The Effect of Product Placement Strategies on Customer Behavior: A Prospective of Foote, Cone and Belding (FCB) Grid Model
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypotheses
2.1. Judgements on Product Placement Strategies
2.2. Limitations of Previous Studies
2.3. The Originality of the Study
2.4. Hypotheses
3. Methodology
3.1. Variable Measured
3.2. Data Collection and Transformation
4. Results
4.1. Sample Description
4.2. Product Difference
4.2.1. Brand Awareness
4.2.2. Brand Recognition
4.2.3. Brand Attitude
4.2.4. Purchase Intention
4.2.5. Product Difference
4.3. Findings
5. Discussion
5.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications
5.2. Limitations and Future Research
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Balasubramanian, S.K.; Karrh, J.A.; Patwardhan, H. Audience response to product placements: An integrative framework and future research agenda. J. Advert. 2006, 35, 115–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Delorme, D.E.; Nowak, G.J. Developing integrated marketing communications message delivery strategies: Challenges and opportunities associated with the brand contact concept. In Proceedings of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 30 July–2 August 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Agrawal, M. Review of a 40-year debate in international advertising: Practitioner and academician perspectives to the standardization/adaptation issue. Int. Mark. Rev. 1995, 12, 26–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- d’Astous, A.; Chartier, F. A study of factors affecting consumer evaluations and memory of product placements in movies. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 2000, 22, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nebenzahl, I.D.; Secunda, E. Consumers’ attitudes toward product placement in movies. Int. J. Advert. 1993, 12, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babin, L.A. Advertising via the box office: Is product placement effective? J. Promot. Manag. 1996, 3, 31–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, P.B.; Gould, S.J. Consumers’ perceptions of the ethics and acceptability of product placements in movies: Product category and individual differences. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 1997, 19, 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karrh, J.A. Brand placement: A review. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 1998, 20, 31–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, P.B.; Lord, K.R. Product placement in movies: The effect of prominence and mode on audience recall. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 1998, 20, 47–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gould, S.J.; Gupta, P.B.; Grabner-Kräuter, S. Product placements in movies: A cross-cultural analysis of Austrian, French and American consumers’ attitudes toward this emerging, international promotional medium. J. Advert. 2000, 29, 41–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russell, C.A. Investigating the effectiveness of product placements in television shows: The role of modality and plot connection congruence on brand memory and attitude. J. Consum. Res. 2002, 29, 306–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morton, C.R.; Friedman, M. “I saw it in the movies”: Exploring the link between product placement beliefs and reported usage behavior. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 2002, 24, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisend, M. A cross-cultural generalizability study of consumers’ acceptance of product placements in movies. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 2009, 31, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, G.Y. Audience’s Acceptability of Product Placement: A Comparison of Chinese and Korean Young Consumers. Ph.D. Thesis, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Bigné, E.; Küster, I.; Hernández, A.; Suemanotham, T.; Vila, N. Product placement in video games as a marketing strategy: An attempt to analysis in Disney company. In Advances in Advertising Research; Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2011; Volume 2, pp. 3–20. [Google Scholar]
- Tessitore, T.; Geuens, M. PP for ‘product placement’or ‘puzzled public’? The effectiveness of symbols as warnings of product placement and the moderating role of brand recall. Int. J. Advert. 2013, 32, 419–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naderer, B.; Matthes, J.; Marquart, F.; Mayrhofer, M. Children’s attitudinal and behavioral reactions to product placements: Investigating the role of placement frequency, placement integration, and parental mediation. Int. J. Advert. 2018, 37, 236–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gillespie, B.; Muehling, D.D.; Kareklas, I. Fitting product placements: Affective fit and cognitive fit as determinants of con-sumer evaluations of placed brands. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 82, 90–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chernikova, A.; Branco, M. Product placement in computer/video games: An analysis of the impact on customers purchasing decision. Innov. Mark. 2019, 15, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cowan, K.; Ketron, S. A dual model of product involvement for effective virtual reality: The roles of imagination, co-creation, telepresence, and interactivity. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 483–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, K.; Hung, K. The Effect of Natural Celebrity–Brand Association and Para-Social Interaction in Advertising Endorsement for Sustainable Marketing. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gibbons, T.; Katsirea, I. Commercial influences on programme content: The German and UK approaches to transposing EU rules on product placement. J. Media Law 2012, 4, 159–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toomey, D.A. The Influence of Product Placement on Pre-Teen Decision-Making; Anderson University: Anderson, SC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Liang, A.R.D.; Hsiao, T.Y.; Cheng, C.H. The effects of product placement and television drama types on the consumer responses of college students. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2015, 20, 1212–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, F.F.Y.; Petrovici, D.; Lowe, B. Antecedents of product placement effectiveness across cultures. Int. Mark. Rev. 2016, 33, 5–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adis, A.A.A.; Ing, G.P.; Osman, Z.; Razli, I.A.; Pang, Y.X.; Sondoh, S.L.; Majid, M.R.A. Mediation role of attitude towards product placement in social media. J. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 8, 79. [Google Scholar]
- Marchand, A.; Hennig-Thurau, T.; Best, S. When James Bond shows off his Omega: Does product placement affect its media host? Eur. J. Mark. 2015, 49, 1666–1685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roozen, I. The Effectiveness of Product Placements in Music Videos: Some Experimental Empirical Results. Rom. Market. Rev. 2010, 4, 7–31. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, C.; Jeon, H.G.; Lee, K.C. Discovering the Role of Emotional and Rational Appeals and Hidden Heterogeneity of Con-sumers in Advertising Copies for Sustainable Marketing. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, F.; Ye, G.; Hudders, L.; Lv, W.; Li, M.; Duffy, V.G. Product placement in mass media: A review and bibliometric analysis. J. Advert. 2019, 48, 215–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Küster, I.; Vila, N.; Hernández, A.; Canales, P.; Castillo, V. Product Placement in Video Games: Image Transference among Emotions. In Engaging Consumers through Branded Entertainment and Convergent Media; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2015; pp. 127–148. [Google Scholar]
- Dagger, T.S.; David, M.E. Uncovering the real effect of switching costs on the satisfaction-loyalty association: The critical role of involvement and relationship benefits. Eur. J. Mark. 2012, 46, 447–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaudhuri, A.; Buck, R. Affect, reason, and persuasion: Advertising strategies that predict affective and analytic-cognitive responses. Human Commun. Res. 1995, 21, 422–441. [Google Scholar]
- Homer, P.M. Product placements. J. Advert. 2009, 38, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Thinking (Low Feeling) | High Feeling | |
---|---|---|
High Involvement | Example: | Example: |
Car | Jewelry | |
House | Cosmetics | |
Furnishings | Fashion goods | |
New products | ||
Low Involvement | Example: | Example: |
Food | Cigarettes | |
Household items | Liquor | |
Candy |
Concept/Variable | Operationalization | Likely Data Source |
---|---|---|
Independent Variables | ||
1. Product Difference | ||
High Involvement/Thinking | Suitable classification from previous research | Questionnaire |
High Involvement/High Feeling | ||
Low Involvement/Thinking | ||
Low Involvement/High Feeling | ||
Dependent Variables | ||
1. Acceptability | ||
Awareness | Suitable classification from previous research | Questionnaire |
Recognition | ||
Attitude | ||
Purchase Intention |
Feeling (1: Thinking; 2: High Feeling) | Product | |
---|---|---|
1 | 1 | Citrus Zinger |
2 | Xiang Piaopiao | |
2 | 1 | Lenovo |
2 | Coffee Bene |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 | 111 | 73.5 | 73.5 | 73.5 |
2 | 40 | 26.5 | 26.5 | 100.0 | |
Total | N = 151 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 | 10 | 6.6 | 6.6 | 6.6 |
2 | 109 | 72.2 | 72.2 | 78.8 | |
3 | 18 | 11.9 | 11.9 | 90.7 | |
4 | 9 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 96.7 | |
5 | 5 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 100.0 | |
All | N = 151 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 | 100 | 66.2 | 66.2 | 66.2 |
2 | 23 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 81.5 | |
3 | 13 | 8.6 | 8.6 | 90.1 | |
4 | 15 | 9.9 | 9.9 | 100.0 | |
All | N = 151 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Lenovo | Bene | Zigrus | Xiang Piaopiao | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cronbach’s Alpha | 0.19 | 0.565 | 0.75 | 0.862 |
Lenovo | Bene | Zigrus | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KMO Value | 0.604 | 0.595 | 0.604 | |||||
R.C.M | C1 | C2 | C3 | C1 | C2 | C3 | C1 | C2 |
Q1 | 0.888 | 0.874 | 0.847 | |||||
Q2 | 0.61 | −0.72 | 0.58 | 0.615 | 0.8 | 0.405 | ||
Q3 | 0.755 | 0.811 | 0.621 | |||||
Q4 | 0.848 | 0.789 | 0.935 | |||||
Q5 | 0.918 | 0.896 | 0.673 | −0.432 | ||||
Q6 | 0.954 | 0.866 | 0.814 | |||||
Q7 | 0.768 | 0.775 | 0.573 | 0.511 | 0.777 |
Effect | Value | F | Hypothesis df | Error df | Sig. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
involvement | Pillai’s Trace | 0.494 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.506 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.976 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.976 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.265 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.735 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.361 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.361 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
involvement and feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.341 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.659 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.518 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.518 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Effect | Value | F | Hypothesis df | Error df | Sig. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
involvement | Pillai’s Trace | 0.494 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.506 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.976 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.976 | 146.370 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.265 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.735 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.361 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.361 | 54.124 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
involvement and feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.341 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.659 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.518 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.518 | 77.626 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Effect | Value | F | Hypothesis df | Error df | Sig. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
involvement | Pillai’s Trace | 0.418 | 107.748 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.582 | 107.748 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.718 | 107.748 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.718 | 107.748 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.88 | 1101.245 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.12 | 1101.245 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 7.342 | 1101.245 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 7.342 | 1101.245 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
involvement × feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.517 | 160.787 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.483 | 160.787 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 1.072 | 160.787 b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 1.072 | 160.787 b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Effect | Value | F | Hypothesis df | Error df | Sig. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
involvement | Pillai’s Trace | 0.415 | 106.339b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.585 | 106.339b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 0.709 | 106.339b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 0.709 | 106.339b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.893 | 1253.930b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.107 | 1253.930b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 8.36 | 1253.930b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 8.36 | 1253.930b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
involvement × feeling | Pillai’s Trace | 0.558 | 189.478b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Wilks’ Lambda | 0.442 | 189.478b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Hotelling’s Trace | 1.263 | 189.478b | 1 | 150 | 0 | |
Roy’s Largest Root | 1.263 | 189.478b | 1 | 150 | 0 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhang, X.; Li, N.; Wang, Y.; Sun, Y. The Effect of Product Placement Strategies on Customer Behavior: A Prospective of Foote, Cone and Belding (FCB) Grid Model. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021189
Zhang X, Li N, Wang Y, Sun Y. The Effect of Product Placement Strategies on Customer Behavior: A Prospective of Foote, Cone and Belding (FCB) Grid Model. Sustainability. 2023; 15(2):1189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021189
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Xiaohong, Na Li, Yanbo Wang, and Yanqi Sun. 2023. "The Effect of Product Placement Strategies on Customer Behavior: A Prospective of Foote, Cone and Belding (FCB) Grid Model" Sustainability 15, no. 2: 1189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021189
APA StyleZhang, X., Li, N., Wang, Y., & Sun, Y. (2023). The Effect of Product Placement Strategies on Customer Behavior: A Prospective of Foote, Cone and Belding (FCB) Grid Model. Sustainability, 15(2), 1189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021189