The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When Attention‐Getting Advertising Tactics Elicit Consumer Inferences of Manipulative Intent: The Importance of Balancing Benefits and Investments
Abstract
This research examines two attention‐getting tactics commonly used in television advertising and explores how the use of these tactics might sometimes lead consumers to infer that the advertiser is attempting to manipulate the audience. The article explores how inferences of manipulative intent might arise if a consumer's perceptions of personal investments, personal benefits, advertiser's investments, and advertiser's benefits associated with the ad are not in balance. The data show that inferences of manipulative intent are related to measures of personal benefits, personal investments, and advertiser's investments as predicted and that these variables mediate the relationship between the attention‐getting tactics and inferences of manipulative intent. Inferences of manipulative intent are found to lower advertising persuasion as measured by ad attitudes, brand attitudes, and purchase intentions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Adams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359
The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209380 · Cited by 3,811
Process Analysis: Estimating Mediation in Treatment Evaluations
Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981) · Evaluation Review · doi:10.1177/0193841x8100500502 · Cited by 2,442
Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?
Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150973 · Cited by 1,472
Cited by
Authenticity under threat: When social media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation
Audrezet, A., de Kerviler, G., & Guidry Moulard, J. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.008 · Cited by 1,452
The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities on Companies With Bad Reputations
Yoon, Y., Gürhan‐Canli, Z., & Schwarz, N. (2006) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1604_9 · Cited by 1,429
Campbell, M. C., & Kirmani, A. (2000) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/314309 · Cited by 1,342
Self-citationDevelopment of a Scale to Measure Consumer Skepticism Toward Advertising
Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (1998) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp0702_03 · Cited by 1,037
When Is Honesty the Best Policy? The Effect of Stated Company Intent on Consumer Skepticism
Foreh, M. R., & Grier, S. (2003) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1303_15 · Cited by 1,003
Metadata
- Authors
- Campbell, M. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 225-254
- ISSN
- 1057-7408 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7663
- OpenAlex
- W2000832906
- Cited by
- 554
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 5.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When Attention‐Getting Advertising Tactics Elicit Consumer Inferences of Manipulative Intent: The Importance of Balancing Benefits and Investments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327663jcp0403_02
- The paper
- Campbell, M. C. (1995). When Attention‐Getting Advertising Tactics Elicit Consumer Inferences of Manipulative Intent: The Importance of Balancing Benefits and Investments. Journal of Consumer Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0403_02
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
