Post on 19-Jul-2018
1
Knowing Me, Knowing You. Aha (Or Not): The Impact of Personality Type
on Response to Advertising Image
Abstract
We investigate potential congruence between image types in print advertisements and consumers’
perceiving preferences. These orientations are classified as sensing (S) or intuiting (N) by the
well-established Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), underpinned by Jungian philosophy.
Earlier results (LaBarbera et al., 1998) indicated congruence between consumers grouped by S
and N perceiving preference and corresponding images classified across 4 product categories,
implying use by practitioners of this matching concept to strengthen impact and predict consumer
responses to advertising
Our study replicates and extends this original study, differing in time frame, geography and
sample. The original research was carried out in 1998 in New York, with an unintended bias
towards intuitive types. This study used a UK sample recruited with a greater balance between
the two preference groups, a decade later.
This study found no congruence between image type and the corresponding consumer perceiving
preference groups against any of the measures of image appeal, overall advertisement appeal or
intention to purchase.
This study implies that advertising and marketing professionals should not rely on this matching
concept to strengthen impact or to predict consumer response. Practitioners are exhorted to ignore
findings which remain unreplicated.
Key words: MBTI, processing styles, advertising images, print advertising, generalisations,
replication
2
Introduction Despite numerous proposed models, understanding of the communication process remains
elusive (Wilmshurst and MacKay, 1999). Attempts to explore the relationship between consumer
personality and response to advertising messages have resulted in inconclusive findings
(Holbrook, 1986; Wright, 1975; Aaker ,1997; LaBarbera et al., 1998; McBride et al., 1987). One
explanation offered for the inconsistent findings is that studies have been based on exercises
profiling consumers across accepted personality traits, rather than on a personality theory rooted
in cognitive style (LaBarbera et al. 1998).
One instrument based on cognitive personality theory is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI),
the most widely used personality assessment tool in business (Leonard and Straus, 1997)
describing individual preferences for acquiring, processing and using information (Myers and
McCaulley,1985). It assesses individuals across 4 dimensions: extroversion/introversion,
sensing/intuiting, thinking/feeling, judging/perceiving – and identifies 4 preferences (see
Appendix 1) categorising16 personality types (Myers, 1992).
We are concerned here with the perceiving function - how an individual prefers to take in
information (Myers,1992). The options here are sensing or intuitive (S/N) styles. Sensing types
are interested in the concrete, focus on the immediate, and are realistic having a memory for
detail dependent on their senses (Myers,1992: Myers and McCaulley,1985). Intuitives are
interested in patterns and relationship focusing on possibilities, the abstract dependent on
intuitions that emerge subconsciously (Myers, 1992, Myers and McCaulley, 1985). ‘Sensors’
tend to concentrate on the detail of an image and stay within the limits of its context whereas
‘intuitives’ make more assumptions that may not be evidenced in the image, and consider future
possibilities (Russell, 2001).
This distinction suggests that personality may offer insights into responses to advertising images,
offering significant commercial benefits. However these potential rewards can only be realised if
this congruence is proven.
Previous Research
Previous work in this area has focused on the link between perceiving types and advertising
appeal, advertising imagery, and the effect on intention to purchase. McBride (1987) proposed a
congruence model suggesting a receiver would find an object more appealing when consistent
with their personality. Implicit in this model is that objects, such as products and/or advertising
messages, intrinsically possess a personality type or can be positioned to represent a type.
This study provided the foundation for LaBarbera et al.’s (1998) later more focused research,
which specifically investigated the potential congruence between the imagery in print advertising
and subjects’ preferred perceiving preference (sensing/intuiting). The reported results indicated
support for hypotheses on three measures of image appeal, advertising appeal and purchase
intention, suggesting that respondents classified images as either sensing or intuiting in type and
responded as such. The implication was that advertisements containing images tailored to match
the dominant perception preference style of a target group would have greater appeal to this type
(LaBarbera et al.1998).
Several researchers have studied the effect of attitude towards an advertisement on the attitude
towards a product/brand and, importantly, its indirect effect on future predicted behaviour (see
Mitchell, 1986). Individuals can draw inferences about the advertised brand based on the visual
imagery and these may result in the formation or change of beliefs about the advertised brand. A
positive or negative evaluation of the visual element affects brand attitudes that are a function of
attitude towards the advertisement. Mitchell’s (1986) study did, however, not explore the effects
3
of the visual and copy components of advertisements separately, nor the potential congruence
between an individual’s perceiving preference and attitude towards an advertising image.
Further psychological insight is offered by the idea that a consumer’s cognitive activity can be
altered by the presence of a dominant picture in a print advertisement, while an individual is
viewing the advertisement (Edell and Staelin,1983). In their study, lack of brand evaluation was
exhibited by subjects viewing unframed pictorial advertisements. The differences in processing
of advertisements were shown to have a mediating effect on the individual’s brand attitudes and
purchase intentions.
Adding to this, Russell (2001) showed a link between an individual’s MBTI personality type,
preferred processing style and interpretations of photographs. This suggests that an individual’s
response to imagery in print advertising should show congruence with a consumer’s preferred
processing style has been shown, a proposition supported by LaBarbera et al.(1998).
In addition, attitudes towards advertisements have been shown to have a partial mediating effect
on attitudes towards a brand/product and intention to purchase (Mitchell and Olson 1981,
Mitchell 1986, MacKenzie et al. 1986). Compounding this, in research with primarily pictorial
print advertisement, framing of the picture has been shown to have a positive effect on
brand/product evaluations and recall (Edell and Staelin 1983).
Since the LaBarbera et al.(1998) study, there has been no further research in the public domain
specifically testing congruence between image type and an individual’s preferred processing
style in print advertisements. In view of the limited research evidence supporting congruence
between Jung’s perceiving dimension and image type in advertising, the need for further research
was indicated. As Evanschitzy et al. (2007) suggest, practitioners should “put little stock in the
outcomes of one-shot studies”. There is a concern that “hardly any” of results reported in
marketing journals have been successfully replicated. This study offers a representation with
extension consistent with Hubbard and Armstrong’s (1994) definition ie it is a “duplication of a
previously published empirical research project that serves to investigate the generalisability of
earlier research findings”.
This study was conducted a decade on, in the UK and using a convenience sampling technique to
deliver a sample representative of the UK population in terms of perceiving preference split.
Three categories were chosen to represent a range of products – orange juice, mattresses and
retirement savings plans, consistent with the original study but omitting the fourth category as
preliminary research showed a gender bias.
Hypotheses
The aim is to investigate the extent to which congruence between consumer personality-type
perceiving preference and image type in print advertisements is supported. For robustness, the
LaBarbera et al. (1998) hypotheses were reversed:
H1 – Individuals show no preference for images and advertisements consistent with their
information processing styles.
Images and advertisements perceived as realistic, concrete and informative will not be evaluated
more (less) favourably by individuals with sensor (intuitive) typologies compared to
advertisements perceived as imaginative, conceptual and abstract.
H2 – Individuals show no preference to purchase products consistent with their information
processing styles.
Advertisements perceived as realistic, concrete and informative will not elicit higher (lower)
purchase intentions by individuals with sensor (intuitive) typologies compared to advertisements
that are perceived as imaginative, conceptual and abstract.
4
Methodology
This study was conducted in three phases: an expert panel, a pre-test study and a main study over
an 8-week period. The data collection methods, instruments and objectives for each phase are
summarised in Table 1.
Table 1: Summary of data collection methods, instruments and objectives
Phase Objective Stimulus Material
and Instruments
Outline
Expert panel • To select 18 images for
the pre-test
• Mixed selection of
images for three
product categories –
both product, and
conceptual
3 panel members (trained to
level B psychometrics)
selected 3 ‘sensing’ and 3
‘intuitive’ images for each of
the 3 product categories
giving 18 images (3+3 X 3)
Pre-test • To filter out the
strongest S and N
image for each product
category, 6 in total
• To determine
respondent’s
perceiving preferences
• 18 images selected
by the expert panel -
6 per product
category
• Pre-test vocabulary
and short MBTI
questionnaire
30 respondents selected
word associations for the
images from the pre-test
vocabulary
(see Appendix 2).
S/N perceiving preference
for pre-test sample assessed
Main study • To test the hypotheses
by rating image appeal,
overall advertisement
appeal and intention to
purchase
• To determine each
subject’s S/N
perceiving preference
• A total of 6 images –
2 per product
category – with 3
shown to each
subject
• Questionnaire to rate
image appeal,
overall advert appeal
and intention to
purchase
• Pre-test key words
• Short MBTI
questionnaire
104 adults allocated
perceiving preference based
on key words and
then rated image appeal,
overall advert appeal and
intention to purchase on a
Likert scale 1 = strongly
disagree, 7 = strongly agree
Analysis and findings
Results of the pre test
The results of the pre test to classify the images confirmed the judgment of the expert panel (see
Table 2), validating the visual stimulus material.
Table 2: Summary of image classification results
Product category Ad Type Image description1 Mean
Value2
No. of
subject
scores
Standard
deviation
Orange juice
Sensor (S) Glass with oranges 0.30 47 2.39
Intuitive (N) Sunburst -1.26 57 1.92
Retirement Plan Sensor (S) Piggy bank 2.00 57 2.24
Intuitive (N) Crystal ball -0.91 47 1.99
Mattress Sensor(S) Bedroom 0.57 51 2.34
Intuitive(N) Moonlight scene -2.38 53 1.69 1 See appendix 3 for images
2Sensing minus intuitive key word score
There was no statistically significant interaction effect between perceiving type (sensor/intuitive)
on image classification F(1, 308) = 0.367, p=0.55.
5
Main Study
The sample of 104 respondents comprised 63% sensors and 37% intuitives, categorised by the
number of sensing and intuitive words selected (see Appendix 2). The sample was asked to rate
the images on the items shown in Appendix 4 using a Likert scale.
To check reliability and internal consistency in the three items of the intention to purchase scale
and the two items of the advertising appeal scale, Cronbach alpha tests were run with results of
0.85 and 0.9 respectively. No statistically significant effects were found for overall advertisement
appeal, image appeal and purchase intentions between sensing and intuitive subject groups at
aggregate image level. To assess the potential for congruence between image type and subject
type, more detailed analysis with 6 two-way between group ANOVAs conducted on the 6
individual measures of image appeal, advertisement appeal (x2) and purchase intention (x3) for
each of the 6 advertising images. These results of are summarised in tables 3-5. Throughout all
Levene’s homogeneity of variance was not violated. No significant interaction effects were seen
between the independent variables of subject groups and images and no significant main effects
were seen for the subject groups.
Table 3: Image appeal ratings
Advertisement type
(S/N)
Mean rating by
sensor subjects
Mean rating by
intuitive subjects
F-value Significance
(p-value)
Orange juice (S)
Orange juice (N)
3.52
3.94
3.44
4.17
0.18 0.68 **
Retirement plan (S)
Retirement plan (N)
3.00
4.87
3.25
4.88
0.17 0.70**
Mattress (S)
Mattress (N)
3.48
3.10
4.00
3.00
0.42 0.34**
**p >0.01
Table 4: Advertisement appeal ratings
Advertisement type Mean rating by
sensor subjects
Mean rating by
intuitive subjects
F-value Significance
(p-value)
Orange juice (S)
Orange juice (N)
3.99
4.45
3.66
4.96
0.07 0.21***
Retirement plan (S)
Retirement plan (N)
3.14
9.16
3.04
5.00
0.41 0.32***
Mattress (S)
Mattress (N)
3.35
3.15
3.67
3.16
0.31 0.61***
*** p>0.01
The reported means and low F values indicate no significant difference between group and within
group differences in the mean scores providing support for H1.
Table 5: Intention to purchase ratings
Advertisement type Mean rating by
sensor subjects
Mean rating by
intuitive subjects
F-value Significance
(p-value)
Orange juice (S)
Orange juice (N)
4.56
4.74
4.29
5.26
0.21 0.17***
Retirement plan (S)
Retirement plan (N)
4.21
5.39
4.43
5.48
0.40 0.80***
Mattress (S)
Mattress (N)
4.29
4.17
4.66
4.42
0.42 0.82***
*** p>0.01
6
The reported means and low F values indicate insignificant between group and within group
differences in the mean scores providing support for H2. There was no significant difference in
intention to purchase behaviour between sensor and intuitive subject groups across all images and
product categories.
No significant differences were found between the sensor and intuitive subject groups for any
image on the individual measures of image appeal, overall advertisement appeal and
intention to purchase supporting both H1 and H2. Both hypotheses were supported with
individuals showing no preference for images and advertisements nor to purchase products
presented in a form consistent with the information processing styles that characterise their
personality types.
Discussion and Implications
The findings of this study do not support a congruency theory between perceiving-type
preference and visual image type in advertising. No significant differences were found between
the sensor and intuitive subject groups for any image on the individual measures of image appeal,
overall advertisement appeal and intention to purchase. No cause and effect relationship was
shown.
Subjects were shown to reliably categorise visual images displayed alone and in advertisements
as either sensor or intuitive in type, suggesting the sensor/intuitive classification system may
reliably offer a method for evaluation of visual images displayed alone and in advertisements.
This categorisation was not affected by individuals’ perceiving preference as no significant
differences were found on evaluation of images between the sensor and intuitive groups.
From the findings of this study, the principal implication is that perceiving type preference
information cannot reliably be used to understand and predict how consumers will interpret and
respond to imagery in advertisements. Using visual images that are consistent with perceiving-
type preference has no effect on advertising evaluations. However this study does not take
account of the interaction effects between the different dimensions and to some extent seeks
parsimony where complexity might be helpful.
The results of this study and the limited previous support for a congruence theory between
Jungian perceiving preference and visual image type indicate that practical application of this
partially supported theory is not recommended.
This study emphasises the importance of replication research as this close application of the
original delivers diametrically opposing results. Geography and time scale do not provide an
explanation for this since the MBTI is stable over time and differences in the frequency of the
S/N perceiving types are accounted for in the research design. The credibility of academic
research is brought into question by this lack of generalisability and should reasonably create
scepticism in the minds of practitioners.
7
References
Aaker J L (1997). “Dimensions of Brand Personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 3 347-
56
Briggs K C and Briggs Myers I (1998). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Step 1 Question Book,
Oxford, UK: Seacourt Press, distributed by OPP Limited
Bruner G C, James K E and Hensel P J (2001). Marketing scales handbook: a compilation of
multi-item measures. Vol 3. Chicago, III: American Marketing Association.
Edell J A and Staelin R (1983), “The Information Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements”,
Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 45-61
Evanschitzky H, Baumgarth C, Hubbard R. and Armstrong J.S (2007). “Replication Research in
Marketing Revisited: A Note on A Disturbing Trend”, Journal of Business Research, 60, 4, 411-
415
Holbrook Morris (1986). “Aims, Concepts and Methods for the Representation of Individual
Differences in Esthetic Responses to Advertising”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 3 337-47.
Hubbard R and Armstrong J S (1994). “Replications and Extensions in Marketing: Rarely
Published but Quite Contrary”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11, 233-248
LaBarbera P A, Weingard P and Yorkston E A (1998),”Matching the Message to the Mind:
Advertising Imagery and Consumer Processing Styles”, Journal of Advertising Research,
September-October 1998 29-43
Leonard D and Straus S (1997), “Putting your Company’s Whole Brain to Work”, Harvard
Business Review 75, 4 110-22
MacKenzie S B, Lutz R J and Belch G E (1986), “The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a
Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Evaluations”, Journal of Marketing
Research, XXIII, 130-43
McBride M H (1987). “Toward a Theory of Psychological Type Congruence for
Advertisers”,Conference Proceedings: Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication (70th
, San Antonio, 1987)
Mitchell A A and Olsen J C (1981), “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of
Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?”, Journal of Marketing Research, XVIII, 318-32
Mitchell A A (1986),”The Effect of Verbal and Visual Components of Advertisements on Brand
Attitudes and Attitude toward the Advertisement”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 12-24
Myers, I. B and McCaulley M. H (1985). A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-
Briggs Type Indicator, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc
Myers, Isabel Briggs, Myers B Peter (1992). Gifts Differing, 16th
edition, Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc
Russell A L (2001). A Personal Odyssey: Myers Briggs Type Indicator Preferences and Personal
Responses to Photographs, Published in the proceedings (2002) 33rd
Annual Conference of the
International Visual Literacy Association, Eskilstuna, Sweden, November, 165-170
Wilmshurst J and MacKay A (1999). The Fundamentals of Advertising, 2nd
edition. Butterworth
Heinemann, Oxford
Wright P (1975),”Factors affecting cognitive resistance to advertising”, Journal of Consumer
Research, 2, 1-9
8
Appendix 1: The four preferences of the MBTI (Source: Myers and McCaulley 1985)
Index preferences between Affects choices as to
EI
E Extraversion or
I Introversion
Whether to direct perception
judgment mainly on the outer
world (E) or mainly on the
world of ideas (I)
SN
S Sensing perception
N Intuitive perception
Which kind of perception is
preferred when one needs or
wishes to perceive
TF
T Thinking judgment
F Feeling judgment
Which kind of judgment to
trust when one needs or
wishes to make a decision
JP J Judgment
P Perception
Whether to deal with the outer
world in the judging (J)
attitude (using T or F) or in
the perceptive (P) attitude
(using S or N)
9
Appendix 2: Sensor/ Intuitive Key Words
Source: adapted by author from LaBarbera 1998 (Briggs and Briggs-Myers 1998, Myers 1992,
Myers and MacCaulley 1985)
Sensor vocabulary Intuitive vocabulary
• Realistic
• Useful
• Practical
• Down-to-earth
• Actual
• Factual
• Concrete
• Here and now
• Informative
• Speculative
• Fantasy
• Imaginative
• Head-in-the-clouds
• Possible
• Innovative
• Abstract
• Future
• Inspirational
10
Appendix 3: Advertising Images
Sensing Intuitive
11
Appendix 4
Variables and Related Items (Bruner et al. 2001)
Variable Item
Advertisement appeal I like this advert
I imagined what it would be like to use the product
advertised
Image appeal The image of this product appealed to me.
Intention to purchase I would like to try this product.
I would buy this product if I happened to see it
I would actively seek out this product to buy it