Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 554

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

Campbell, Margaret C.·1995·Journal of Consumer Psychology

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327663jcp0403_02

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 6 references

Cited by

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

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.