USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Consumer responses to stereotypical vs. non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Consumer responses to stereotypical vs. non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
McDonald, Jessica
Publisher:
University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Advertising attitude
Advertising response
Gender
Sex roles
Dissertations, Academic -- Mass Communications -- Masters -- USF   ( lcsh )
Genre:
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
ABSTRACT: Women are active travel consumers, yet travel advertising notoriously depicts women stereotypically. If consumers react negatively to these stereotypical portrayals in advertising, they may disregard the ad or brand and purchase a different travel product. The purpose of this study is to determine if consumers react differently to stereotypical versus non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. The study will examine these reactions, by measuring attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention, and cognitive responses to carefully prepared advertisements that are characterized as "stereotypical" or "non-stereotypical." Ads are defined as stereotypical by utilizing Goffman's (1979) framework for analyzing images of women in advertising. Results overwhelmingly indicate that consumers in this study display more favorable attitudes to the non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. Attitudes toward the advertising, brand, purchase intention, and cognitive responses were all significantly more favorable among the non-stereotypical advertising condition. The results have theoretical benefit to the travel advertising industry, since these findings support the affect transfer hypothesis and dual mediation hypothesis. No studies to date have examined such research in travel advertising and results indicate a possible need for action among advertisers.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of South Florida, 2010.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System Details:
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Jessica McDonald.
General Note:
Title from PDF of title page.
General Note:
Document formatted into pages; contains X pages.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - E14-SFE0003413
usfldc handle - e14.3413
System ID:
SFS0027728:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Consumer Re sponses to Stereotypical V ersus Non s tereotypical Depictions of Women in Travel Advertising b y Jessica E ran McDonald A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment o f the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts School of Mass Communications College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Scott Liu, Ph.D Kelli Burns, Ph.D Kim Golombisky, Ph.D Date of Approval April 5, 2010 Keyw ords: advertisi ng attitude advertising response, gender, sex roles Copyright 2010 Jessica Eran McDonald

PAGE 2

1 Acknowledgements I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of those who assisted in the would like to thank all of my graduate professors in the USF School of Mass Communications for teaching me how to think outside of my corporate sphere. Next, I would like to thank my Major Professor, Dr. Scott Liu for his patience, support and time. Without him, I would not have completed my thesis this decade. Third, I would like to thank my thesis committee members Dr. Kelli Burns and Dr. Kim Golombisky for their committee. Good things come to those who wait so thank you for patiently awaiting the completion of my continuous work in progress. Final ly, I would like to thank my family and friends for their support and encouragement throughout this educational process.

PAGE 3

2 Table of Contents List of Tables i i Abstract i v Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review 4 Goffman & Defining Advertising Stereotypes 4 9 Gender Role Stereotypes in Advertising 7 Theories of Advertising Response 1 0 Cognitive Responses to Advertising 1 0 Attitude Toward the Ad, Attitude Toward the Brand and Purchase Intention 12 Bem Sex Role Inventory 15 Research Hypothese s 16 Chapter 3: Methodology 18 Participants 18 Design 20 Stimulus Materials 21 Procedure 2 2 Dependent Measures 23 Reliability Tests 26 Covariates 27 Chapter 4: Results 28 Hypothesis Testing 28 Additional Findings 35 Chapter 5: Discussion & Implications 44 Discussion of the Findings 44 Study Limitations 58 References 61 App endices 6 6 A ppendix A: Stimulus Materials 6 7 A ppendix B: Questionnaire 7 3 i

PAGE 4

3 List of Tables Table 1 Distribution of Participant s Education 18 Table 2 Distribution of Participant s Sex 19 Table 3 Distribution of Participant s Travel Within the Last Year 19 Table 4 Distribution of Participant s Age 19 Table 5 Experimental Design 20 Table 6 Cognitive Response Table of Definitions 24 Table 7 Item Indexes 26 Table 8 Item Statistics: Attitude Toward the Ad & Attitude Toward the Brand 27 Table 9 Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Attitude Toward the Ad 30 Table 10 Attitude Toward the Ad: Means and Standard Deviations 30 Table 11 Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Attitude Toward the Brand 31 Table 12 Attitude Toward the Brand : Means and Standard Devi ations 31 Table 13 Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Purchase Intention 32 Table 14 Purchase Intention : Means and Standard Deviations 32 Table 15 Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Counterargument s 33 ii

PAGE 5

4 Table 16 Counterarguments: Means and Standard Deviations 33 Table 17 Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Support Arguments 34 Table 18 Support Arguments: Means and Standard Deviations 35 Table 19 Effects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Cognitive Response Categories 37 Table 20 Correlations Among Covariates and Dependent Variables (Stereotypical & Non s tereotypical Conditions) 41 Table 21 Correlations Among Covariates and Dependent Variables (Stereotypical Condition ) 42 Table 22 Correlations Among Covariates and Dependent Variables (Non s tereotypical Condition ) 43 iii

PAGE 6

5 Consu mer Responses to Stereotypical V ersus Non s tereotypical Depictions of Women in Travel Advertising Jessica Eran McDonald ABSTRACT Women are active travel consumers yet travel advertising notoriously depicts women stereotypically. If consumers react negatively to these stereotypical portrayals in advertising, they may disregard the ad or brand and purchase a different travel product. The purpose of this study is to determine if consumers react differently to stereotypical versus non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising The study will examine these reactions, by measuring attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention and co gnitive responses to carefully prepared advertisements that are defined as stereotypical by utilizing analyzing images of women in advertising. Results overwhel mingly indicate that consumers in this study display more favorable attitudes to the non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. Attitudes toward the advertising, brand, purchase intention and cognitive responses were all significantly mo re favorable among the non stereotypi cal advertising condition. The results have theoretical benefit to the travel advertising industry, since the se findings support the affect transfer hypothesis and dual mediation hypothesis. No studies to date have examined such research in travel advertising and results indicate a possible nee d for action among advertisers iv

PAGE 7

Chapter One Introduction Women make most travel planning decisions (Mottiar & Quinn, 2003; Richie & Filiatrault, 1980), yet the advertising industry often depicts women stereotypically (Goffman, 1979; Kang, 1997; Lindner, 2004; Sirakaya & Sonmez, 200 0 ). If consumers react negatively to these stereotypical portrayals in advertising, they may disregard the ad or brand and purchase a different travel product. The purpose of this thesis is to determine if consumers react differently to stereotypical versu s non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. The study will examine these reactions, by measuring attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention s and cognitive responses to carefully prepared advertisemen ts that are to stereotypical images of women in travel advertising, the hope is that advertisers will that c ould form negative gender role stereotypes about women Tourism research has found that women are depicted stereotypically in print media (Sirakaya & Sonmez, 2000); however, scholars have not yet conduc ted any studies examining consumer reactions to t hese stereotypical depictions in travel advertis ing B y examining consumer reactions advertisers will also have a better understanding of how these stereotypical depictions may or may not affect purchase intentions or the 1

PAGE 8

2 conducted by the author (McDonald, 200 5 ) that determined women are depicted stereotypically in travel advertising, as defined by Goffman (1979). Building on this rese arch, the current study will examine how consumers react to stereotypical versus non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. There are numerous reasons why it is important to examine gender issues in advertising. Every day consumers are p resented with advertisements that encourage them to buy products and services. These messages may shape perceptions of what the term broadcast their messages to mass audien ces, the men and women in the advertisements seem to represent the population at large (2004). Linder also states that men and women within advertisements appear to accept the behaviors they portray, thus validating the roles and actions displayed by women in advertising Research on this topic additionally suggests that exposure to gender role stereotypes in advertising often influences gender stereotyped attitudes ( Lindner, 2004). Results of a study by Kilbourne (1990) confirmed that after being exposed t o advertisements that depict women in stereotypical roles, respondents showed significantly more negative attitudes toward women. These findings suggest there may be some correlation between the way women are portrayed in advertising and ideas about how wo Lanis and Covell (1995) examined the effects on sexual attitudes of different portrayals of women in advertisements. In one condition women were depicted as sex objects in another condition women were portraye d in progressive roles, and a third condition included product oriented advertisements containing no models The researchers found that males exposed to the sex object ad s were significantly more

PAGE 9

3 accepting of rape supportive attitudes, and females exposed to the progressive female images were less accepting of such attitudes. McKay and Covell (1997) found similar results. If advertising portrays women stereotypically, then research in tourism advertising ref lects this practice as well s ( 2000) study found that women in tourism promotional brochures are depicted stereotypically. Wearing and Wearing (1996) noted major power differences between men and women in tourism marketing and that these views can have a significant impact on tourism image and promotion P ritchard and Morgan (2000) found that women and sexual imagery are used excursions where sex is usually part of the vacation. Although there is a lack of research regarding images of women in tourism advertising, Pritchard and Morgan (2000) add that the literature available clearly shows that language and imagery within tourism marketing focuses on the male heterosexual gaze. In other words, the woman i s viewed from the in a voyeuristic manner. These collective findings highlight the need for this study, especially since no research has examined how consumers respond to stereotypical images of women in tourism advertising. To address these topics and more, this thesis has been divided into five chapters. Following this Introduction, Chapter Two reviews relevant literature from which research hypotheses were derived. Chapter Three describes the research method ology that was used in the collection of empirical data. Chapter Four presents results of the experiment in detail. Chapter Five summarizes the results and discusses their implications.

PAGE 10

4 Chapter Two Literature Review Goffman & Defining Advertising Stereotypes analysis concept focuses on subtle clues that display important messages about gender representations in advertis ing The concept examines the study of images that represent relationships between men and women, thus potentially presenting scholarly insights into the depiction of both sexes (Klassen, Jasper the frame analysis concept involves a coding system that analyses the knees, hands, eyes, facial expressions, head posture, relative sizes, positioning and head eye aversion in advertising. Goffman argued that these content categories indicate gender differences in ; ment of social power, influence, and authority. In his 1979 book, Gender Advertisements Goffman said that women are quite often treated like children in advertising. He note d that the best way to understand the male and female relation ship in ads is to compare it to a parent/child relation ship in which men take on the roles of parents while women behave similarly to children. Goffman supports this claim by highlighting severa l aspects of gender relationships within ads ; like the fact that w omen are often displayed sucking fingers, much like a child. Furthermore, women are often portrayed man, much like children would solicit comfort from their mother.

PAGE 11

5 Goff is also concerned with what social portrayals in advertising say about the positions of men and women within society. For instance, he describes how women are often depicted in subordinate roles, lying on beds and floors These positions are associated with the subjects being positioned lower than anyone who is sitting or standing. A subordinate position also leaves subjects in a more defenseless position and puts them at the mercy of others around them (Jhally, 1989). Goff man's sample of ads shows that women and children are pictured on beds and floors much more than men a strong male. Goffman captured these characteri stics and developed a categorical framework for analyzing images of women in advertising. Goffman found that gender stereotyping in advertisements is mainly captured in the following categories: rel ative size, function ranking, feminine touch, ritualization of subordination, and licensed withdrawal (Goffman, 1979). One way Goffman addressed power and rank for classification in advertising images relates to relative size, especially the height of mode ls within advertisements. In the interaction of men and women in advertising superior status over the wom an was often highlighted by the man appearing much taller or larger than the woman (Goffman, 1979). second cat egory, function ranking, states that advertisements o ften portray men acting in the executive role or instructing women. Goffman said this instructor and the woman serves as his student. third category for analyzing images of women in advertisements refers to the female touch. Advertisers here portray

PAGE 12

6 women (more often than men) using their fingers and hands to outline, cradle, or caress objects. Women are man, self touching conveys the delicate and precious nature of the body as well A nother classic stereotype of reverence is displayed when a person physically lowers his or her body in some form or another to show respect (Sirakaya & Sonmez, 2000) Goffman labeled this category ritualization of subordination. Here, the woman is often pictured subordinately in adver tising while the man holds his body erect and his head is held high as a mark of superiority. advertising stereotypes is called licensed withdrawal which refers to situations in which the subject is psychologically withdrawn from a social situation or disoriented (Goffman, 1979). Goffman stated that this category illustrates physical reactions of women, such as hiding the mouth with fingers, lying deeper, laughing, and nuzzling. Based on the cat egories defined by Goffman, the current study developed The advertisements were then presented to participants to determine how consumers react to stereotypical images o f women in travel advertising in terms of attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention and mediating cognitive responses. With a clear conceptual definition of stereotypical advertising in place, the following section will review existing literature pertaining to the effect of gender role stereotypes in advertising on both individual and societal levels.

PAGE 13

7 Gender Role Stereotypes in Advertising Research shows that negative gender role stereotypes about women in advertising affect Kilbourne, 1990 ; Lindner, 2004). As consumers are constantly presented with advertisements that encourage them to buy in our society (Lindner, 2004). According to Kilbourne (1999 ), advertising has troubled women with numerous issues, including low self esteem, eating disorders, binge drinking and domestic violence, all of which stem from women attempting to adapt Research also suggests that exposure to gender role stereotypes in advertising often influences gender stereotyped attitudes. Kilbourne (1990) found that after being exposed to advertisements that depicted women in st ereotypical roles, people showed significantly more negative attitudes toward women. These results suggest that there may be a relationship between exposure to stereotypical images of women in advertising and ideas about how women should behave and the roles they should occupy within society. Other issues, such as aggression towards women have al so been noted in studies about stereotypical images of women in advertising. Lanis and Covell (1995) found that sexually explicit images of women in ad vertising increased gender role stereotyping and the acceptance of aggression and violence against women, among the male participants. McKay and Covell (1997) found similar results regarding sexual aggression. Their study also extended existing research by showing a positive correlation between exposure to s exual images of women in ad s and the strength of attitudes toward sexual aggression.

PAGE 14

8 Despite these alarming empirical findings, advertising still portrays women in stereotypical roles. Research shows th at the practice of portraying women stereotypically in advertising is slow to change, despite the to several studies (Belknap & Leonard, 1991; Goffman, 1979; Kang, 1997; Lazar, 2006; Lindner, 2004; Lundstrum & Scigl impaglia, 1977; Plackoyiannaki & Zotos, 2009; Sirakaya & Sonmez, 2000), the advertising industry collectively stereotypes women. In 1979, Goffman content analyzed approximately 500 photographs of men, women, and children in print advertising. The purpose of the study was to examine the power relationships and roles portrayed by the models in advertising. Results of the study showed that women in advertising were overwhelmingly portrayed in stereotypical roles (1979). Subsequent research generally supported Belknap & Leonard, 1991; Kang, 1997; Lindner, 2004; Sirakaya & Sonmez, 2000) and further confirmed that women were regularly depicted stereotypically in advertising. After analyzing over 1 000 magazine advertisements from Good Housekee ping, and Rolling Stone Belknap and Leonard (1991) discovered that women were often portrayed in predictable, traditional and stereotypical roles. Kang (1997) found that the images of women in 1991 adve rtisements did not change significantly from advertisements. Kang (1997) writes that only superficial advertising occurred over the years, and that women in magazine advertisements typically portra y a weak, childish and dependent woman (as compared with images of men). Most recently, Plakoyiannaki and Zotos (2009) found that UK consumer print

PAGE 15

9 advertisements showed a preponderance of decorative images of women such as sex objects who are concerned with physical beauty Research shows that women are portrayed stereotypically in tourism marketing photographs presented in state tour ism promotional materials. Their results confirmed that women were shown in traditional stereotypical po ses (i.e., overly subordinate, submissive, and dependent on men) throughout printe d tourism promotional brochures Similarly, Pritchard and Morgan (2000 ) concluded in their study of the male gaze that the language and imagery of tourism marketing privilege the male, heterosexual gaze. In A fter analyzing images of women in t ourism marketing literature Pritchard and Morgan (2000 ) also found that women were more likely portrayed as passive observers who were Sexuality often influence s the marketing of destinations, hotels an d tourist resorts, often implying the promise of & Morgan, 2007). According to Wang (2000), the media generate marketing materials suggestive of sensual pleasures and the ful fillment that sex is part of the tourism experience. Despite these studies, there is still a lack of research that examines how consumers respond to stereotypical representations of women in travel advertising and specifically in relation to attitude towar d the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention and cognitive response s.

PAGE 16

10 Theories of Advertising Response Research on advertising processing has focused on how advertising content and imagery affect cognitive responses and attitude toward the ad which in turn affect attitude toward the brand and purchase intention (Brown & Stayman, 1992 ). In cognitive response studies, participants are asked to report the spontaneous thoughts they ha ve when exposed to persuasive communications such as advertising. Research on attitude toward rds the likelihood that they will purchase the brand in the future (Lutz, MacKenzie & Belch, 1983). These four different but related types of responses to advertising are discussed in the next section. Cognitive Responses to Advertising In the cognitive response approach, researchers ask participants to record the spontaneous thoughts they have when exposed to communications. The thoughts are then coded into relevant categ ories (Meirick, 2002). Greenwald (1968) coined the term "cognitive response" in the framework of persuasion when he argued that people actively process incoming persuasive information and subsequently remember their personal reactions to a message rather t han just the message itself. According to Greenwald, these cognitive thoughts (responses) are expected to predict attitudes (1968). Wright (1973) later introduced the cognitive response approach to advertising. He argued that certain types of natural cognitive responses reflected ( but not exact ly mirrored) the psychological processes un derlying persuasion i n a way that breaks free

PAGE 17

11 from more planned measurement s Wright (1973) recognized f our types of primary thoughts: counterargu ments, support argumen ts, source derogations and curiosity statements. Counterarguments are triggered when the information in the message is discrepant with the receiver's beliefs or the receiver disagrees with the message The number of counterarguments is usually the best j udge of message approval or rejection. Support arguments in contrast, ar e activated by message informa tion that is fitting with the receiver's beliefs or when the receiver agrees with the message According to Wright (1973), support argu ments are the only thing that can give advertising a chance of persuasion or influence. Source derogations are an opposing response related to the source, the speaker, or the sponsor. The final category curiosity statements are thoughts that communicate a want for more information or clarification. Sup port arguments and counterargum ents tend to be the most prominent responses among respondents (Meirick, 2002). Cognitive response methods (also known as thought listing or verbal protocols) have become common in adver studies of travel advertising If stereotypical and non stereotypical travel ads elicit different types of thoughts, it would be logical to conclude that one advertising condition is preferred over t he other. Additional attitudinal measures in this study will help paint a more definitive picture of how consumers respond to stereotypical images of women in travel advertising.

PAGE 18

12 Attitude Toward the Ad, Attitude Toward the Brand and Purchase Intention A concept that has been useful in understanding the affective bases of attitudes in low involvement situations is the ad (Hoyer & Macinnis, 2009). Studies have often shown that attitude toward the ad is a strong moderator of advertising effectiveness ( Batra & Ray, 1986; Bruner & Kumar, 2000; MacKenzie, Lutz & Belch, 1986; Mitchell & Olson, 1981 ). And s ometimes consumers may have such strong attitudes toward an advertisement that they transfer these feelings from the ad to the brand (attitude toward the brand). There is clear evidence that the affective reactions that advertising messages arouse, do carr y over to products and brands. S everal studies note that attitude toward the ad is an important precursor of brand attitudes ( Mac K enzie, Lutz & Belch 1985; Shimp, 1981). Other researchers have demonstrated that emotional responses generated in the viewing of a n ad can affect attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions (Batra & Ray, 1986; Holbrook & Batra 1987). These studies have often shown a strong positive relationship between attitude toward the ad and attitude toward th e brand, which in turn is positively related to purchase intention. For instance, Mitchell and Olsen (1981) tested determine attitude toward brand and purchase intentions. In addition, Shimp (1981) investigated the effect of attitude toward an ad on purchase intentions and the results attitudes toward an ad were a significant indicator of their purchase intentions. Several theoretical expla na tions have been used to clarif y the attitude toward the ad concept.

PAGE 19

13 The Dual Mediation Hypothesis (DMH) is a slightly more complex account of the According to this hypothesis, consumers can have a positive attitude toward an ad either because they find it believeable or because they feel good about it. The dual mediation hypothesis proposes that attitude towards the ad can affect brand attitudes eit her through believeability or liking. These responses, in turn, may positively affect consumers intentions to purchase the ad can play a more significant role in their li king of the brand (Hoyer & Macinnis, 2009). This brand factor may play a positive role in the current study if advertising attitudes are positive since the research utilizes a fictional brand and is hence not well known The Affect Transfer Hypothesis (AT H) is also an important justification of the mediating role of attitude toward an ad (Mitchell & Olson, 1981; Shimp, 1981). A ccording to MacK enzie, Lutz, and Belch (1986), the hypothesis posits a direct one way causal relationship from attitude toward an a d to attitude toward a brand. The general concept of the ATH is that, we learn to like or have favorable attitudes toward objects we On the other hand we acquire adverse feelings toward (Shimp, 1981). Therefore, we use simple cues, such as attractive sources, in order to decide whether a persuasive message is believable or not (MacK enzie, Lutz, & Belch, 1986). In addition to these findings linking advertising attitudes to brand and purc hase attitudes, research shows that sexist advertising may affect attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Ford, LaTour and Lundstrom (1991) found that

PAGE 20

14 women participants would not use a product if the company executes a s exist advertising campaign. The women in this study also stated that they would not use a product they like if the product adopted a sexist advertising campaign. Studies by Jaffe (1994) and Jaffe & Berger (1988) also noted in their studies that attitudes toward the ad vertising were more positive and had a higher purchase intention when the roles portrayed in the In other words, a modern or progressive woman may reject a traditional or stereotypical a dvertising campaign. A study by Ford, LaTour and Honeycutt (1997) extended previous work and examined random samples of adult women from New Zealand, Japan, and Thailand to determine their reactions to portrayals of women in magazine advertising. The res earchers found that consumers who are not happy with the way they are depicted in advertising might not purchase the products of companies that use sexist advertisements. Together, these previous studies provide the theoretical justification for examining cognitive responses, attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions in the present study. This study also incorporates an individual characteristic sex role identity in analyzing consumer responses to images of women in trav el advertising.

PAGE 21

15 Bem Sex Role Inventory Masculinity and femin inity comprise two role identity. Masculinity measures traits like aggressiveness and dominance, whereas femininity measures expressive traits like tenderness and compassion. Individuals who show high levels of both masculine and feminine traits are considered androgynous. Past consumer research has suggested that sex role identity is related to consumer response to sex role portray al s in advertising (Bhat, Lei gh & Wardlow, 1996). The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) is a widely used instrument in measuring gender role perceptions One may question the validity of the adjectives used within the BSRI, as changes in the roles of men and women have occurred in Americ an society since the BSRI was developed in the Holt and Ellis ( 1998) conducted a test to validate the masculine and feminine adjectives in the BSRI and found all but two of the adjectives were assessing gender roles in advertising. Howev er, Holt and Ellis (1998) also indicated that the traditional masculine and feminine gender role perceptions may be weakening. Specifically, the gender role perceptions of participants in their 1998 study reflect less of the traditional masculine and femin ine roles that gender role perceptions may have undergone some changes over time. It should also be noted that several recent advertising studies have utilized the BSRI as a measure of sex role identity ( Ademola 2009; Hogg & Garrow, 2003 ; Martin & Gnoth, 2009; Morrison & Schaffer, 2003) further validating its use as a covariate in the current study

PAGE 22

16 Research Hypothese s The purpose of this study is to determine how consumers react to stereotypical versus non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. The study specifically attitude toward the brand and purchase int ention. The study additionally examines cognitive responses to gain a more in depth understanding of reactions to the travel advertising stimuli. Based on existing advertising exploration the research hypotheses are presented below. Several studies have found that women react unfavorably to stereotypical depictions of women in print advertising (Ford, LaTour & Lundstrom, 1991; Ford & LaTour, 1993; Jaffe, 1994; Lundstrom & Sciglimpaglia, 1977; Morrison & Shaffer, 2003). It is therefore reasonable to expec t that women may also react unfavorably to stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertisements. Studies by Jaffe (1994) and Jaffe and Berger (1988) note that attitudes toward the ads were more positive when the roles portrayed in the advertisements were congruent with the Therefore it is also expected that attitudes toward the ad and brand will be more favorable after exposure to travel advertising that depicts women in non stereotypical ways. H1: Attitude toward the ad will be l ess favorable among participants that view stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising and more favorable among participants that view non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. H2: Attitude toward the brand will be less fav orable among participants that view stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising and more favorable among participants that view non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising.

PAGE 23

17 It is also logical to expect that women will be less likely to purchase products that portray women in stereotypical depictions. Ford, LaTour and Lundstrom (1991) found company executes a sexist advertising campaign. H 3: Purchase intention will be less likely among participants that view stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising and more likely among participants that view non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. Regarding cognitive re sponses, it is expected that counterargument will be the most influential cognitive response in relation to the stereotypical ads that are viewed. If negative attitudes are most likely to be driven by counterarguing, it seems rational to expect such negati ve reactions would be evident in a relatively large number of counterarguments. In contrast, it is expected that support arguments will be most prominent among the group that views the non stereotypical advertising H4: During advertising exposure, stere otypical travel advertising will elicit more counterarguments than non stereotypical travel advertising. H5: During advertising exposure, non stereotypical travel advertising will elicit more support arguments than stereotypical travel advertising. The next chapter will review hypothesis testing methods in order to determine how consumers react to stereotypical images of women in travel advertising Each hypothesis will be tested by the bra nd, purchase intention and cognitive responses after viewing stereotypical and non stereotypical travel advertising.

PAGE 24

18 Chapter Three Methodology Participants Eighty six undergraduate mass communication students (24 male s and 62 female s ) from the University of South Florida participated in this study. The students were encouraged to participate in the study by their undergraduate professors, who offered extra credit for participation. Students were informed that they were participating in a unive rs ity advertising opinion study to examine reactions to a travel advertising campaign. The participants primarily came from the same education al background, with ninety In addition, e ighty four percent of respondents indicated they had traveled in the last year for business or pleasure, thus further qualifying the sample as a relevant travel audience. Participant ages ranged from 18 to 40 but 81 out of 86 total participants were 19 to 25 years o ld. Table 1 Distribution of Participant s Education Education Level Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent High School 2 2.3 2.3 2.3 Some College 81 94.2 94.2 96.5 College Graduate 3 3.5 3.5 100.0 Total 86 100.0 100.0

PAGE 25

19 Table 2 Distribution of Participant s Sex Sex Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Female 62 72.1 72.1 72.1 Male 24 27.9 27.9 100.0 Total 86 100.0 100.0 Table 3 Distribution of Participant s Travel Within the Last Year Travel in the last year for business or pleasure? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Yes 72 83.7 83.7 83.7 No 14 16.3 16.3 100.0 Total 86 100.0 100.0 Table 4 Distribution of Participant s Age Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 18 1 1.2 1.2 1.2 19 7 8.1 8.1 9.3 20 19 22.1 22.1 31.4 21 25 29.1 29.1 60.5 22 13 15.1 15.1 75.6 23 9 10.5 10.5 86.0 24 3 3.5 3.5 89.5 25 5 5.8 5.8 95.3 26 1 1.2 1.2 96.5 27 1 1.2 1.2 97.7 37 1 1.2 1.2 98.8 40 1 1.2 1.2 100.0 Total 86 100.0 100.0

PAGE 26

20 Design In attempting to understand the differences, if any, between reactions to stereotypical and non stereotypical travel advertising, the study utilized a between subjects experimental design. The design manipulated the independent variable (the type of advertising: stereotypical vs. non stereotypical). Specifically, one group of participants viewed three travel ads that contained stereotypical depictions of women and the other group viewed three ads that contained non stereotypical depictions of women. Within each experim ental condition, the ordering of the ads was randomized to reduce the potential ordering effects. The randomization was achieved by randomly assigning participants to each of the two experimental conditions (stereotypical vs. non stereotypical) and then, within each condition, to six separate experimental sessions, each containing a different ordering of three ads. Forty two participants were exposed to the stereotypical ads and 44 to the non stereotypical ads. Table 5 explains the design in detail, including the number of participants per session Table 5 Experimental Design Ad Ordering Stereotypical Ads (n=42) Non Stereotypical Ads (n=44) 123 Session 1, n=7 Session 1 n=9 132 Session 2 n=7 Session 2 n=8 231 Session 3 n=6 Session 3 n=6 213 Session 4 n=7 Session 4 n=4 312 Session 5 n=8 Session 5 n=9 321 Session 6 n=7 Session 6 n=8

PAGE 27

21 Stimulus Materials Six print travel advertisements (three stereotypical, three non stereotypical) were created to determine how consumers react to stereotypical representations of women in travel advertising, as compared to non stereotypical representations. The ads promote d a fictional within various city scene settings A fictional travel company (Calovadra Travel) was used to avoid response bias due to prior brand familiarity and experience. City scenes were u sed to reduce destination bias over well known cities or themed vacations ( beach vacations, camping et c). The creation of stereotypical advertising stimuli followed with the use of Each stereotypical stereoty pical advertising ( feminine touch, ritualization of subordination, function ranking, relative size, and licensed withdrawal) The ads were additio nally pre tested to ensure they elicited the appropriate response In the non stereotypical ads, positive ima ges of women were used to replace the contained stereotypical elements of feminine touch, ritualization of subordination, function ranking, relative size, and licensed withdra wal as defined by Goffman (1979). The women were depicted in modern portrayals, playing executive roles within each non stereotypical advertisement. These ads were also pre tested to ensure internal validity.

PAGE 28

22 The headline, layout and body copy were iden tical in these ads and only the main images were varied to represent part of the same campaign. Only the main images of models were varied to classify the ads as stereotypical and non stereotypical and the same background travel image was used in each ad All six ads (three stereotypical and three non stereotypical) are presented in Appendix A. Procedure Experimental sessions took place in a small conference room inside the Communication and Information Sciences building at the University of South Florid a. Participants were randomly assigned to either the stereotypical or the non stereotypical conditions. Upon entering the conference room, participants were informed that they were participating in an advertising opinion study. They were briefed on informe d consent procedures and signed consent documents. A welcome note and general instructions were then projected via PowerPoint on the screen in the conference room. The instructions read: The purpose of this research is to investigate methods of pretesting advertisements which are still in the concept testing stage of development. Your task is simply to examine the ad in front of you and form an evaluation of it. As you look at the advertisement, please remember we are interested in your evaluati on of the a dvertisement itself. After viewing the instructions, participants were shown the three travel ads E ach ad appeared on the screen for 30 seconds. Participants then answered the cognitive response portion of the questionnaire (see Appendix B) by writing down any thoughts they had while viewing the ads. The cognitive response instructions read as follows: In the space provided below please list all the thoughts, reactions, and ideas that went through your mind while you were looking at the advertisement. Please write down any thoughts, no matter how simple, complex, relevant or irrelevant they may seem to you. Write down everything you thought of, regardless of

PAGE 29

23 whether it pertained to the product, the advertisement, or anything else. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not worry about grammar, spelling or punctuation, but please write your thoughts clearly. Remember, list all th oughts that occurred to you during the time you were looking at the advertisement. Participants were given two minutes to respond to the cognitive response measure by writing down their thoughts on the space provided in the questionnaire. They were th en told to answer the next section of the questionnaire which contained measures of attitude toward the ads, attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. The experimental session concluded after participants completed the Bem Sex Role Inventory desi gned to measure feminine and masculine traits. Participants were thanked for their time at the end of each session and turned in all forms and informed consent documents Questionnaires used in the experiment were numbered with an internal code to distin guish the experimental conditions as well as the ordering of ad stimuli. The experiment was carried out through twelve different sessions, with f our to eight st udents per session Each session took approximately fifteen minutes to complete. Dependent Mea s ures The dependent measures in this study consisted of cognitive responses to advertisements, attitude toward the ads and brand, and purchase intentions. As described earlier, cognitive responses were collected by asking participants to write down the tho ughts they had while viewing the ads in an open ended format. Following Wright (1973), the written thoughts were subsequently coded by the author into six cognitive response categories: s upport arguments, counterarguments, source derogation, source bolste ring, curiosity statements, and other thoughts. To better understand the nature of support arguments and counterarguments, these two categories were further coded into four sub categories respectively. All categories and their definitions are listed in Ta ble 6.

PAGE 30

24 The researcher individually coded each respondent's cognitive response statements Each statement was classi fied as belonging to one of nine types of cognitive response categories In lieu of a second coder, the researcher coded responses from twent y of the subjects a second time, approximately two days after the first coding to ensure accuracy Table 6 Cognitive Response Table of Definitions Cognitive Response Category Definition Support Arguments The receiver activates responses indicating congr uent associations have been discovered or that message argument is supported by already entrenched beliefs (Wright, 1973). Ad support arguments The participant thinks the overall ad is positive Ad design support arguments The participant thinks the ad design is positive Actor support arguments The participant thinks the models are positive Travel support arguments The participant thinks travel aspects in the ad are positive Counterarguments A counterargument is activated when incoming information is compared to the existing belief system and a discrepancy is noted (Wright, 1973). Ad counterarguments The participant thinks the overall ad is negative Ad design counterarguments The participant thinks the ad design is negative Actor counterarguments The participant thinks the models are negative Travel counterarguments The participant thinks travel aspects in the ad are negative Source Bolstering This positive response focuses on the source of the information and acceptance of the sponsor (Wright, 1973). Source Derogation This resistive response focuses on the source of the information. The individual may spontaneously derogate the specific spokesperson or the sponsoring organization or the advertising in general (Wright, 1973). Curiosity Statements Thoughts that express a desire for more information or clarification (Wright, 1973). Other Statements Miscellaneous cognitive responses

PAGE 31

25 The other attitudinal measures, a ttitude toward the ad ( ATTA), attitude toward the brand ( ATTB) and purchase intention (PI) were gauged with 7 point semantic differ ential scales presented below. Each category read as follows in the questionnaire: Attitude Toward the Ad (ATTA) 1. Now, please take a moment to share your evaluation of the ads you just vie wed. Please remember we are interested in your evaluation of the advertisements. Please circle your attitude response to the statements below, based on your evaluation of the advertisements. Dislike 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Like Unfavorable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Favorable Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good Negative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Positive Attitude Toward the Brand (ATTB) 2. Now, please take a moment to share your evaluation of the brand (Calovadra Travel) presented within the advertisements you just viewed. Please remember we are interested in your evaluation of the brand (Calovadra Travel) shown in the ad. Please circle your attitude response to the statements below regarding the brand based on your evaluation of the advertisements. Dislike 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Like Unfavorable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Favorable Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good Negative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Positive Purchase Intention (PI) 3. Now, please take a moment to share the likelihoo d that you w ill purchase the product (travel services) shown within the advertisements you just viewed. Please remember we are interested in your evaluation of purchasing the product. Please circle your attitude response to the statements below regarding purchasing th is pro duct, based on your evaluation of the advertisements. Unlikely 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Likely

PAGE 32

26 R consistency of the multiple item scales of the dependent measures ( ATTA and ATTB ). Purchase intention (PI) was not tested since the measure only contained one item (likely/unlikely). As shown i n Table 7, both attitude toward the ad and the brand achieved four item scale used to measure ATTA yielded a coefficient alpha of .947 and the four item scale used to measure ATTB yielded a coefficient alpha of .9 68 According to Berman (2002), alpha values between .80 and 1.00 indicate high internal consistency. In light of the results, items of ATTA and ATTB were combined to form into compos ite measures of the variables. Table 8 presents the means and standard deviations of individual items in ATTA and ATTB. Table 7. Multiple Item Indexes Multiple Item Response Measure Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items ATTA: Attitude Toward the Ad .947 .948 4 ATTB: Attitude Toward the Brand .968 .968 4

PAGE 33

27 Table 8. I tem Statistics: Attitude Toward the Ad & Attitude Towards the Brand Multiple Item Response Measure Mean Standard Deviation N ATTA: Dislike/Like 4.30 1.729 86 ATTA: Unfavorable/Favorable 4.23 1.664 86 ATTA: Bad/Good 4.26 1.632 86 ATTA: Negative/Positive 4.49 1.883 86 ATTB: Dislike/Like 4.55 1.733 86 ATTB: Unfavorable/Favorable 4.49 1.754 86 ATTB: Bad/Good 4.66 1.671 86 ATTB: Negative/Positive 4.63 1.847 86 Covariates Individual differences in terms of masculine and feminine traits were measured by the Bem Sex Role Inventory. For each participant, two scores (masculine and feminine) were generated by the Inventory. These scores were then introduced as covariates in data analysis to achieve a more reliable assessment of the effects of advertising exposure.

PAGE 34

28 Chapter Four Results The current study seeks to provide more insight into the field of advertising research and gender studies by examining consumer rea ctions to stereotypical versus non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. Particularly, the study aims to attitude toward the brand (ATTB) and purchase intention (PI) will be negatively affected by exposures to stereotypical images of women in advertising. In addition, this study was designed to test specific hypotheses pertaining to a wide variety of theory based consumer reactions to stere otypical images of women in travel advertising. Hypothesis Testing In this section, hypothesis testing results are presented. The principal statistical procedure used was a nalysis of c ovariance (ANCOVA) Analysis of covarianc e is a powerful variation of analysis of variance (ANOVA). It enables the researcher to test the main and interaction effects of the independent variables (factors) of interest while controlling the influence of other theoretically relevant variables (covariates). That is, in partit ioning effects, ANCOVA takes into account inter group variation due to not only the treatmen t itself, but also the covariates (Field, 2009) The following hypotheses were tested with ANCOVA in this study: H1: Attitude toward the ad will be less favorable among participants that view stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising and more favorable among participants that view non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising.

PAGE 35

29 H2: Attitude toward the brand will be less favora ble among participants that view stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising and more favorable among participants that view non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. H3: Purchase intention will be less likely among part icipants that view stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising and more likely among participants that view non stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. H4: During advertising exposure, stereotypical travel advertising will el icit more counterarguments than non stereotypical travel advertising. H5: During advertising exposure, non stereotypical travel advertising will elicit more support arguments than stereotypical travel advertising. H1: Effects on Attitude Toward the Ad To test H1, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to test the between subject effects on the dependent variable, attitude toward the ad, with the advertising condition (stereotypical and non stereotypical ads) serving as the independent variable. introduced as covariates to control the variation in the dependent variable due to preexisting masculine and feminine characteristics of each participant thereby providing a more statistically powerful test of the effect of the advertising treatment The ANCOVA test (see Table 9) indicates a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on attitude toward the ad, F (1,82)= 67.425, p =.000, = .451. T he mean scor es of attitude toward the ad for each condition are shown in Table 10. As hypothesized, mean attitude toward s the ad in the stereotypical condition ( M =3.1905) was significantly lower than that in the non stereotypical condition ( M =5.3977). That is, partici pants preferred the non stereotypical ads over the stereotypical ads H1 is therefore supported.

PAGE 36

30 Table 9. Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Attitude Toward the Ad Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Corrected Model 109.057 a 3 36.352 27.062 .000 .498 Intercept 3.433 1 3.433 2.556 .114 .030 Bem Sex Role: Masculine 4.367 1 4.367 3.251 .075 .038 Bem Sex Role: Feminine .030 1 .030 .022 .883 .000 Condition: Stereotypical or Non Stereotypical 90.571 1 90.571 67.425 .000 .451 Error 110.149 82 1.343 Total 1824.000 86 Corrected Total 219.206 85 a. R Squared = .498 (Adjusted R Squared = .479) Table 10. Attitude Toward the Ad: Means and Standard Deviations Condition Mean Std. Deviation N Stereotypical 3.1905 1.36575 42 Non Stereotypical 5.3977 .94056 44 Total 4.3198 1.60590 86 H2: Effects on Attitude Toward the Brand Table 11 shows ANCOVA test results for H2. As hypothesized, the effect of advertising condition on attitude toward the brand was significant, after controlling the influence of the covariates ( Inventory) F (1,82)= 56.363, p =.000, = .407. Table 12 shows that the mean attitude toward the brand in the stereotypical condition ( M =3.4702) was lower than that in the non stereotypical condition ( M =5.6420). That is, participants liked the brand featured in the non stereotypical ads more t han the brand in the stereoty pical ads.

PAGE 37

31 Table 11. Effects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Attitude Toward the Brand Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Corrected Model 112.725 a 3 37.575 24.609 .000 .474 Intercept .101 1 .101 .066 .798 .001 Bem Sex Role: Masculine 8.504 1 8.504 5.570 .021 .064 Bem Sex Role: Feminine 3.740 1 3.740 2.450 .121 .029 Condition: Stereotypical or Non Stereotypical 86.060 1 86.060 56.363 .000 .407 Error 125.205 82 1.527 Total 2043.000 86 Corrected Total 237.930 85 a. R Squared = .474 (Adjusted R Squared = .455) Table 12. Attitude Toward the Brand : Means and Standard Deviations Condition Mean Std. Deviation N Stereotypical 3.4702 1.56389 42 Non Stereotypical 5.6420 .91879 44 Total 4.5814 1.67307 86 H3: Effects on Purchase Intention The ANCOVA results in Table 13 indicate a s tatistically significant effect of advertising condition on purchase intention, F (1,82)= 15.596, p =.000, = .160. T he mean scores of purchase intention for each condition are shown in Table 14. As hypothesized, purchase intention in the stereotypical condition ( M =2. 36) was significantly lower than that in the non stereotypical advertisements ( M =3.98) That is, participants exposed to the non stereotypical ads were more likely to purchase the travel product than those exposed to the stereotypical ads.

PAGE 38

32 Table 13. Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Purchase Intention Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Corrected Model 70.863 a 3 23.621 8.416 .000 .235 Intercept 1.000 1 1.000 .356 .552 .004 Bem Sex Role: Masculine 12.826 1 12.826 4.569 .036 .053 Bem Sex Role: Feminine 2.489 1 2.489 .887 .349 .011 Condition: Stereotypical or Non Stereotypical 43.777 1 43.777 15.596 .000 .160 Error 230.160 82 2.807 Total 1174.000 86 Corrected Total 301.023 85 a. R Squared = .235 (Adjusted R Squared = .207) Table 14. Purchase Intention : Means and Standard Deviations Condition Mean Std. Deviation N Stereotypical 2.36 1.37 42 Non Stereotypical 3.98 1.677 44 Total 3.19 1.882 86 H4: Effects on Counterargument Cognitive Responses H4 posited that during advertising exposure, stereotypical travel advertising would elicit more counterarguments than non st ereotypical travel advertising. C ounterargument s are activated when incoming information is compared to the existing belief system a nd a discrepancy is noted (Wright, 1973). To test this hypothesis, ANCOVA was conducted to analyze the between subject effects of advertising condition on the dependent variable, the number of counterargument cognitive responses, with masculine and feminine scores as covariates.

PAGE 39

33 Results of ANCOVA are presented in Table 15 which indicates a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on counterarguments, F (1,82)= 15.632 p =.000, =.160. T he mean number of counterargum ents for each condition is shown in Table 16. Consistent with H4, participants reported nearly twice as many counterarguments after seeing the stereotypical ads ( M =1. 3095 ) than those who saw the non stereotypical ads ( M =.6 591 ). Table 15. Effects of Stereo typical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Counterarguments Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Corrected Model 11.050 a 3 3.683 8.185 .000 .230 Intercept 3.835 1 3.835 8.522 .005 .094 Bem Sex Role: Masculine 1.905 1 1.905 4.233 .043 .049 Bem Sex Role: Feminine .122 1 .122 .271 .604 .003 Condition: Stereotypical or Non Stereotypical 7.035 1 7.035 15.632 .000 .160 Error 36.903 82 .450 Total 130.000 86 Corrected Total 47.953 85 a. R Squared = .230 (Adjusted R Squared = .202) Table 16 Counterarguments: Means and Standard Deviations Condition Mean Std. Deviation N Stereotypical 1.3095 .64347 42 Non stereotypical .6591 .71343 44 Total .9767 .75110 86

PAGE 40

34 H5: Effects on S upport Argument Cognitive R esponses H5 posited that during advertising exposure, non stereotypical travel advertising will elicit more support argument cognitive responses than stereotypical travel advertising. The ANCOVA test in Table 17 illustrates the e ffects on the dependent variable, support arguments, with the advertising condition serving as the independent variable. The ANCOVA test indicates a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on support argument cognitive responses, F (1,82)= 20.413, p =.000, =.199. T he mean scores of support arguments for each condition are shown in Table 18 Results indicate that the stereotypical condition ( M =.4048) was significantly lower mean than that in the non stereotypical advertisements ( M = 1 .2727 ). That is, respondents showed significantly more support arguments towards the non stereotypical advertising condition in this study. H5 is therefore supported. Table 17. Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Advertising on Support Arguments Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Corrected Model 17.387 a 3 5.796 8.540 .000 .238 Intercept .126 1 .126 .186 .668 .002 Bem Sex Role: Masculine 1.045 1 1.045 1.539 .218 .018 Bem Sex Role: Feminine .228 1 .228 .336 .564 .004 Condition: Stereotypical or Non s tereotypical 13.853 1 13.853 20.413 .000 .199 Error 55.648 82 .679 Total 135.000 86 Corrected Total 73.035 85 a. R Squared = .238 (Adjusted R Squared = .210)

PAGE 41

35 Table 18 Support Arguments: Means and Standard Deviations Condition Mean Std. Deviation N Stereotypical .4048 .62701 42 Non stereotypical 1.2727 .97321 44 Total .8488 .92695 86 Additional Findings The results presented thus far provided strong support for the main hypotheses of this study. Compared to those exposed to stereotypical travel ads, participants exposed to the non stereotypical travel ads showed more favorable attitudes toward the ads and brand, express ed stronger purchase intention; in addition to r eporting more support arguments and less counterarguments after advertising exposure. This study also supports previous research by proving all hypotheses and builds on travel advertising research by noting that participants in this study significantly pr eferred the non stereotypical travel advertising condition as compared to the stereotypical condition. In addition to these results, this study analyzed other significant findings that further support the hypotheses and indicate possible areas of future r esearch. First, the researcher not only examined general cognitive response categories but expanded on more detailed cognitive response categories to better understand the type of responses that were most common among consumers in this study Description s of these additional cognitive response categories are highlighted in Table 20. This study found that the support arguments and counterargument categories showcased a variety of responses, some of which had little to do with the purpose of the study. For example, there were several counterguments within the each condition that focused on the

PAGE 42

36 participant s dislike of the ad design or travel destination. Therefore, additional cognitive response categories were added to the support argument and counterargum ent condition to better understand which support arguments and counterarguments were directed at the advertisements, ad design, actors/models, and travel comments. Several comments pertained to the ad design and aspects of travel within the ads, both of wh ich have little to do with the purpose of this study. Segmenting these categories helps better understand which comments were focused on the actors/models in the ads and the overall advertisement.

PAGE 43

37 Detail of Other Cognitive Responses Table 19 Ef fects of Stereotypical vs. Non s tereotypical Ad vertising on Cognitive Response Categories Cognitive Response Category Category Definition Sig. Mean Stereo Mean Non Stereo Support Arguments The receiver activates responses indicating congruent associations have been discovered or that message argument is supported by already entrenched beliefs (Wright, 1973). .000 .4048 1.272 Ad support arguments The participant thinks the overall ad is positive .064 .1190 .3182 Ad design support arguments The participant thinks the ad design is positive .005 .1429 .4545 Actor support arguments The participant thinks the models within the ad are positive .047 .0476 .2045 Travel support arguments The participant thinks the travel aspects of the ad are positive .010 .0952 .2955 Counterarguments A counterargument is activated when incoming information is compared to the existing belief system and a discrepancy is noted (Wright, 1973). .000 1.309 .6591 Ad counterarguments The participant thinks the overall ad is negative .000 .8333 .1591 Ad design counterarguments The participant thinks the ad design is negative .003 .0714 .3409 Actor counterarguments The participant thinks the models within the ad are negative .009 .3571 .0909 Travel counterarguments The participant thinks the travel aspects of the ad are negative .343 .0476 .0682 Source Bolstering This positive response focuses on the source of the information and acceptance of the sponsor (Wright, 1973). .173 .041 .120 Source Derogation This resistive response focuses on the source of the information. The individual may spontaneously derogate the specific spokesperson or the sponsoring organization or the advertising in general (Wright, 1973). .513 .102 .062 Curiosity Statements Thoughts that express a desire for more information or clarification (Wright, 1973). .044 .126 .312

PAGE 44

38 The results of the expanded cognitive response categories in Table 20 are highlighted in this section. In examining ad support arguments, the ANCOVA test indicates marginally significant effect of advertising condition on support arguments of the overall advertisement (ad support) F (1,82)= 3.530, p =.064. However, the ANCOVA test indicate s a statistically significant effect of advertising co ndition on ad design support arguments F (1,82)= 8.422, p =.005; actor support arguments F (1,82)= 4.080 p =.047; and travel support arguments F (1,82)= 6.876 p =.010. When examining the mean scores in each category, every examination showed significantly m ore support for the non stereotypical advertising condition. The finding regarding actor support arguments is particularly significant, because it highlights the fact that participants significantly preferred the female depictions of models/actors within t he non stereotypical condition. As previously mentioned, the counterargument cognitive response category was also further segmented to better understand the type of counterarguments that originated from participants. Two of the counterargument sub categor ies showed significant results The ad counterargument subcategory indicates a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on counter arguments related to the overall advertisement F (1,82)= 64.163 p =.000. T he mean scores indicate that respondents showed more overall ad counterarguments within the stereotypical advertising condition. The actor counterargument saw the same result. Again, this finding is highly relevant, because it suggests that participants in the study react unfavorably to negative images of women within the stereotypical advertising condition. The ad design counterargument

PAGE 45

39 subcategory also indicated a statistically significant difference between advertising conditions, F (1,82)= 9.197 p = .003. However, the mean scores i ndicate that respondents showed more overall ad design counterarguments within the non stereotypical advertising condition. These results differ from the overall counterargument category results which confirmed that stereotypical ads received more countera rguments overall. This sub category was added to show that some counterarguments within the non stereotypical ad set focused on irrelevant topics aside from purpose of this study, such as ad design. The final counterargument sub no statistically significant effect of advertising condition, F (1,82)= .910 p =. 343 This sub category included counterarguments to some topics irrelevant to this study, including travel aspects within the ads. Other standard cognitive resp onse measures were included in this examination as well. The ANCOVA test indicates no statistically significant effect of advertising condition on source bolstering F (1,82)= 1.890 p =. 173 or source derogation F (1,82)= .433 p =. 513 However, the effect of s attained statistical significance F (1,82)= 4.198 p =. 044 T he mean scores indicate that participants in the non stereotypical advertising condition expressed a greater number of curiosity statements and wis hed to learn more about the ads than those in the stereotypical advertising condition significant effect of advertising condition, F (1,82)= 4.460 p =. 038 T he mean scores indicate that participants in the no n stereotypical advertising condition showed a higher number of other cognitive response statements.

PAGE 46

40 Covariates Correlation analysis based on data across advertising conditions (Table 20 ) showed statistically significant and positive correlations between male score, a measure of masculine traits, and attitude towards the ad (r=.290, p=.007), attitude towards the brand (r=.319, p=.003), and purchase intention (r=.290, p=.007). In other words, the stronger the masculine traits in the participant, the more p ositive his or her attitudes and purchase intention would be. However, female score, a measure of feminine traits, showed no significant correlation with attitudes and purchase intention. To further explore the issue, separate correlation analyses were performed on data in individual a dvertising conditions. Table 21 shows that, within the stereotypical condition, neither the male nor the female score was significantly correlated with attitudes and purchase intention. Significantly positive correlations however, were observed in the non stereotypical condition between male score and attitude toward the ad (r=.335, p=.026), and attitude toward the brand (r=.312, p=.039). The correlation between male score and purchase intention also approached significan ce (r=.287, p=.059). Together, the correlation analyses suggest that masculine traits are more closely related to attitudinal and behavioral intention reactions to travel advertising, and such relations tend to be more prominent when the advertising shows non stereotypical depictions of women.

PAGE 47

4 1 Table 20. Correlations Among Covariates and Dependent Variables (Stereotypical & Non s tereotypical Conditions) BEM: Male BEM: Female ATTA ATTB P I BEM: Male Correlation 1 Sig. (2 tailed) N 86 BEM: Female Correlation .096 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .380 N 86 86 ATTA Correlation .290 ** .042 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .007 .703 N 86 86 86 ATTB Correlation .319 ** .070 .844 ** 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .003 .519 .000 N 86 86 86 86 P I Correlation .290 ** .048 .661 ** .699 ** 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .007 .663 .000 .000 N 86 86 86 86 86 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed). In Table 21 below, a correlation analysis was again conducted to assess the relationship among variables but within the stereotypical ad condition here Correlations among composite measures were all significant again and ranged from .000 to 986 The strongest correlations were again between all three main variables: attitude toward the ad a nd attitude toward brand ( r = 783 p =.000); attitude toward the ad and behavioral intention ( r = 583 p =.000); and attitude toward the brand and behavioral intention ( r = 637 p =.000). The weakest correlation was again between Bem Sex Role Inventory feminine characteristics and attitude toward the ad ( r = 003 p = 986 ).

PAGE 48

42 Table 21. Correlations Among Covariates and Dependent Variables (Stereotypical Condition) BEM: Male BEM: Female ATTA ATTB PI BEM: Male Correlation 1 Sig. (2 tailed) N 42 BEM: Female Correlation .126 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .428 N 42 42 ATTA Correlation .105 .003 Sig. (2 tailed) .510 .986 N 42 42 ATTB Correlation .202 .258 1 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .199 .099 N 42 42 42 42 P I Correlation .160 .104 .637 ** .637 ** 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .311 .511 .000 .000 N 42 42 42 42 42 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed). Finally, in Table 22 below a correlation analysis was conducted to assess the relationship among variables within the non stereotypical ad condition. Correlations among composite measures were all significant and ranged from .000 to 977 The strongest correlations were again between all three main variables: attitude toward the ad and attitude toward brand ( r = 572 p =.000); attitude toward the ad and behavioral intention ( r = 537 p =.000); and attitude toward the brand and behavioral intention ( r = .6 10 p =.000). The weakest correlation was between Bem Sex Role Inventory feminine characteristics and a ttitude toward the ad ( r = .0 04 p = 977 ).

PAGE 49

43 Table 22. Correlations Among Covariates and Dependent Variables (Non s tereotypical Condition) BEM: Male BEM: Female ATTA ATTB P I BEM: Male Correlation 1 Sig. (2 tailed) N 44 BEM: Female Correlation .267 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .080 N 44 44 ATTA Correlation .335 .004 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .026 .977 N 44 44 44 ATTB Correlation .312 .015 .572 ** 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .039 .922 .000 N 44 44 44 44 P I Correlation .287 .064 .537 ** .610 ** 1 Sig. (2 tailed) .059 .678 .000 .000 N 44 44 44 44 44 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2 tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed).

PAGE 50

44 Chapter Five Discussion and Implications Discussion of the Findings The data analysis revealed several patterns and interesting findings which are highlighted in this section The hypothese s aimed to determine how participants react to stereotypical images of women in travel advert ising. Specifically, the study examined and cognitive responses to stereotypical and non stereotypical advertising. The findings within this study are a step forward in the field of advertising rese arch and gender studies, since the results confirm that consumers within this examination signifi cantly preferred the non stereotypical advertising condition as compared to stereotypical advertisements that contained negative images of women in travel advertising. The study also contributes to the advertising industry by adding an element of generaliz ability since this study regarding travel advertising falls in line with previous research that examines the advertising industry as a whole. However, no study is without implications as well. This section discusses the findings of this study and limitatio ns. toward the brand and intent to purchase the travel product. H1 confirms attitude toward the ad is more positive in the non stereotypical condition. In addi tion H2 also confirmed that attitude toward the brand was more favorable among the non stereotypical ad condition. Furthermore, purchase intention was more likely among the

PAGE 51

45 non stereotypical advertising condition. These collective findings show that overa ll, attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand and purchase intention are each significantly more favorable among participants who viewed the non stereotypical ad condition. The stereotypical advertising condition was significantly less favorable am ong participants When examining each response category specifically, attitude toward the brand displayed the highest means, with attitude toward the ad second and purchase intention third. Although participants were still significantly more likely to pur chase the travel product after viewing the non stereotypical ads; the means were much lower than attitude toward the ad and attitude towards the brand. This is likely because several of the college students within the non stereotypical condition mentioned in their cognitive responses that they could not afford to travel at this point in time. It should therefore be noted that means within the purchase intent category may have been even more varied if the study utilized a stronger respondent sample with high er disposable income But overall, these three categories showed statistical significance. In addition, H1, H2 and H3 have theoretical application. The results indicate support for the Affect Transfer Hypothesis (ATH), which posits that people will transfe r their attitudes toward the advertisement to their attitude toward the brand, and will have a tendenc y to purchase a product from brand (Shimp, 1981). In this examination, results confirm that participants in this study transfer what they feel about the a dvertising condition (stereotypical or non stereotypical advertising) to what they feel about the ad In addition, the brand and purchase intentions are also affected. For example, within the stereotypical advertising condition, participants displayed unfa vorable attitudes toward

PAGE 52

46 the ad, unfavorable attitudes toward the brand and were less likely to purchase the travel product. Conversely, within the non stereotypical advertising condition, participants displayed favorable attitudes toward the ad, and favor able attitudes toward the brand and were more likely to purchase the travel product. These two hypotheses help emphasize the current body of knowledge and support the Affect Transfer Hypothesis (ATH). These findings additionally support the Dual Mediatio n Hypothesis (DMH) As mentioned, according to the DMH, consumers can have a positive attitude toward an ad either because they find it believeable or because they feel good about it. The DMH proposes that attitude towards the ad can affect brand attitudes either through believeability or liking. These responses, in turn, may positively affect consumers intentions to purchase the product. This is evident in H1, H2 and H3 because consumers significantly preferred (felt good about) the non stereotypical adver tising condition and consequently had more favorable attitudes to all variables. Conversely, since participants reacted unfavorably (did not like) the stereotypical condition, this was likely because they It could also be noted that this could be in fact In addition, according to the DMH, a more significant role in their liking of the brand (Hoyer & Macinnis, 2009). Since the brand in this study was fictional and unknown in this instance; more favorable attitude s may have resulted as the DMH suggests. The cognitive response results f urther support these findings and add a dditional insight into the type of thoughts and emotions participants felt immediately after viewing each advertising condition H4 examined counterargument cognitive responses in order to

PAGE 53

47 prove that the stereotypical advertising condition would elicit mor e counterarguments than non stereotypical travel advertising This hypothesis proved true The mean scores showed that stereotypical advertisements elicited significantly more counterarguments than the non stereotypical advertising condition. In other wor ds, participants opposed or noted more discrepancies within the stereotypical condition. This category supports the other attitude responses in noting that the stereotypical category proved less favorable in this instance by eliciting significantly more co unterarguments. In looking further into the counterargument category, this segment was sub categorized to include ad counterargument, ad design counterargument, actor counterargument, and travel counterargument to better understand specific responses With in the ad counterargument category, the participant made counterargument comments related to the overall advertisement, or found the ad to be negative. This ad counterargument sub category overwhelmingly indicates a statistically significant effect of adve rtising condition on ad counterarguments. Respondents additionally displayed significantly more ad counterarguments within the stereotypical advertising condition and less ad counterarguments within the non stereotypical condition. Common responses within the ad counterargument sub overall reference to the advertisement as a whole ; instead of the design, travel or models in the ad Within the stereotypical condition, ad counterargument cognitive respon ses s were s were Participants also an escort service usion that participants significantly disliked or showed much opposition to the advertisement as a

PAGE 54

48 whole. Within the non stereotypical condition, ad counterarguments focused on overall hereas, comments within the stereotypical condition almost always referenced the sexist nature of the advertising. The counterargument sub category was further highlighted by reviewing ad design counterarguments. This is a non relevant category to the overall study that focused on discrepancies regarding the design of the ad s This could include comments about the design specifically, colors used within the ad, or specific photos. Typical ad design counterarguments focu sed on comments that offered suggestion as to how the ad design could be improved or how the participants disliked a specific photo. Interesting enough, this category differed from the collective counterargument category that confirms the stereotypical con dition received more counterarguments Within the ad design counterargument category the results still found a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on ad design counter arguments ; b ut the significance here actually related to counterar guments within the non stereotypical condition. The mean scores showed significantly more ad design counterarguments for the non stereotypical condition. After reviewing the cognitive responses, this is certainly due to the fact that participants within th e stereotypical condition spent most of their time focusing on the sexist nature of the ads or the models within the ads and not on the ad design In the non stereotypical condition, most counterarguments related to the advertising design since the ads wer e not sexist or derogatory. Typical comments within the non stereotypical condition included comments es used at the bottom of the ad

PAGE 55

49 In addition, other commen ts focused on the fact that, The models were obviously altered in PhotoShop It is clear through the further analysis of this sub category that some cognitive responses included non relev ant topics like counterarguments related to the ad design of the stimuli. The next counterargument sub category, actor counterargument, enabled the researcher to see specifically how participants reacted to the models or actors within the ads. Within this category, the participants display a dislike for the actors within a given advertising condition. The results in this category indicate a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on actor counter arguments T he mean scores of actor countera rguments for each condition confirm that respondents showed significantly more actor counterarguments within the stereotypical advertising condition and less actor counterarguments within the non stereotypical condition. There were very few actor counterarguments within the non stereotypical condition to rep o rt. However, the stereotypical condition included numerous actor counterarguments, rangin g t he women looked This cognitive response category shines additional light into the topic, examining reactions to images of women in advertising and focuses specifically on comments about the actors within the ad s. Almost all of the actor counterarguments were focused within the stereotypical condition and results overwhelmingly found that participants in this study reacted unfavorably to the negative portrayal of women in travel advertising.

PAGE 56

50 The final counterargu ment sub category, travel counterargument, focused on about travel within the ads. It is not surprising that this category found no statistically significant effect of advertising condition on travel counter arguments. After analyzing responses within both advertising conditions, it was evident that both categories received very similar responses. Within both advertising As mentioned, the aspect of travel is not relevant to the purpose of this study, but this added subcategory highlights the fact that some respondents did mention counterarguments about traveling, although the number in this instance was n ot significant. In summary, results indicate a highly statistically significant effect of advertising condition on overall counter argument cognitive responses In looking more closely at counterargument subcategories, ad counterarguments and actor countera rguments also showed a statistically significant effect of advertising condition, with more counterarguments originating from the stereotypical advertising condition. Ad design counterarguments additionally elicited a statistically significant effect but more counterarguments originated from the non stereotypical condition. Travel counterarguments showed no statistical significance. In conclusion, this analysis of counterargument cognitive responses supports H4 and also provides further insight into partic categories. The support argument category was segmented exactly like the counterargument category to examine various s upport argument responses.

PAGE 57

51 With support arguments, t he receiver activates responses i ndicating congruent associations have been discovered or that message a rgument is supported by already e ntrenched beliefs (Wright, 1973 ) H5 posited that during advertising exposure, non stereotypical travel advertising will elicit more support argument cognitive responses than stereotypical travel advertising. This hypothesis proved true, at the highest level of statistical significance. The mean scores showed that non stereotypical advertisements elicited significantly more support arguments than the st ereotypical advertising condition. In other words, participants approved of or noted more support of the non stereotypical condition. In looking further into the support argument category, this segment was sub categorized to include ad support arguments, a d design support arguments, actor support arguments, and travel support arguments. This category supports the other attitude response categories (attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention) in noting that the non stereotypical ca tegory proved more favorable in this instance by eliciting significantly more support arguments. This section will review each sub category in more detail to shed light on specific support arguments elicited by respondents. Within the ad support argument c ategory, the participant made support comments related to the overall advertisement, or found the ad to be positive. This ad support argument sub category indicates no statistically significant effect of advertising condition on ad support arguments. Respo ndents did exhibit more ad support arguments within the non stereotypical advertising condition and less ad support arguments within the stereotypical condition but the relationship was not significant These results differ from the overall support argume nt category that collectively confirms overall, that the non

PAGE 58

52 stereotypical ads saw significantly more support arguments. Here, the results indicate that when respondents view the overall ad, their level of support arguments was not significant. Common resp onses within the ad support argument sub category referenced instead of the design, travel or models in the ad. There were few ad support arguments among the stereotypica l condition, but the non stereotypical condition included ad support ar guments that typically stated, t he ad provoked excitement, adventure and possibility The support argument sub category was further highlighted by reviewing ad design support arguments or positive comments about the ad design This category is not relevant to the purpose of the overall study, but highlight s the fact that not all support arguments were aimed at the overall ad or actors within the ads. Ad design support arguments i nclude comments about the design specifically, colors used within the ad, or like of specific photos. R esults indicate a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on ad design support arguments R espondents showed more overall ad design support of the non stereotypical ads, even though the ad design in both conditions were identical. This is likely due to the fact that photos and imagery within the condition did not share their support of the images, but rather their dislike For example, comments wit hin the non

PAGE 59

53 commen highlighting the negative aspects of the ads. It is important to note that although the non stereotypical condition showed a statistically significant effect on advertising condition for ad design support arguments; significance was also noted for ad design counterarguments. Therefore, this shows that many respondents liked ad design elements, but many also disliked ad design elements. S everal questionnaires pointed out ad design support arguments, but men tioned ad design counterarguments in the same analysis. This category is not important to the overall purpose of this study, but results in the ad design support argument category do confirm that participants supported the ad design (and images) more withi n the non stereotypical condition, even though the general ad design was identical within both conditions. The next support argument sub category focused on actor support arguments and enabled the researcher to see specifically how participants supported t he models or actors within each advertising condition. Within this sub category, the participants display support for the actors within the advertising stimuli. The results in this category indicate a statistically significant effect of advertising conditi on on actor support arguments T he mean scores of actor support arguments for each condition confirm that respondents displayed more actor support arguments within the non stereotypical advertising condition and less actor support arguments within the stereotypical condition. There were few actor support arguments within the stereotypical condition to report. However, the non stereotypical condition included support argument comments like the looked happy and Even two positively The

PAGE 60

54 majority of the actor support arguments were focused within the non stereotypical condition and results found that participants in this study rea cted more favorably to the positive depiction of women in travel advertising and showed little support of the negative images of women in the travel advertising stimuli The final support argument sub category focused on travel support arguments, in which the participant s highlight supportive comments about travel within the ads. The results indicate a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on travel support arguments T he mean scores of travel support arguments for each condition indicate that respondents showed more overall travel support arguments within the non stereotypical ads, as compared to the stere otypical advertising condition This is interesting, because t ravel aspects within both ads were identical and the t ravel counterargument subcategory did not show a significant effect of advertising condition on travel counterarguments. There were very few travel support arguments to report within the stereotypical condition; however, the non stereotypical condition saw travel support argument responses, such as the destinations looked exciting ; other comments about the specific cities used within the ads such as As mentioned, the aspect of travel is not relevant to the purpose of this study, but this added subcategory highlights the fact that some respondents did mention support arguments about traveling In summary of support a rguments results indicate a highly statistically significant effect of advertising condition on overall support argument cogni tive responses In looking more closely at support argument subcategories, ad design support arguments

PAGE 61

55 actor support arguments and travel support arguments all showed a statistically significant effect of advertising condition, with more support arguments originating from the non stereotypical advertising condition in each category Surprisingly, the ad overall (ad support catego ry) did not show a significant effect of advertising condition However this analysis of support arguments cognitive responses supports H5 and also provides support argument sub categories. Othe r standard cognitive response categories were examined as well and include source bolstering, source derogation, curiosity statements and other general cognitive response statements. Source bolstering is a positive response that focuses on the source of t he information and their acceptance of the sponsor whereas, source derogation is a resistive response that focuses on the source of the information. The individual may spontaneously derogate the specific spokesperson or the sponsoring organization or the advertising in general (Wright, 1973). The ANCOVA tests in both categories indicated no statistically significant effect of advertising condition on source bolstering or source derogation. Therefore, cognitive responses regarding the source were not releva nt within this study. This could be because the travel company used was fictional and not well known. However, in examining curiosity statements, this category indicated a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on curiosity statements an d respondents showed a higher number of curiosity statements and wished to learn more about the non stereotypical advertising condition Curiosity statements a re thoughts that express a desire for more information or clarification (Wright, 1973). Typical c omments within th e non stereotypical category include, and

PAGE 62

56 what services they offer ; number to call for Few curiosity statements were reported for the stereotypical condition. This is likely because most participants in the stereotypical category spent most of their time writing counterarguments. cognitive response category indicated a statistically significant effect of advertising condition on other cognitive response statements. Here, respondents showed a higher number of other cognitive response statements among the non stereotypical advertis ing condition Comments within the non stereotypical condition centered upon other thoughts, not related to the previous categories, such as These co mments ranged quite heavily and no consistent pattern of statements was noted among other statements In conclusion, the analysis of cognitive responses supports H4 and H5, in addition to providing further insight into various responses elicited by respons es. It is clear that counterargument and support argument were the most common and statistically significant cognitive responses. Where, source bolstering and source derogation had little impact. However, curiosity statements and other miscellaneous cognit ive responses were significant among the non stereotypical advertising condition. The most important finding among the cognitive response analysis is that cognitive responses confirmed that the non stereotypical advertising condition proved more favorable by eliciting significantly more support arguments and the stereotypical condition proved less favorable by eliciting significantly more counterarguments. In addition to cognitive response analysis, the BEM Sex Role Inventory provides insight into reactions to travel

PAGE 63

57 advertising and how masculine and feminine characteristics may play a role in these responses. Several studies have examined the influence of feminist consciousness or masculine and feminine characteristics as an influence in responding to adver tising studies. In this study, the BEM Sex Role Inventory covariate was added to determine if masculine or feminine characteristics have any sort of relationship in determining how consumers react to stereotypical images of women in advertising. For exampl e, it may be imagery. The analysis o verall found that the BEM Sex Role Inventory covariate did not overwhelmingly influence reactions to images of women in travel advertising. However, some variables did see a significant statistical reaction from consumers, mainly among participants who rated high levels of masculine characteristics. One may assume this means that men were more sensitive to the negative portrayal of women in tr avel advertising. The actuality is quite the opposite. In reviewing individual questionnaires, many women in this study scored high for strong levels of masculinity. This is not surprising, since research show s that modern women increasingly display more Role Inventory. Overall, the BEM Sex Role Inventory covariates played little factor in influencing attitude towards the ad, attitude towards the brand, purchase intention and cognitive responses. It can be noted that some categories displayed slight statistical significan ce in relation to masculine and feminine characteristics, but the relation was slight. There was no consistent pattern in relation to the covariate. It should also be noted that the covariate examined masculine and feminine characteristics, not necessarily

PAGE 64

58 characteristics. For example, several female participants scored high on the masculine scale and low for feminine characteristics. Therefore, the relationship of high masculine characteristics affecting some of the categories in this s tudy is likely due to women with high masculine characteristics influencing results. Therefore, these women may have high levels of feminist consciousness and display more masculine characteristics and were thus more offended by the stereotypical advertisi ng. Future research should additionally separate male and female responses to better understand how men versus women react to the advertising. Since this study only included a small sample of male respondents, it was not feasible to examine male reactions alone for fear of validity issues. Study Limitations This research is subject to limitations. One such limitation is the sample of college students used in the study, which limits the generalizability of the results. A larger, non student sample wou ld ins pire somewhat more confi dence in the generalizations drawn here and would perhaps have found significant differences where this research did not. Also utilizing an older sample that travels regularly for business and pleasure would prove more effective res ults Due to timing, funding and resources available, it was not possible to use such a sample for this study. It should be noted that many college students may not have the disposable income to travel and this fact could have affected the lower purchase intention means. Therefore, since the experiment was performed utilizing college students as respondents, the results should be generalized only to populations similar to that of students which participated in the study. Also, o ther demographic factors sho uld be assessed such as age, religion, values, or even political orientation to

PAGE 65

59 determine if such factors affect response to stereotypical images of women in travel advertising. In addition the advertising stimuli used in the experiment were artificial an d the travel company mentioned within the ads was fictional. A true empirical test of stereotypical advertising should use an actual consumer ad vertising campaign to better measure responses. Another limitation with the advertising stimuli includes the bel ievability of the ads. The researcher classified the advertisements as stereotypical by advertising. However, the advertisements could have pushed the envelope in terms of being too racy or non believable. Although no participants mentioned this fact in their cognitive response statements, it should still be addressed as a limitation. Because the level of statistical significance on advertising condition was high among attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention, support arguments and counterarguments; one can only wonder if the levels of contrast was due to the fact that Another limitation includes the fact that the conditions for advertising stimulus exposure and processing were atypical in several respects: participants were tested in groups; exposure to advertisements were forced and highly compressed into a short period of time; ads were projected o n screens in a boardroom setting rather than in a natural environment. All these factors may give rise to a processing mode that is different from what would be expected in real life situations. In addition to these limitations, future studies should more extensively analyze the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) as a covariate and examine a gender role congruence model of advertising effectiveness to see how traditional participants (masculine men and

PAGE 66

60 feminine women) respond to stereotypical adverti sing than to non stereotypical advertisements. In addition, non traditional participants (androgynous individuals; feminine men; masculine women) should be further segmented to better examine reactions by gender role congruence and sex. Due to time limitat ions resources and the fact that the BSRI had little impact on audiences in this study, further analysis was not conducted. Despite these limitations, this study is one of few known research efforts designed to offer evidence about the reactions to ster eotypical travel advertisement execution and consumer responses to the ads. The findings of the research indicate unfavorable response to stereotypical images of women in travel advertising on the key consumer response variables like purchase intention, at titude toward the brand, attitude toward the ad, and cognitive responses. The implication of these findings to advertisers is rather straightforward. The use of unethical advertising that include stereotypical images of women in travel ad s may significantly affect consumer responses to ads in a negative manner T hus, the use of potentially unethical advertisements may have negative ramifications for advertisers. The results highlight the importance of assessing consumer evaluations of poten tially problematic ads by consumers prior to their use in advertising programs.

PAGE 67

61 List of References Ademola, Owolabi Benjamin ( 2009 ). Effects of gender role orientation, sex of advert presenter and product type on advertising effectiveness. Europe an Journal of Scientific Research, 35 (4), 537 543. Batra R., & Ray M. L. ( 1986 ). Affective responses mediating acceptance of a dvertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (2), 234 249. Belknap, P. & Leonard, W. M. (1991). A conceptual replication and exte nsion of Erving Goffman's study of gender advertisements. Sex Roles (25), 103 117. Berman, E. M. (2002). Essential Statistics for Public Manager and Policy Analysts Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. Bhat, S. Leigh T. W., & Wardlow, D.L (1996). The effect of homosexual imagery in advertising on attitude toward the ad. Journal of Homosexuality 31 (1 2), 161 176. Brown, Steven P. & Stayman, Douglas M. (1992). Antecedents and consequences of attitude toward the ad: A meta analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (June), 34 51. Bruner II, G. C. & Kumar, A. (2000). Web commercials and advertising hierarchy of effects. Journal of Advertising Research 40 (1 2), 35 44. Field, A.P. (2009). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS: and sex and drugs and roll (3 rd Edition). London: Sage. Ford, J.B., & La Tour, M.S. (1993). Differing reactions to female role portrayals in advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 33 (September/October), 43 52. Ford, J.B., LaTour, M.S., & Honeycutt, E.D., Jr. ( 1997). An examination of the cross cultural female response to offensive sex role portrayals in advertising. International Marketing Review, 14 (6), 409 423.

PAGE 68

62 of female role portrayals in advertising. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 8 (1), 15 28. Goffman, E. (1979). Gender Advertisements Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In Psychological foundations of attitudes. 147 170. New York: Academic Press. Hogg, M.K. & Garrow, J. (2003). Gender, identity and the consumption of advertising. Qualitative Market Research, 6 (3), 160 174. Holbrook, M.B. & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research 14 404 420. Holt, Cheryl L. & Ellis, Job B. (1998). Assessing the current validity of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Sex Roles 39 (11 12), 929 941. Hoyer, Wayne D. & Macinnis, Deborah J. (2006). Consumer Behavior, Fourth Edition South Western College Pub. Jaffe, L. J., & Berger, P. D. (1988). Impact on purchase intent of sex role identity and product positioning. Psychology & Marketing ( 5 ) 259 271. Jaffe, L.J. (1994). The unique predictive ability of sex role identity in explaining Psychology & Marketing, 11 (5), 467 482 Jhally, Sut. (1989). Advertising, gender and sex: What's wrong with a little objectification? Worki ng Papers and Proceedings of the Center for Psychosocial Studies (edited by Richard Parmentier and Greg Urban), No. 29. Sex Roles: A Journal o f Research, 37 979 991. Kilbourne, W.E. (1990). Female stereotyping in advertising: An experiment on male female perceptions of leadership. Journalism Quarterly, 67 25 31.

PAGE 69

63 Kilbourne, J. (1999). Deadly Persuasion. Why Women and Girls Must Fight the Addi ctive Power of Advertising. The Free Press : New York, NY. Kinnaird, V., and D. Hall. (1994). Tourism: A Gender Analysis Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Klassen, M.L., & Jasper, C.R., & Schwartz, A.M. (1993). Men and women: Images of their relationships i n magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising Research, 33 30 40. Lanis, K., & Covell, K. (1995). Images of women in advertisements: Effects on attitudes related to sexual aggression Sex Roles, 32, 639 649. local Advertising. Feminist Media Studies 6 (4), 505 17. Lindner, K. (2004). Images of women in general interest and fashion magazine advertisements from 1955 to 2002. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research 51 409 422. Lundstrom, W.J., & Sciglimpaglia, D. (1977). Sex role portrayals in advertising. Journal of Marketing, 41 (3), 72 79. Lutz, Ri chard J., MacKenzie, Scott B., & Belch, George E. (1983). Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: Determinants and consequences. In Advances in Consumer Research Volume 10 532 539. Association for Consumer Research. MacKenzie, Scott B., Lutz, Richard J. & Belch, George E. (1986). The Role of Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations. Journal of Marketing Research. 23 (May), 130 43. Martine, Brett A.S., & Gnoth, Juergen. (2009). Is the Marlboro man the only alternative? The role of gender identit y and self construal salience in evaluations of male models. Marketing Letters, 20 (4), 353 367. McDonald, Jessica. (2005). Women in Tourism Advertising Unpublished Manuscript. McKay, N. J., & Covell, K. (1997). The impact of women in advertisements on attitudes toward women. Sex Roles, 36 573 583.

PAGE 70

64 Meirick, Patrick. (2002). Cognitive Responses to Negative and Comparative Political Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 31 (1), 49 62. Mitchell, A. A. & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude? J ournal of Marketing Research (18) 3, 318 332. Morrison, M.M., & Shaffer, D.R. (2003). Gender role congruence and self referencing as deter minants of advertising effectiveness. Sex Roles, 49, 265 275. Mottiar, Z., & Quinn, D. (2004). Couple Dynamics in household tourism decision making: Women as the gatekeepers? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10 149 160. Pearce, D. (1989). Contemporary issue s in tourism development Routledge: London and New York. Plakoyiannaki, E. & Zotos, Y. (2009) Female role stereotypes in print advertising: Identifying associations with magazine and product categories. European Journal of Marketing, 43 (11/12), 1411 1434 Prakash, V. (1992). Sex roles and advertising preferences. Journal of Advertising Research 32 (May/June), 43 53. Pritchard, Annette & Morgan, Nigel J. (2000). Privileging the male gaze: Gendered tourism landscapes. Annals of Tourism Research 27 (4), 884 905. Pritchard, Annette & Morgan, Nigel J. (2007). Encountering scopophilia, sensuality and desire: Engendering Tahiti. In Tourism & Gender: embodiment, sensuality and experience. 158 181.Oxford: CABI. Ritchie, J.R.B., & Filiatrault, P. (1980). Fam ily Decision Making: A replication and extension. Journal of Travel Research, 18, 3 14. Shimp T. A. 1981 Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of consumer brand choice. Journal of Advertising, 10 (2), 9 15. Sirakaya, E. & Sonmez, S. (2000). Gender images in state tourism brochures: An overlooked area in socially responsible tourism marketing Journal of Travel Research, 38, 353 362. Wang, N. (2000). Tourism and Modernity: A Sociological Analysis Oxford: Pergamon.

PAGE 71

65 Wearing, B., and S. Wearing. (1996). Refoc Leisure Studies, (15), 229 244. Wigery, R. & McGaugh, J. (1993). Vehicle message appeals and the new generation woman. Journal of Advertising Research (September/October), 36 42. Wright Pet er L. (1973). The cognitive processes mediating acceptance of a dvertising Journal of Marketing Research, 10 (February), 53 62.

PAGE 72

66 Appendices

PAGE 73

67 A ppendix A : Advertising Stimuli Stereotypical Ad Treatment 1

PAGE 74

68 A ppendix A : Continued Stereotypical Ad Treatment 2

PAGE 75

69 A ppendix A : Continued Stereotypical Ad Treatment 3

PAGE 76

70 A ppendix A : Continued Non Stereotypical Ad Treatment 1

PAGE 77

71 A ppendix A : Continued Non Stereotypical Ad Treatment 2

PAGE 78

72 A ppendix A : Continued Non Stereotypical Ad Treatment 3

PAGE 79

73 Appendix B: Questionnaire Advertising Opinion Questionnaire 1. Age: _____________________________ 2. Education Level: 1.) High School 2.) Some College 3.) College Graduate 4.) Post Grad 3. Sex: 1.) Female 2.) Male 4. Have you traveled in the last year for business or pleasure: 1.) Yes 2.) No 5. The purpose of this research is to investigate methods of pretesting advertisements which are still in the concept testing stage of development. Your task is simply to examine the ads in front of you and form an evaluation of them. As you look at the group of advertisements, please remember we are interested in your evaluation of the advertisements, not in your evaluation of the product shown in th e ads. ** Do not read ahead in this questionnaire. Now please view the three advertisements presented on the screen in front of you. You will have 30 seconds to view each ad before sharing your opinions. 6. In the space provided below, please list all the th oughts, reactions, and ideas that went through your mind while you were looking at the advertisement. Please write down any thoughts, no matter how simple, complex, relevant or irrelevant they may seem to you. Write down everything you thought of, regardle ss of whether it pertained to the product, the advertisement, or anything else. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not worry about grammar, spelling or punctuation, but please write your thoughts clearly. Remember, list all thoughts that occurred to y ou during the time you were looking at the advertisement. Internal Code: ____________

PAGE 80

74 Appendix B: (Continued) 7. Now, please take a moment to share your evaluation of the ads you just viewed. Please remember we are interested in your evaluation of the advertisements Please circle your attitude response to the statements below, based on your evaluation of the advertisements. Dislike 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Like Unf avorable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Fa vorable Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good Negative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Positive

PAGE 81

75 Appendix B: (Continued) 8. Now, please take a moment to share your evaluation of the brand (Calovadra Travel) presented within the advertisements you just viewed. Please remember we are interested in your evaluation of the brand (Calovadra Travel) shown in the ad. Please circle yo ur attitude response to the statements below regarding the brand based on your evaluation of the advertisements. Disl ike 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L ike Unfavorable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Fa vorable Bad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Good Negative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Positive 9. Now, please take a mo ment to share the likelihood that you will purchase the product (travel services) shown within the advertisements you just viewed. Please remember we are interested in your evaluation of purchasing the product. Please circle your attitude response to the s tatements below regarding purchasing this product, based on your evaluation of the advertisements. Unl ike ly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Likely 10. Now, p lease rate the following opinions about yourself When answering the following characteristics describe true n of the questionnaire. Self reliant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Yielding 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Helpful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Defends own beliefs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cheerful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Moody 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Never or almost never true Always or almost always true

PAGE 82

76 Appendix B: (Continued) Independent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Shy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Conscientious 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Athletic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Affectionate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Theatrical 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Assertive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Flatterable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Happy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strong personality 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Loyal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Unpredictable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Forceful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Feminine 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Reliable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Analytical 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sympathetic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Jealous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Has leadership abilities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sensitive to the needs of others 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Truthful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Willing to take risks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Understanding 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Never or almost never true Always or almost always true

PAGE 83

77 Appendix B: (Continued) Secretive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Makes decisions easily 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Compassionate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sincere 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Self sufficient 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Eager to soothe hurt feelings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Conceited 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D ominant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Soft spoken 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Likable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Masculine 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Warm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Solemn 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Willing to take a stand 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tender 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Friendly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Aggressive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Gullible 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Inefficient 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Acts as a leader 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Childlike 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Adaptable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Never or almost never true Always or almost always true

PAGE 84

78 Appendix B: (Continued) Individualistic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Does not use harsh language 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Unsystematic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Competitive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Loves children 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tactful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ambitious 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Gentle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Conventional 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Never or almost never true Always or almost always true


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 007 cr-bnu---uuuuu
008 s2010 flu s 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0003413
035
(OCoLC)
040
FHM
c FHM
049
FHMM
090
XX9999 (Online)
1 100
McDonald, Jessica.
0 245
Consumer responses to stereotypical vs. non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising
h [electronic resource] /
by Jessica McDonald.
260
[Tampa, Fla] :
b University of South Florida,
2010.
500
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains X pages.
502
Thesis (M.A.)--University of South Florida, 2010.
504
Includes bibliographical references.
516
Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.
538
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
3 520
ABSTRACT: Women are active travel consumers, yet travel advertising notoriously depicts women stereotypically. If consumers react negatively to these stereotypical portrayals in advertising, they may disregard the ad or brand and purchase a different travel product. The purpose of this study is to determine if consumers react differently to stereotypical versus non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. The study will examine these reactions, by measuring attitude toward the ad, attitude toward the brand, purchase intention, and cognitive responses to carefully prepared advertisements that are characterized as "stereotypical" or "non-stereotypical." Ads are defined as stereotypical by utilizing Goffman's (1979) framework for analyzing images of women in advertising. Results overwhelmingly indicate that consumers in this study display more favorable attitudes to the non-stereotypical depictions of women in travel advertising. Attitudes toward the advertising, brand, purchase intention, and cognitive responses were all significantly more favorable among the non-stereotypical advertising condition. The results have theoretical benefit to the travel advertising industry, since these findings support the affect transfer hypothesis and dual mediation hypothesis. No studies to date have examined such research in travel advertising and results indicate a possible need for action among advertisers.
590
Advisor: Scott Liu, Ph.D.
653
Advertising attitude
Advertising response
Gender
Sex roles
690
Dissertations, Academic
z USF
x Mass Communications
Masters.
773
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?e14.3413