, even if not accompanied by a rational process such as recognition of the stimulus. In contrast to reason, affects are the first reaction to stimuli, are made without perceptual "encoding," and are made with greater confidence and more quickly. Thus it is not necessary to "know" something before liking it. However, all rational cognitions are accompanied by affects despite parallel yet separate and independent systems.
To quote Zajonc (1980, p. 153) on the pervasive nature of emotions, he says, "There are practically no social phenomena that do not implicate affect in some important way. Affect dominates social interaction and it is the major currency in which all social intercourse is transacted." For instance, one cannot meet a person without feeling some inner attraction or revulsion. Affective reactions are thus important because we do not simply see things as they are, but instead, we provide affective interpretations of them (e.g., not just a sunset, but a "beautiful" sunset).
COMPARING EMOTIONAL AND RATIONAL PERSUASION
Emotions can never be wrong. Understanding and the intellect can betray us and prove us wrong, but emotions are always true and real. There can be no doubt about the existence of feeling. This virtue has marketing applications. Consumers can be wrong about their beliefs about a product, but they can have no misconception about their emotional response to a product or advertisement. We, as marketers, may mistake how they feel and consumers themselves may not always reveal their true internal state. Nevertheless, if we can generate feelings, these will be genuine and accurate and, thus, more resistant to competitive claims than a rational belief in the virtues of the product. Rational beliefs about products can be changed by competitors providing “new evidence” in the way of taste tests and the like. It will be much harder to change a consumer’s overall affective disposition to a brand. Beliefs are amenable to change; feelings are more resistant. Buck (1984) makes the same point when he distinguishes between spontaneous communication, which is nonvoluntary, nonpropositional (cannot be false), and nonsymbolic, and signals meaning via a biologically based system, and symbolic communication, which is intentional, propositional, and functions on a socially shared system (such as language) between sender and receiver. What would it take to change someone’s positive feelings of liking towards a brand? A price change? Bad word of mouth from a friend? A single bad experience with the brand? Nonavailability of the brand? None of the above? It would seem, then, that emotions can create long-term brand loyalty, which is the goal of most marketing campaigns. Of course, rational beliefs can lead to repeated buying of the brand as well. However, when you have an emotional commitment to the brand you may also have a superior kind of brand loyalty. Aaker (1991) distinguishes between different types of brand loyalty. Contrast, for example, the car buyer who buys a Beetle because she “loves” it and the buyer who buys a Hyundai because it is cheaper. Whose loyalty could you count on in the future? Emotions are global. By showing photographs of facial expressions to observers, Ekman and Friesen (1975) identified six widely occurring emotions, usually referred to as the six basic affects: happiness, sadness, fear, anger, surprise, and disgust. Darwin’s (1872) seminal book on facial expressions established that such expressions are universal and not cultural. Affects are basic and common across cultures and universal in their signal systems. Thus, affects produce more predictable reactions across consumer segments than cognitive systems, which are different across cultures. Emotional treatments would thus be preferable to rational treatments for “global” advertising. If you remember that emotional communication is “spontaneous,” then this enhances the utility of emotional messages in global persuasion campaigns. Notice how large companies with worldwide operations are developing logos and advertisements that are largely nonverbal and thus easily translated (emotionally) across cultures. Nike has replaced its name with just a swoosh. Coke uses ads with nonspeaking polar bears whose appeal can be “understood” (again, emotionally) in any culture. This emotional language is the new persuasion strategy in global marketing. Emotions are fundamental. Ray and Batra (1983) state that the affective is the first level of response and governs our subsequent relations with the environment. It primes and makes available the inference rules that favor positive appraisals, because it creates uncritical judgments of a favorable nature. Cognitive defenses are lowered by emotional treatments. Very often, we use rational arguments to justify what we really “feel” like doing. Volvo uses this in the headline of an ad urging Americans to buy the car in Europe because it is cheaper—“How to justify a European vacation.” The “real” reason is the pleasure of touring Europe in a new sedan. The justification is the rationality of obtaining a lower price for the car while in Europe.
Emotions are fast, catchy, and memorable. Emotional appeals lead to better attention getting, better processing of information, and better retention in memory (Ray & Batra, 1983). Because these appeals are often (but not always) nonverbal they are also quicker to communicate. A picture speaks faster than a sentence and, once again, this type of “spontaneous” communication has an impact very different and often more complete than that of “symbolic” communication using words. Emotions are permanent. According to Zajonc (1980), we have little control over affects and once evoked, they are irrevocable. Affects may become separated from content and still remain. We may forget the content of a book, movie, or advertisement, but not the feelings elicited by them. This is especially significant for marketing communications because affective attitudes may, thus, be less conducive to change than cognitive ones. For instance, whereas cognitive brand attitudes can be changed by merely supplying competing information of a more favorable kind (price appeals, etc.), brand attitudes created by affect may be more abiding and even irrevocable because, according to Zajonc, these are also independent of content. Emotions are independent of rational cognition. Affects do not depend on rational cognitions, whereas all social phenomena involve affects (Zajonc, 1980). Affective reactions may be acquired by virtue of experience with a stimulus, even if not accompanied by a rational message. However, all rational cognitions are accompanied by affects—we do not see an advertisement without interpreting it as a “good” or “bad” ad. Overall, emotional positioning is inherently superior to positioning your brand only on rational attributes. Your brand’s competitors can copy your rational product benefits and say that they “do it better.” However, if you have created a long-term emotional image for your brand, your competitors would be foolish to copy it. Think about it. If you used cowboys in a cigarette ad or babies in an automobile tires ad, who would consumers think the ad was for? You would actually be spending your ad dollars to promote Marlboro or Michelin! Can you think of disadvantages of emotional treatments in advertising? I can think of one—they are more risky in terms of creating a controversy. Think of the Calvin Klein ads, which have been accused of child pornography, or the Benetton ads, which used emotional themes like AIDS, war, and racism. These are all ads that have stirred negative feelings in people, and the sponsors of these ads have been criticized for poor taste. Will this negativity carry on to sales of the products? Or will the publicity generated by the ads create greater recall of the brands? For instance, the “sleeper effect” might lead us to believe that, over time, people may forget the negative element and just focus on the brand, in which case, they are really discussing an advantage of emotional treatments! However, in general, most companies play it safe and do notactively pursue a strategy of offending people. Emotional treatments using socially sensitive themes are too risky! Another caveat to remember is that “image” without substance is not likely to work in the long run. Emotional persuasion must be backed up by quality products and services. I think it was Abraham Lincoln who said that “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.” Not that emotional persuasion is the same as “fooling” people. Not at all. But, with most products, you need to satisfy the rational as well as the emotional needs of your consumers.
