标题：两种广告的比较 (11)

　　文体类型：总结文2

　　提出旧理论及其缺失：有2 个学者Wilkie and Farris 认为，对比型广告(competitive advertisement)——即在广告诉求中说我的产品比竞争对手的产品怎么怎么好/在广告中有针对性的与竞争品进行比较的广告——比非对比型(noncompetitive)广告更有说服力(persuasive)。但有些研究表明，对比型广告不那么有说服力(reduce persuasion)，广告效果不那么好。三个支持(support)研究观点的理由：

　　(1)广告中对产品的某些特性进行比较，但这些特性本身并不是消费者关心(care)的。但是如果熟悉的客户早就知道你这些优势了，对他们也没用。

　　(2)消费者没有办法区分广告中那个品牌产品，在理论上比别的产品好，是否在实际上比别的商品好。

　　(3)即使给消费者提供了相应的指导，他们还是不会区分。

　　提出证据支持旧理论：However，作者开始批判这个研究而认为对比型广告比非对比型的更有说服力。指出研究方法的缺陷：认为实验之所以得出的结果无价值(null)，是因为：

　　(1)比较的讯息是消费者认为不重要，或是比较的讯息是消费者虽认为重要却是消费者已知的，是因为他们所取的样本(sample)不对。它研究的两组广告，本身都是说服力不强的。此类广告是要突出产品与竞争产品的差异，而如果看广告的人早已经知道了这个差异，那么这种广告对消费者的观点的影响就不大了。两组广告都是用了和健康有关的产品，需要研究其它非健康相关产品的广告才能得出正确的结论。(Q)

　　(2)没有引入相关性因素(relative factor)来较好地衡量(measure)广告的说服力度。原先的实验是没有相关比较的实验(unrelative experiment)用来衡量的方法是根据非对比广告的，因此无法有效反应对比广告是否优于非对比。上述研究因为只取了与结果一致的资料而早成了研究结果的局限性。The attractiveness of the ads which show the difference and the ads which do not are equivalent.更有效的实验应该是有相关性的实验(relative experiment)。In this experiment, the consumer at first will show some preference of some products.

　　问题：

　　Q1：文章的main point

　　参考答案：对一个研究的品评。(全文的论述还是比较偏重评价competitive 广告有效性的研究问题。)

　　选项：一个可能的解释对于竞争性广告没有说服力。

　　Q2：作者观点。

　　答案：一个可能的解释对于竞争性广告没有说服力。

　　Q3：nonrelative 和 relative 对 postcommunication 作用的区别

　　答案：specifically point out the reference

　　Q4：为何研究的结果不对

　　答案：采样不完全

　　Q5：文章suggest 开头那2 个学者最同意下面哪个选项。

　　Q6：文章suggest 作者同意什么?

　　英文背景知识：

　　In their classic article, Wilkie and Farris (1975) proposed that, in general, comparative advertisements will be more persuasive than their noncomparative counterparts. However, the bulk of empirical evidence has not supported this proposition. Although several studies have shown comparative ads can exert more positive effects than noncomparative ads on brand attitudes, purchase intentions, or purchase, comparative ads have also been found to reduce persuasion. Perhaps the most common finding has been that comparative and noncomparative ads produce very similar postcommunication (产品后续宣传) attitudes and intentions. Why have comparative and noncomparative ads so often been found to produce similar levels of persuasion? One rather obvious possibility is that null findings(无效)are simply the result of the fact that the particular comparative and noncomparative ads used in the test situation were truly equivalent in their persuasiveness. It may be, for instance, that the comparative copy communicated interbrand differences that were seen as trivial or unimportant. Similarly, failure to include adequate substantiation for the comparative claims could render them impotent (无力的，无效的). Even if comparative claims convey important differences with adequate substantiation, they may be no more effective than noncomparative claims when consumers are already aware of these differences. Another possibility, the one explored in this paper, is that the failure to detect persuasion differences between comparative and noncomparative ads may be the result of the types of measures used to test for such effects. Earlier investigations have often relied upon nonrelative or monadic (一元的) measures of postcommunication impressions (i.e., measures that assess beliefs, attitudes, and/or intentions toward the advertised brand without an explicit point of reference). However, it would appear that relative measures (i.e., measures that use the comparison brand as a point of reference in their assessment) are better suited for capturing the persuasive impact of comparative advertising. The rationale for this position is developed in the following sections.

　　One potentially important difference between comparative and noncomparative advertising is the ability of a comparative ad to encourage a particular point of reference during encoding of the information about the ad- vertised brand. Moorman (1990) points out that external reference points can enhance consumers' ability to process information as well as their comprehension of the information. As a result, consumers who lack the knowl- edge necessary to understand some information fully may benefit from the bench marks provided by reference information. External reference points may not only increase one's ability to extract meaning from a set of information, they may also affect the particular meaning extracted from the information. The presence of such reference points during processing may result in their becoming an integral part of the impressions which are formed. Consequently, consumers exposed to comparative ads which provide an explicit comparison brand should be more likely to form mental impressions of the advertised brand that are relative (to the comparison brand) in nature than they would following exposure to noncomparative ads.

　　以上就是楷维留学指南为大家分享的【GMAT机经】康老师十月份GMAT阅读机经大放送之人文社会－企业&商管(一)，预祝备战GMAT的同学考试顺利!

　　有关人文社会-企业&商管相关的阅读机经，请看以下文章。

　　【GMAT机经】康老师十月份GMAT阅读机经大放送之人文社会-企业&商管(二)

　　【GMAT机经】康老师十月份GMAT阅读机经大放送之人文社会-企业&商管(三)

　　【GMAT机经】康老师十月份GMAT阅读机经大放送之人文社会-企业&商管(四)

　　【GMAT机经】康老师十月份GMAT阅读机经大放送之人文社会-企业&商管(五)