Energy Communications -

The Effect of Message Structure

by' Mary Ellen Adams*

May 1982

*This paper was taken from Ms .. Adams~' 'Masters f Theses in Marketing.Sandra Kirks, PURC, edited and contributed to this version. The viewsreflected here are not necessarily endorsed by PURC or its sponsoringorganizations.

Background

Since the early 1970's, the changing balance in energy supply and

demand has focused national attention on both long-term efforts directed

at the development of new energy sources and on energy conservation mea-

sures designed to generate more immediate savings in energy consumption.

In the long term, energy resources and technical innovations must be de-

veloped to offset depleted reserves of oil and natural gas. However, if

the nation were to make a serious commitment to conservation, it might well

use 30 to 40 percent less energy than it does now, while requiring only

modest adjustments in the way people live.

The techniques to accomplish cost-effective energy conservation vary

from region to region and from one section of the economy to another. They

include such things as insulating a building, making appliances, transporta-

tion, agricultural, and industrial processes more energy efficient, and

encouraging behavior which results in energy savings. Implementing conser-

vation techniques in the various sectors requires the development of pro-

grams tailored to differences in energy-use characteristics. The production

sectors are characterized by a greater degree of centralization in the de-

cision process than is found in the consumer sector. There is also greater

attention paid to the relative advantages and costs of energy conservation.

Energy conservation measures in the production sectors of the economy have

been directed primarily toward making transportation, agricultural, and

industrial processes more energy efficient. Where there are relatively few

decision makers, as in the automobile industry, it is possible to set and

monitor mandatory regulations, such as higher miles-per-gallon standards, in

order to increase energy efficiency. But, in the fragmented consumer sector,

mandatory regulation is difficult to implement. Consequently, in the consumer

market, significant effort has been directed at encouraging voulntary changes

1

2

in usage behavior that result in savings in energy consumption.

Consumers utilize energy in their homes, in their cars, and in their

leisure activities. This sector accounts for an estimated 40 percent of

the total national energy use. The residential sector alone accounts for

over 20 percent of the energy use in the U.S. It is estimated that conser-

vation efforts could reduce consumer consumption by as much as 40 percent.

The overall goal of federal and state energy policies is changes in

behavior, either through changes in daily living patterns or through the

use of technical options which reduce the quantities of energy used to

carry out processes (Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, National

Energy Act of 1978, and the Florida State Energy Plan, 1979). Because of

the decentralized nature of the consumer market, voluntary cooperation

needs to be secured. At the federal level, the Department of Energy (DOE)

has been given the responsibility for consumer education programs to in-

crease the importance of energy information in consumer decisions.

The availability of mass communication techniques makes it possible

to reach and perhaps influence a vast number'of people with messages ex-

plaining technical options and advocating energy conservation behavior.

Indeed, surveys indicate that most consumers rely on mass media for energy

information (Cunningham & Lopreato, 1977; Milstein, 1977). Communication

research can provide relevant input to the development of mass media cam-

paigns by examining proposed messages and informational campaigns in terms

of content, presentation format, modes of distribution, and audience charac-

teristics. Once the campaign has been launched, assessments of the effects

of information on consumers' conservation decisions would provide knowledge

useful in improving subsequent promotional campaigns.

Relatively little documentation exists regarding attempts to directly

monitor the effectiveness of energy conservation communication campaigns.

3

A research program in the United Kingdom monitored a major domestic energy

conservation campaign using a variety of "ad hoc" surveys, depth research, re-

interviews, and retail trade surveys to obtain attitudinal and behavioral mea-

sures before, during, and after the campaign. Changes in reported conservation

action and attitudes were supported by increased sales of energy.... saving products.

However, while the findings may have helped in assessing the effectiveness of

the campaign, it was difficult in the absence of controls to directly attribute

the results to the communication campaign itself. Differences in samples,

appeals used, timing, and location would have made it difficult to compare the

results of persuasive appeals with cross-sectional surveys. Other elements

of the energy program or outside influences may have contributed to any reported

change in public attitudes, beliefs, or conservation actions.

McDougall et ale (1981) review some of the research on the effectiveness

of energy conservation initiatives. Their review shows mixed results with

information initiative programs. The impact of conservation communication

programs is reported to be fairly limited. Energy consumption feedback pro-

grams have shown some effect, but it remains fairly difficult to separate the

effect of feedback information from the conservation instruction alone. The

impact of home audits has not been studied to any great extent and in the

little research that exists, it is difficult to attribute conservation actions

to the home audit program by itself.

Incentives research has focused for the most part on the rebates related

to in-home energy consumption feedback and incentives for bus-riding and car-

pooling. The effects of disincentives for energy consumption brought about

through rising energy prices or peak-load pricing by utilities have shown some

effects. Consumer reactions to peak-load pricing have generally been favorable.

Winkler and Winett (1982) assert that higher energy prices have an impor-

tant effect on the share of family budget that goes to resource expenditure.

4

They assessed the s·ize of this effect in behavioral experiments in resource

consumption relative to the rates and budget share that existed at the time

each study was conducted. The studies used rebates and frequent feedback on

consumption to promote conservation. Table 1 summarizes the findings. Respon-

siveness is plotted in Figure 1. They found that budget share is the best pre-

dictor of responsiveness and can partially explain why feedback or rebate pro-

cedures sometimes work well and sometimes work marginally.

In general though, very few studies have compared the impact of different

approaches to communicating energy information. Laboratory studies that com-

pared different types of persuasive appeals or formats for presenting energy

information were often conducted in research environments with little corres-

pondence to real world settings, e.g., student samples, limited time frames.

Field studies have concentrated on factors which relate more to the communi-

cation situation, e.g., source credibility, delivery medium, incentives than

to the content of the message itself. These studies and others have limited

evaluation of communication effects to measures of interest and/or actual con-

sumption.

Communication Issues

The development of mass media energy conservation campaigns obviously

raises some important general issues in the design of communications. Goals,

strategies, and specific communication designs generally follow from analyses

of consumer needs, attitudes, and present behavior. The key to a successful

promotional campaign lies in designing the communication so that it is rele-

vant to the consumer's informational needs. Factors such as consumers' moti-

vations, prior knowledge and predisposition, and individual differences are

likely to impact on the effectiveness of energy communications and hence must

be accounted for in design.

TABLE 1Responsiveness inResidential Energy Conservation Studies Using Rebates or Feedback as a Function of Income, Cost, and Budget Share

Cost per tvlonlhlyTotal % chailge overall in Approximate month hudget

Study Year Season households Intervention energy lise gross irworne (5) (5) share

\Vinett & 1\'ietzel (1975) ,1974 Winter 31 Rebates (mean of abollt Electricity-IS (for 20,000·' 130 ,07850% price change in heating)electricity and 150% Natural gas-O (for 20,000' 40' .024on gas) with weekly heating)FB

Winett, Kagel, Eattalio. 1975 Summer 132 Rebates {mean of 145% 12 (of electricity) 13,500 60 .053& Winkler (1978) " price change) withweekly FB

. Seligman & Darley 1975 Summer 29' FB 4 times a week 11 (of electricity) 25,000 78 .037(1977)

Becker, Seligman, & 1976 \\linter 125 FB several times a week 6 (of gas) 25,000 44 .022-,Darley (Note 5) of different types .'

Winett et al. (1977) 1976 Late spring 12 Rebates (mean of 350% 15' (of electricity) 6.000 35 .070price change) and

'l.j·4~

"daily FBBecker (1978) 1976 S~mmer 100 FB 3 times a week with 9 (of electricity) 25,000 60 .030

"hard and easy goals

";''iI,

Bittle, Valesano, & 19i6 Summer 30' Daily FB 7 (of electricity) 18,000· 50 .034Thaler (1979)

..... /f'IP

Becker, Seligman, & 1976 Summer 71 Different types of daily 7 (of electricity) 25,000 84 .O·HDarley (Note 5) FB

Bittle, Valesano, & 1977 ,Summer 353 Different types of daily High users-II (of 20,000' I 65 .040Thaler (1979) FE electricity)

Mid-users-O (of 20.000' 29 .018li;lectricity) \'·.l Low~users--O (of 20,000",: 15 .010electricity)

..;

Winett, Neale. Williams, 1977 Summer I 123 Different types of daily Upper-middle 32,500 105 ,039Yokley, & Kauder FB c1ass-20 (of ~(,.~(1979) electricity)

Middle c1ass-20 22,500 45 .024(of electricity)

Lower-middle 15,000 15 .012c1ass-7 (ofelectricity)

TAOLE 1- (continued)

Cost per MonthlyTotal % change overall in Approximate month budget

Study Year Season households Intervention energy lise gross income ($) ($) share

Winett, Neale, & Grier 1978 Winter 71 Daily FB 14 (of electricity) 37,500 200 .064(1979)

Carlyle (J979) 1979 Winter •. 40 Daily FB o (of gas) 17,J)ooa 35 .024

Willett cl a!. (in press) 1980 Winter 113 Daily FB 16 13,500 70 .063

\Vinell ct al. (in press) 1980 Summer 71 Daily FB 16 21,500 65 .036.vote. Studies only include those primarily focusing on heating or cooling. Some of the studies noted have been used to evaluate other. procedures not indicated (e.g., self-monitoring, videotape modeling, etc.). Costper month is approximate cost duririg an intervention month.SljI.Jdies where groups were separable by income or consumption level cOntributed separate groups to the meta-analysis. FB = feedback.

• btimated figure. . .,

PERCENT REDUCTION IN

OVERALL TARGETED ENERGY USE

lcorrel~n: .15, ns),.use as a function of budget share":(A), cost of.

Ul IC)a::

'0Iet0...J...J...J 3600::r 0 32Wu:.~O 26°Ul 24::ro

z...Jet 20etUl:J:JZo 16z::r

7

Just what are consumers' energy informational needs? Several surveys

indicate the majority of respondents discuss the energy situation and agree

that it is a serious problem. People are concerned with rising costs, are

in favor of conservation, and they have taken a few steps to cut down energy

use, primarily by reducing consumption rather than implementing preventive-

type measures.

Although more people may be reporting positive conservation attitudes,

possibly because it may be socially desirable to do so, they are reluctant

to make big conservation efforts because they do not want to give up comfort

and conveniences. Also, in many cases, they lack knowledge about the nature

of the energy situation and what they as individuals can specifically do about

it. They .do not know such basic facts as how much energy is used to heat

water in the home or that they have the option to adjust the temperature set-

ting on the water heater. Many do not realize that their insulation is inade-

quate nor do they know how to calculate how much insulation they need, where to

go for advice and installation, or how to obtain financing.

In open-ended personal interviews, a significant number of people indicated

they failed to follow through with conservation intentions due to factors such

as skepticism of cost-benefit projections, concern for comfort, convenience,

time, reliability of products, and "bother". Some respondents mentioned that

although they were aware of conservation issues it was not something relevant

or pressing in their lives. Many were simply unwilling to devote the necessary

time and effort to investigate, evaluate, and select the right products for their

homes. In a study of electricity consumption, Heslop, Moran, and Cousineau

(1981) report that only price consciousness appeared to be related to energy

use. Neither social responsibility nor energy and environmental consciousness

measures were related to energy use. These surveys seem to suggest that

8

conservation appeals need to be structured in ways that persuade consumers

to translate their awareness and interest into actual conservation responses.

While the specific content of an advertisement is an obviously important

determinant of communication effectiveness, factors relating to how the infor-

mation is presented may influence whether consumers attend to, process, and

respond to the communication. Information may be ignored unless consumers

perceive its salience from an individual standpoint. For example, an adver-~

tisement that fails to bring home the consequences of energy consumption in a

manner relevant and specific to the individual may be ignored. This is parti-

cularly significant since the use of household energy is not clearly or instantly

related to the payment of the utility bill. Further, when an individual examines

projected cost-benefit data in average or summary form, it is not necessarily

clear how individually relevant or applicable they really are. AsSterngold

and Kotler (1979) point out, this inability to relate energy information to

personal needs is one of the primary reasons given for the reported failure to

translate energy conservation intentions to conservation actions.

Since informational campaigns are designed to run over extended periods,

a second consideration in the design of conservation campaigns is the long-

term effects of the communications. Persuasive energy conservation campaigns

are undertaken in a complex communication environment in which the communicator

must compete with other information sources for the target audiences' attention

and concern. When information is complex, comprehension and assimilation may

occur only with repeated exposure. Because energy information is complex, the

full impact of an informational campaign may not occur for several months. With-

out adequate longitudinal data the true impact of information may be understated.

Factors other than the information itself influence whether an individual

attends to, processes, and responds to the persuasive communications. Diff....

erences in income and education, personality, existing knowledge, and the

9

ability to sort out complex information can impact on the persuasiveness of

the energy communication.

Individuals have differing priorities in interpreting energy-saving

messages. These priorities are based on such factors as type of property,

space heating and cooling needs, degree of mobility, initial investment costs,

and desired life-style. Consumers will ignore information if they do not believe

it will be useful to them. Prior research has highlighted the problem of rele-

vance among renters and people who already own certain energy-saving devices.

Another contributing factor to the problem of relevance is that the conse~

quences of energy consumption are not always clear, as in the case of household

energy usage that is not instantly related to payment of the utility bill.

Finally, when the objective of persuasive campaigns is to convince con-

sumers of the benefits of acting upon conservation intentions, appeals are

needed which affect beliefs and values. The effects of such appeals need to

be evaluated with criteria tapping this level of response, in addition to aware-

ness or behavioral measures. As with other communication research, it is ad-

visable to evaluate energy information campaigns at different levels of response

using multiple dependent measures.

10

relating to a target case instance is often weighted more heavily in human

judgments than base rate information.

The amount of information, the congruency of information to prior ex-

pectancies, medium characteristics and source characteristics are separate

variables known to impact on the convincingness of a message. They should

not be used to define or differentiate between base rate and target case in-

formation. The key dimension distinguishing case information from base rate

information is the level of analysis; i.e., the degree of individuality/

aggregation in the evidence. Case information maintains the unique, singular

identity of a specific event, object, or condition. Events, objects, or con-

ditions are considered collectively in base rate information. Evidence is

summarized as the rate of occurrence of a particular type of event, object,

or condition within a population of such events, objects or conditions. Due

to the existence of the potential confounds, it is not possible to determine

from these studies if the "base rate fallacy" was due to differences inherent

in the type of information or stemmed from the effects of other variables con-

founded with the type of information.

To summarize, information utilization appears to be a matter of perceived

relevance. If base rate information and case information are both available

and appear to be equally relevant, then the two will be integrated somehow in

the final decision. In many instances, target case information is more viVid,

more specific and causally relevant, more representative of implicit casual

theories, and more available in memory than base rate information. Thus, it

is more likely to be utilized in decisions than base rate information.

Communication Implications

Much of the work on judgmental heuristics and the base rate fallacy tends

to take a very strong normative stance, that is, the focus is on how these

11

judgmental strategies lead people astray. However, these findings may be

viewed in a more descriptive light; i.e., how do these judgmental strategies

determine which information people prefer to utilize in making a decisILon?

It may be possible to utilize knowledge about biases and preferences to pro-

duce more convincing and persuasive messages.

In general, people appear to prefer strategies which do not involve re-

liance on relevant weights, trade-off functions, or other numeric computations.

People may rely on representativeness and availability heuristics when making

judgments on the believability of information and decisions to utilize the

information in a choice task. Case information may simply be more representative

and available than base rate information.

Despite some criticisms of the methodology and validity of some of the

conclusions, the communication implications of the case-base studies are quite

intriguing. Nisbett and Borgida (1976) point to the significance of the find-

ings for general questions of communication and persuasion:

. If people are unmoved by the sorts of dry, statistical datathat are dear to the hearts of scientists and policy planners, thensocial and technical progress must be impeded unless effective, con-crete, emotionally interesting ways of communicating conclusions aredeveloped • • . .We believe that the present research and examplesdrawn from every- day life show that some kinds of information thatthe scientist regards as highly pertinent and logically compellingare habitually ignored by- people. Other kinds of information, logi-cally much weaker, trigger strong in~erences and action tendencies.We can think of no more useful activity for psychologists who studyinformation processing than to discover what their subjects regardas information worthy of processing. (pp. 132-133)

The majority of studies on the base rate fallacy have examined base rate

utilization in the presence of target case information. The focus has been on

learning how people combine or integrate case ~nformation with base rate infor-

mation. The evidence indicates, with some qualifications, that people tend to

underutilize the base rate information in favor of case information.

12

However, a relevant focus for questions of communication and persuasion

would be: What is the impact of case information alone compared to base rate

information? One decision facing an advertiser is how to structure the message

arguments. When presented with information on energy-use, will people be more

likely to utilize the information if it is structured in a case format or base

rate format? The evidence although contaminated by confounding factors, indi-

cates that case information will have a greater impact than base rate informa-

tion. Presenting energy information in the form of a case illustration or tes-

timonial should give the information more emotional interest and specificity,

thereby increasing the likelihood that it is perceived to be relevant to the

consumer's own energy usage problems. There is the possibility, however, that

people may not trust testimonial information in an advertising context. Recent

work on the base rate fallacy indicates that case information may not appear to

be more specific and causally relevant if it is incongruent with intuitive

causal theories. Testimonial ads may conflict with consumers' beliefs about

the implicit or explicit goals of persuasive communications. This response

may be more prevalent when the advertiser is a profit organization but is less

likely when the advertiser is a government agency or other nonprofit organi-

zation ..

Of practical importance to communicators is the possibility that people

may be unaffected by statistical information because they find it too boring to

pay attention to it. However, laboratory evidence indicates that people fail

to use data-summary information in judgment tasks even when exposure is con"'-

trolled and manipulation checks indicate they learned the information quite

well. The underutilization of the summary data seems therefore to be due to

insufficient weighting rather than failure to notice it.

How can energy information be presented so that the consumer will see its

implications for his own behavior? How do changes in the advertising schedule

13

impact on the effectiveness of energy communications?

First, research on human information processing in judgment tasks offers

insights on how people utilize information and the types of information which

people find relevant in evaluation and decision making situations. The findings

suggest that energy conservation information presented in the form of case evi-

dence may have greater persuasive impact than similar information presented as

base rates. Government sponsored campaigns often rely heavily on summary, base

rate information in messages to stop smoking, improve nutritional knowledge or

encourage energy conservation. A well-designed test of the effectiveness of tar-

get case versus base rate information would provide a realistic comparison of

alternative message structure approaches to encourage consumers to follow through

with conservation intentions. Moreover, the manipulation should ensure the elim-

ination of confounding factors (i.e., amount of significant detail, medium effects,

credibility effects) that may have contributed to the findings showing greater

impact of case information.

Second, the advertising literature suggests that the level of exposure is

an important determinant of advertising impact. Therefore, in implementing

energy conservation campaigns, attention needs to be focused on message repeti-

tion effects, i.e., the impact of the number and the frequency of messages at

various levels of the response hierarchy.

Third, longitudinal effects of energy conservation communications are not

very well understood at present. Most survey based studies have ignored this

factor and null findings of one experimental study are difficult to interpret

conclusively. In the absence of longitudinal data, it may be difficult to

assess the impact of an energy communication campaign. Hence, there is a need

for studies examining the longitudinal effects of message repetition in the

energy communication arena.

14

Fourth, since repetition effects may vary by types of message structures,

the interaction effects between message structure and message repetition need

to be taken into account in the design and implementation of communication pro-

grams relating to energy conservation.

Finally, a more complete evaluation of energy conservation communications

implies the use of measures tapping changes in cognitive structure such as

beliefs and attitudes, in addition to measures of behavioral intentions and~

behavior. The proposed study attempts to use measures spanning these variables

that represent different levels at which the communication may impact. The

design of the study enables measurement of changes in these variables as a

function of the message structure and message repetition manipulations using

energy conservation-related messages in a field experimental setting using

homeowners as respondents.

250 single family dwellings were mailed advertisements dealing with water

heater insulation jackets along with dummy ads. Timing of receipt of the ads

were varied among groups. While the mailings took place, phone interviews were

conducted periodically to obtain results of the ad effectiveness.

Summary of the Findings

None of the advertising and product awareness and recall measures were

affected by the case/basemanipulation. Belief in copy claims relating to ease

of installation was the only belief variable' significantly affected by the casel

base manipulation. However, the effect was opposite to that predicted, i.e.,

the base advertisement generated stronger beliefs in this copy claim. Attitude

toward direct mail advertising was more- ,favorable under the case information

condidtion and was the only statistically significant main effect of message

structure. It was, however, qualified by a three way interaction between message

structure and message repetition factors. Neither purchase intentions nor pur-

chases were influenced by the message structure manipulation.

15

The number of exposures to the advertising message showed statistically

significant effects on product awareness, the recognition of the advertising

medium and recall of copy content. In each case, increasing the number of

exposures to the advertisements resulted in improved awareness and recall.

Belief strengths in two specific copy claims (reusability of the jacket and

level of average household water heating costs) showed significant improve-

ments with repeated exposure. Attitudes toward testimonial advertising showed

improvements as a function of the number of exposures but was qualified by a

significant message structure x number of exposure interaction. However, as

with the message structure manipulation, no impact was noted on purchase inten-

tions or actual purchase.

Frequency of exposures showed no significant main effects on any of the

dependent variables along the entire hierarchy of response. However, beliefs

in copy claims regarding the level of reduction in utility bills stemming from

the installation of water heater jackets showed an interaction effect between

the number and frequency of exposures. Subjects receiving two exposures in

the massed condition showed stronger beliefs in this copy claim'than subjects

in the spaced exposure condition. However, this effect was reversed in the

four exposure condition, i.e., the spaced exposure condition showed stronger

effects. The manipulations had the greatest measurable impact on this belief.

On a scale from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree, subjects in treat-

ment groups expressed stronger beliefs in copy claims regarding the effective-

ness of water tank insulation in reducing water heating bills relative to sub~··

jects in the control group.

Interactions between message structure and the numuer of expos.ures were

noted on two measures. The first pertained to the strength of oeltefs in the

copy claims on the cost of the ins.ulation jacket. The case advertisement

16

performed poorer than the base advertisement at one and four exposures. The

second measure pertained to attitudes towards testimonial advertising. The

base advertisement performed significantly better than the case advertisement

at one and two exposures, but at four exposures, the effect was reversed.

Interactions between message structure and frequency of exposure were

noted on recall of advertising medium, the strength of beliefs in copy claims

regarding the insulation jacket's ability to reduce utility bills and on atti-

tudes toward energy saving appliances. With respect to recall of medium., the

base advertisement performed poorer than the case advertisement under massed

exposure but better than the case advertisement under spaced exposure. Under

massed exposure, the case advertisement generated stronger beliefs than the base

advertisement in copy claims related to reduction in utility bills. However,

this effect was reversed under the spaced exposure condition. The effect with

respect to the measure of attitude towards energy saving appltances showed a

very similar ordering of the treatment effects.

Finally, significant three way interactions were noted on a belief strength

measure pertaining to a copy claim regarding the availability of water heaters,

as well as on a measure of attitude toward direct mail advertising. These

findings suggested some limited support that case advertisements under the

massed exposure condition were less susceptible to advertising wear-out effects.

Limitations of the Study

In general terms, the results of the study were fairly disappointing,

although not inconsistent with the results of previous field studies which

show that energy conservation communications have had little systematic im-

pact on energy savings. The picture which emerges is one in which few indivi-

duals are seen as being affected by energy communications.

17

As proposed by Hovland (1959) in his discussion of persuasion in labora-

tory versus field settings, several explanations may be offered for the lack

of effects. First, the potential for additional attitudinal and behavioral

change may be small in a field study in which the audience is likely to be

composed of individuals who are predisposed to favor the position being advo-

cated. Second, the time interval to measurement may be such that relatively

remote effects are being evaluated. Third, studies in the field involve reach-

ing individuals in their natural environment, where there is potential for

simultaneous and interacting influences from the viewing conditions and from

discussions with friends and relatives.

The results indicate that these factors may have been operant in this

study. The lack of statistical significance of treatment effects on the major-

ity of measures suggests that it may be difficult to produce measurable changes

in connnunication responses in field studies, even in a controlled experiment

in which the frequency of exposure has been shown to be high (e.g., advertising

awareness and recall of medium effects).

The lack of effects might be attributed to treatments that were deficient

in the sense that there was not enough distinction between case information

and base rate information. The manipulation checks indicate that the messages

performed well on measures of basic effectiveness and advertising execution and

could, therefore, be expected to be reasonably effective in the field. However,

by removing the possibility of confoundings from differences in source, medium,

and amount of information, the major significant differences between the two

types of information may have been eliminated. There have been weaknesses in

the conceptualization of the case/base phenomenon in the past literature. Be-

cause of these weaknesses it is not possible to determine which dimensions are

the underlying factors driving the "base rate fallacy". Vividness, specificity,

18

and causal relevance may vary with the amount of significant detail and not

with the fact that the information is presented in the form of case evidence

rather than summary data. For example, it is possible to differientiate stim-

uli in terms of how personal or impersonal they are perceived to be, and in the

degree of concreteness and attention-attracting qualities, without producing

differences in vividness, specificity, relevance, and the usefulness of infor-

mation.

The inability to clearly define the underlying dimensions of the case/

base phenomenon leads to difficulties in interpreting the results (or lack

thereof) in this study. Failure to find differences in persuasive impact may

be due to the fact that the key factors determining the convincingness of infor-

mation were controlled out of the study. Or it may be attributed to deficien-

cies in executing the case/base manipulation. It remains to be seen whether

stimuli can be constructed which successfully manipulates all the dimensions

believed to produce the case/base effect without confounding other factors

known to impact on advertising effectiveness.

Several other limitations need to be noted when interpreting the results

of this study.

First, given the likelihood of response bias reflecting social desirabil-

ity, the reliance on self-reports in energy conservation research to assess

consumers' attitudes, intentions, and actions has recently been criticized

(Geller, 1981; McDougall, et al., 1981). It can be argued that such a response

bias might be less of a concern when the recommended action involves a monetary

expenditure for an energy-efficiency device rather than a curtailment of energy

use through modifications of behavior. It is much easier for the consumer to

justify to himself and others not making a monetary expenditure than it is to

justify not making a behavioral adjustment. Nevertheless, future research in

19

this area might include collection of sales data fro1.11'·local energy dealers to

confirm stated actions.

Second, the time frame of this study, six months, although substantially

longer than in the majority of energy communication research, may have been

too short to develop a better understanding of the linkages between beliefs,

attitudes and conservation behaviors. Although the purchase measure was able

to capture some of the delayed behavioral effects of the energy conservation

information, it is possible that with a longer time horizon even more behavioral

impact would occur.

Third, no attempt was made in this study to analyze the set of dependent

measures used with respect to their specific nature. Thus, it may be likely

that factors related to the nature of the probes used to generate the dependent

measures may themselves influence the nature of the treatment effects. Some

evidence of this problem was available for the probes used to test advertising

copy recall. These probes themselves seemed to vary in terms of the effects

of the treatments that were observed. This points to the need for future stu-

dies to explicitly hypothesize the effect of probe type, response modality etc.,

in measurement of communication effects.

Fourth, the study was conducted ,in Gainesville, Florida during the summer

months (May-October, 1981) and the salience of an energy conservation device

such as a water heater insulation jacket may have been fairly low. Structural

and climatic variables often provide strong explanations of in-house energy

consumption and this may have, in part, lowered the potential for persuasive

impact of the messages. This is particularly likely with respect to the mea-

sures relating to purchase intention and purchase.

Finally, individual and situational differences may have generated varia-

tions in responses to the probes that may have had an impact on the signifi-

cance of the results by inflating the error turns in the analyses. While

20

co-variates such as income, occupation and education levels showed no signifi-

cant effects on the dependent measures, the potential of effects of other vari-

ables obviously exists.

Conceptual Implications of Findings

As detailed earlier, only a few scattered statistically significant effects

were noted on the dependence measures analyzed in this study. The few signtfi-

cant effects noted were on the measures of advertising effects at the lower

levels of the hierarchy of response (i.e., awareness and recall, beliefs and

attitudes) rather than at the higher levels (behavioral intentions and be-

havior). These findings are consistent with previous findings in the communi-

cation effects literature.

The manipulation in this study.that produced the largest number of pre-

dicted effects was the number of exposures. In contrast, the effects of

message structure (case/base information) and exposure frequency were rarely

noted and occurred only as interactions. The message structure x frequency

interactions, obtained in this study showed that the base information adver-

tisements performed better under spaced exposure conditions.

Finally, the data showed marginal support for the contention that case

advertisements are less susceptible to wearout effects under massed exposure

conditions relative to base advertisements. A similar, but somewhat inconsis-

tent finding was also observed· under spaced exposure situations.

In view of the marginal nature of these findings and the limitations

related to the effectiveness of the case/base manipulation in this study, it

is clear that further research is needed to identify the underlying constricts

that influence the differential effects of case versus base rate information.

Past research has attributed these differences to several partially covarying

21

but conceptually different underlying constricts. Future research needs to

identify the partial contributions of these underlying variables to the ob-

served differences in case versus base rate information effects. These con-

ceptual findings are likely to have strong practical implications in the design

of communication campaigns that rely on the use of these variables for communi-

cation effectiveness.

Implications for Design of Energy Conservation Communications

Several authors have expressed concern for the lack of longitudinal data

in energy conservation research. This study provides some evidence that per-

suasion may be longitudinal in nature and occur with increasing numbers of

exposures to the message. The results also suggest that the two presentational

formats may generate different responses .depengingofthe advertising weight.

These findings provide several implications for the design of energy con-

servation communication campaigns conducted through the mass media. First, in

order to inform and motivate consumers, programs could be designed in two sta-

ges. During stage one, energy conservation information presented as summary

data could be distributed to the target market at monthly intervals for a

period of three to four months. Cost effective distribution methods would be

enclosures in utility bills or advertising supplemeritsin special interest

magazines (e.g., Consumer Reports, Farm Journal) mailed to subscribers. This

direct mail campaign could be backed up in the final month by a media blitz.

Television, radio, and newspaper advertisements could present testimonials

and other case evidence about successful conservation applications. In combi-

nation, the two informational formats could provide strong learning and motiva-

tional incentives.

The Department of Energy implemented a program along similar lines (the

Low Cost/No Cost Energy Conservation Program) in November 1979 (Hutton &

22

McNeill, 1981). The time span of the program was shorter than that suggested

above (four weeks) and the type of format used in the direct mail pieces and

media advertisements was not discussed. Nevertheless, the evaluation con-

ducted two weeks after the campaign indicated significant behavioral changes

for four of the recommended actions.

It is possible that the program evaluation would have found an even higher

percentage penetration if more time had been allowed for the households to

carry out recommended actions. A second implication arising from the present

research is that the time horizon for evaluating the success of an energy con-

servation program should be lengthened, particularly if the recommended action

involves a monetary expenditure. The few purchases influenced by the experi-

mental advertisements in this field study occurred 5 to 12 weeks after the start

of the campaign. The actual time horizon for the purchase of low-cost energy

efficiency measures may therefore be at least three months after the initial

exposure. Time horizons for measures requiring greater expenditures may be

even longer and may require significant message repetition in order to gener-

ate sufficient conviction to motivate action.

("---

.1

.,,"

LIST OF REFERENCES

'\:-Abelson, R. P. A script theory of understanding, attitude, and be-

havior. In J. Carroll & T. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and social be-havior, Potomac, Md.: Erlbaum, 1976.

Adams, H. F., & Dandison, B. Further experiments on the attention valueof size and repetition in advertisements. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 1927,483-489.

Aj zen, I. Intuitive theories of events and the effects of base-rateinformation on prediction. Journal of Personality' and SocialPsychology, 1977, 35, 303-314.

Anderson, C. D., & Claxton, J. D. Impact of consumer refrigerationp"urchases of energy consumption information at point of sale,Canada: University of Manitoba, 1979 .

.""

Appeal, V. The realibility and decay of advertising messages, Paperpresented before the National Industrial Conference Board, 1966.

f-# r' >; /On adverti;ing wearout:"}Journal of Advertising' Research,

1971,.!l, 11-13.

Axelrod, J. N. Attitude measures that predict purchase. Journal of. "Advertising Research, 1968, ~ (1), 3-17.

Bar-Hillel, M. The role of sample size in sample evaluation. Organiza-tional Behavior and Human Performance, 1979, 24, 245-257.

The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. ActaPsychologica, in press.

Battalio, R. C., Kagel, J. H., Winkler, R. C., & Winnett, R. A. Resi-dential electricity demand: An experimental study. Review ofEconomics .. and Statistics, 1979, g, 180-189.

Belson, W.A. The effect of recall on changing the position of a radioadvertisement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1953, 37, 402-406.

Bender, B. G., & Levine, J. R. Why do pictures facilitate ~.children's learning of oral prose? Paper presented at the meetingof the American Educational Research Association Annual t-leeting,San Francisco, April, 1976.

Berlyne, D. E. Novelty complexity, and hedonic value.Psychophysics, 1970, ~, 279-286.

Perception

Bersheid, E., & Walster, E. Physical attractiveness. In L. Berkowitz(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 7), NewYork: Academic Press, 1974.

Blalock, H. M., Jr. Social Statistics (2nd Ed.), New York: NcGraw-Hill, 1972.

23 •

24

Bogart, L. Strategy and advertising, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovano-vich, 1967, Chap. 5.

Borgida, E., & Brekke, N. The base rate fallacyprediction. In J. H. Harvey, ~v. J. Icke~-".c=-&, R.Directions in Attribution Research (Vol. 3),Erlbaum, in press.

in attribution andF. Kidd CEds.), NewHillsdale, N. J.:

Borgida, E., & Nisbett, R. E. The differential impact of abstract vs.concrete information on decisions. Journal of Applied SocialPsychology, 1977, Z (3),258-271.

Brehm, - J. W. A theory of psychological reactance, New York: Academic-Press, 1966.

Byrne, D. The attractive paradigm, New York: Academic Press, 1971.

Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. Effects of message repetition and posi-tion on cognitive responses, recall, and persuasion. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 1979,37, 97-109.

--.i ,/ .,~- ,:i- - __..... #-~

r~Persuasiveness of co~eficals isaffected by exposure frequency and communication cogency: Atheoretical and empirical analysis. In J. H. Leigh & C. R~ Martin

- (Eds. ) , Current issues and research in advertising, Ann Arbor:University of Michigan, 1980.

Calder, B. J., Insko, C. A., & Yandell, B. The relation of cognitiveand memorial processes to persuasion in a simulated jury trial.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1974, ~, 62-93.

Calder, B. J., & Sternthal, B. Television commercial wearout: Aninformation processing view. Journal of Marketing Research, 1980,.!2, 173-186.

Chaffee, S. H.~ & McLeod, J. M. Consumer decisions and information use.In S. Ward & T. S. Robertson, (Eds.), Consumer behavior: Theore-tical sources, Englewood Cliffs , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1973.

Chaiken, S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and theuse of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 1980, 39, 752-766.

Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. Communication modality as a determinant ofmessage persuasiveness and message comprehensibility. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 605-614.

Cohen, J. B. Communication: The medium of interpersonal influence. InJ. B. Cohen (Ed.), Behavioral science foundations of consumerbehavior, New York: The Free Press, 1972.

Cook, T. D~, & Campbell, D. T. Quasi-experimentation: Design ~analysis issues for field settings, Chicago: Rand t1cNally CollegePublishing Company, 1979.

25

Craig, C. S., & McCann, J. M. Communicating energy conservation infor-mation to consumers: A field experiment. In B. A. Greenberg &D.A. Bellenger (Eds.), Contemporary marketing thought, Chicago:American Marketing Association, 1977, 432-436.

Assessing communication effects' on energyconservation. Journal of Consumer Research, 1978, ~, 82-88.

Crosier, K. How effective is the contribution of market research tosocial marketing? Journal of the 1"larket Research Society, 21 (1),1977,3-16.

Crossley, D. J. The role of popularization campaigns in energy conser-vation. Energy Policy, 1979, I (1),57-68.

Cunningham, W., & Lapreato, S. C. Energy use and conservation incen-tives: A study of the Southwestern United States, New York:Praeger Special Studies;I977.

Darley, J. M., & Latane, B. Bystander intervention in emergencies:Diffusion of respqnsibili ty .., ..:;~Joll.rnal of. Personali ty.: an,.,e SocialPsychology, 1968, .~, 377-383 ... r. /.: ,

Day, G. S. Theories of attitude structure and change. In S. Ward & T.S. Robertson (Eds.), Consumer behavior: Theoretical Sources,Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1973,303-353.

Assessing the effects of information disclosure require-ments. Journal of Marketing, 1976, 40, 45-52.

Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. Behavioral decision theory:of judgment and choice. Annual Review of Psychology,53-88.

Processes1981, 32,

JournalEhrenberg, A. S. C. Repetitive advertising and the consumer.of Advert~singRe'search, 1974, 14 (2), 25-34.

Energy Information Administration. Annual Report to Congress (1979 Vol.3: Synopsis), Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, 1980.

Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law, 94-163, 1975.

Engel, J. F., & Kollak, D. T., & Blackwell, R. D. Consumer behavior,New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968.

Festinger, L., & Maccoby, N. On resistance to persuasive communication.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 68, 359-366.

Fischhoff, B. Attribution theory and judgment under uncertainity. InJ. H.Harvey, W. J. Ickes, & R. F. Kidd (Eds.), New directions inattribution research, Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbraum, 1976, 419-450.

Fishbein, H., & Ajzen, I. Belief, attitude, intention; and behavior: anintroduction to theory and research, Reading: 1'lass.: Addision-Wesley, 1975.

26

Acceptance, yielding, and impact: ~ognitiveprocesses in persuasion. In R. E. Petty, T. M. Ostrum, & T. C.Brock (Eds.), Cognitive responses in persuasion, Hillsdale, N.J.:Erlbaum, 1981.

The Florida State Energy Plan, Tallahassee:Office, November, 1979.

The Governor I s Energy

Florida State Energy Office. Florida Statewide survey of energy-relatedatti tudes and behavior. Annual Report to the Legislator, Talla-hassee, Fl.: Author, 1978.

Geller, E. S. Evaluating energy conservation programs: Is verbalreport enough? Journal of Consumer Research, 1981, ~, 331-335.

Ginosar, Z., & Trope, Y. The effects of base rates and individuatinginformation on judgments about another person. Journal of Experi-mental Social Psychology, 1980, ~, 228-242.

Goldstein, M. Relationship between coping and avoiding behavior andresponse to fear-prou~ing prop-agenda. .Journal of Abno.tmal andSocial Psychology; 1959, 58, 247-252.

Gorn, G. J., & Goldberg, 11.~elevision commericals.421-424.

E. Children I s responses to repetitiveJournal of Consumer Research, 1980, §.,

Grass, R.,cials.

& Wallace, W. H. Satiation effects of televisionJournal of Advertising Research, 1969, ~, 3-8.

commer-

Gray, C. L., & von Hippel, F. The fuel economy of light vehicles.Scientific American, 1981, 244, 48-59.

Greenwald, A. Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, andattitude change. In A. Greenwald, T. Brock, and T. Ostrum (Eds.),Psychological foundations of attitudes, New York: Academic Press,1968, 147-170.

Heberlein, T. A. Conservation information: The energy crlS1S andelectricity consumption in an apartment complex. Energy Systemsand Po 1i cy, 1975, 1:., 105 - 11 7 .

Hebe r lein, T. A., Linz, D., & Ortiz, B. P. Time of day electricityprlclng. In J. D. Claxton, C. D. Anderson, J. R. B. Ritchie, & G.H. G. McDougall (Eds.), Consumers and energy conservation, NewYork: Praeger Publishers, 1981, 194-204.

Heslop, L. A., Moran, L., & Cousineau, A. "Consciousness" in energyconservation behavior: An exploratory study. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 1981, ~, 299-305.

Holbrook, M. B. Beyond attitude s.trllcture: Toward the informationaldeterminants of attitude. Journal of Narketing Research, 1978, 12,545-556.

27

Hovland, C. I. . Reconciling conflictingmental and survey studies ofPsychologist, 1959, 14,8-17.

resul ts derived from experi-a ttitude change. American

findings,In W. L.

Ann Arbor:

_______, Lumsdaine, A. A., & Sheff~eld, F. D. Experiments onmass communication, Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press,1949.

Hovland, C. I., & Mandell, W. An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience. Journal ofAbnormal and Social Psychology, 1952, 47, 581-588.

Hutton, R. B. Life cycle cast: The impact on the processing of newinformation for durable goods (Doctoral dissertation, University ofFlorida, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1977, 38,3690A - 3691A. (University Microfilm No. 77-25, 935). --

Hutton, R. B., & McNeill, D. L. ResearY::h issues, empiricaland public policy implications for energy labeling.Wilkie (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 6),Association for Con,sumer Resea}"

28

Krugmen, H. E. The impact of television advertising: Learning withoutinvolvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, ~965, 29, 349-356.

Processes underlying exposure to advertising. AmericanPsychologist, 1968, 23, 245-253. --:~===>'

Kulilc, J. A., & Taylor, S. E. Premature consensus on consensus?:Effects of sample-based versus self-based consensus information.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 38, 871-878.

Leventhal, H. Findings and theory in the study of fear communications.In L. Berkowits (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology(Vol. 5), New York: Academic Press, 1970.

Leventhal, H., & Niles, P. A field experiment on fear-arousal with dataon the validity of questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality,1964, 32, 459-479.

Leventhal, H., & Singer, R. P. Affect arousal and positioning of recom-mendations in persuasive communications. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 1966, ~;.;-137-146. -_

r ..Leventhal, H., & Sin_ger, JR. P., ~_/,Oones, S. Effects of.l"fear and

specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behavior. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, ~, 20-29.

Linder, D., & Worchel, W. Opinion change as a result of effortfullydrawing a counter attitudinal conclusion. Journal of ExperimentalSocial Psychology, 1970, ~, 432-448.

Lutz, K. A., & Lutz, R. J. The effects of interactive imagery on learn-ing: Application to advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology,1977, 62, 493-498.

Imagery-elicitingimplications of research. In H. Keithconsumer research (Vol. 5), Ann Arbor:Research, ~1978, 611-620.

strategies: Review andHunt (Ed.), Advances inAssociation for Consumer

HcCullough, J. L., & Ostrum, T. Repetition and highly similar messages. and attitude change. Journal ,of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59,

395-397.

HcDougall, G. H. G., Claxton, J. D., Ritchie, J. R. B., & Anderson, C.D. Consumer energy research: A review. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 1981, ~, 343-352.

McDougall, G. H. G., & Ritchie, J. R. B. Consumer energy conservation:A framework for policy research. In H. Keith Hunt (Ed), Advancesin consumer research (Vol. 5), Chicago : Association for ConsumerResearch, 1978, 272-276.

?'1cGuire, W. J. The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In G.Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (2ndEd., Vol. 3), Reading, Hass,: Addison-Wesley, 1969.

29

An information processing model of advertising effective-ness. In H. Davis & A. J. Silk (Eds.), The behavioral and manage-ment sciences in marketing, New York: The Ronald Press, 1973.

Some internal psychological factors influencing consumerchoice. Journal of Consumer Research, 1~76, ~, 302-318.

McNeill, D. L. An investigation of issues surrounding the disclosure ofenergy use data on major horne appliances (Doctoral dissertation,University of Florida, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts Internatio-nal, 1977, 38, 4340A. (University Microfilm No. 77-29,268)

McNeill, D. L., & Wilkie, W. L. Public policy on consumer informationImpacts of the ne,v energy labels. Journal of Consumer Research,1979, ~, 1-11.

Melton, A.W. Repetition and retrieval from memory. Science, 1967, 158,532.

Miller, R. L. Mere exposure, psychological reactance and attitudechange. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1976, 40, 229-233 .

.;!J.-" ...'C'" -.~~•.• - _5- ,,:;..', .~~~

Milstein, J. S. Attitud~s, i{nowle'dge"';~d behavior of AmericanJconsumersregarding energy conservation with some implications for governmentaction. In W. D. Perreavit, Jr. (Ed.), Advances in consumerresearch (Vol. 4), Atlanta: Association for Consumer Research,1977, 315-321.

National Energy Conservation Policy Act, Public Law 95-619, 1978.

Nietzall, M. T., & Winnet, R. A. Demographics, attitudes and behavioralresponses to important environmental events. American Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 1977, ~ (2), 195-206.

Nisbett, R. E., & Bordiga,E. Attribution and the psychology of predic-tion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32,932-943.

Nisbett, R. E., Bor~ida, E., Crandall, R., & Reed, H. Popular induc-tion: information is not necessarily informative. In J. S.Carroll & J. W. Payne (Eds.), Co~nition and social behavior,Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1976.

Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. Human inference: Strategies and short-comings of social judgment, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980.

Nisbett, R. E., & Schacter, S. Cognitive manipulation of pain. Journalof Experimental Social Psychology, 1966, ~, 227-236.

Peck, A. E., & Doering, O. C. Voluntarism and price response: Consumerreaction to the energy shortage. Bell Journal of Economics, 1976,2, 287-292.

30

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. Attitudes and persuasion: Classic andcontemporary approaches, Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown CompanyPublishers, 1981.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, ~;=Personal involvement asa determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 1981, 41 (5), 847-855.

Petty, R. E., Wells, G. L., & Brock, T. C. Distraction can enhance orreduce yielding to propaganda: Thought disruption versus effortjustification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976,34, 874-884.

Phillips, N., & Nelson, E. Energyintegrated research programme.Society, 1976, ~ (4), 180-200.

savingsJournal

in private households-anof the lvlarket Research

Ray, M. L.ClarkeHills:

"-'"Harketing communication and the hierarchy of effects. In P.(Ed.), New models for mass communication research, BeverlySage Publications, 1973.

Consumer ini'tial processing':- Definitions, issues,

31"

Sawyer, A. G. A laboratory experimental investigation of the effects ofrepetition of advertising (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univer-sity, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1972, 32,4188A. (University Microfilm No. 72-5987). --

The effects of repetition of' refutational and supportiveadvertising appeals. Journal of Marketing Research, 1973, 10,23-33.

The effects of repetition: Conclusions and suggestionsabout experimental laboratory research. In D. G. Hughes & H. L.Ray (Eds.), Buyer/consumer information processing, Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press, 1974,190-219.

Repetition and affect: Recent empirical and theoreticaldevelopments. In A. G. Woodside, J. Sheth, & P. Bennett (Eds.),Consumer and industrial buying behavior, New York: North-Holland,1977, 229-242. -

Seaver, W., & Patterson, A. Decreasing fuel oil consumption throughfeedback and social commendJ.tj.oI},; Jourrwl of Applied ...-BehaviorAnalysis, 1976, ~, ·~147-152. ..'-- /~

Seligman, C., & Darley, J. M. Feedback asresidential energy consumption. Journal"1977, 62, 363-368.

a means of decreasingof Applied Psychology,

Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. Social judgment: Assimilation andcontrast effects in communication and attitude change, New Haven,Ct.: Yale University Press, 1961.

Slovic, P.,theory.

Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. Behavioral decisionAnnual Review of Psychology, 1977, 28, 1-39.

Steadman, H. How sexy illustrations affect brand recall. Journal ofAdvertising Research, 1969, ~ (1),15-20~

Stern, P.C., & Gardner, G. T. Psychological research and energy policy.American Psychologist, 1981, 36, 329-342.

Sterngold, A., & Kotler, P. A marketing approach to energy conserva-tion. In K. E. Hennion & T. C. Kinnear (Eds.), The conserversociety, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1979.

Stewart, J. B. Repetitive advertising in newspapers, Boston: HarvardBusiness School, 1964.

Stobaugh, R., & Yergin, D. (Eds.). Energy future: Report of theEnergy Project at the Harvard Business School, New York: RandomHouse, 1979.

Strong, E. C. The effects of repeti tion in· advertising: A fieldexperiment (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1972).

32

Dissertation Abstracts International, 1973, 33, 4615A.Microfilm No. 73-4602)

(University

Strong, E. K. The effect of size of advertisements and frequency oftheir presentation. Psychological ReviewT"'"'19·t4, 21,136-152.

The factors affecting a permanent impression developedthrough repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1916, !.

Szybillo, G. J., & Heslin, R. Resistance to persuasion: Inoculationtheory in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Research,1973, 10, 396-403.

Thistlewaite, D. L.,'directive' andtudes. Journal107-113.

deHaan, H.,'nondirective'of Abnormal

& Kamenetzky, J. The effects ofcommunication procedures on atti-

and Social Psychology, 1955, 51,

Thistlewaite, D. L., & Kamenetzky, J. Attitude change through refuta-tion and elaboration of audience counterarguments. Journal ofAbnormal and Social.:Psychology,;,;.d9~o.).,51, }-9. _./.

-- . .._"". .;-.1'" -

Tversky, A. Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 1977, 84,327-352.

Tversky) A., & Kahneman, D. Belief in the law of small numbers.Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 76, 105-110.

Availability: A heuristic for judgingfrequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 1973, ~, 207-232.

Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics andbiases. Science, 1974, 185, 1124-1131.

..tainity. In M.Hillsdale: N. J. :

Casual schemata in judgments under uncer-Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology,

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1980.

Underwood, B.learning.83-94.

J. Some correlates of item repetition in free-recall-Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, ~,

Walker, J. M. Voluntary responses to energy conservation appeals.Journal of Consumer Research, 1980, Z, 88-92.

Wallsten, T. S. Processes and models to describe choice and inference.In T. S. Wallsten (Ed.), Cognitive processes in choice and decisionbehavior, Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum, in press.

'Warshaw, P. R. A new model for predicting behavioral intentions: Analternative to Fishbein. Journal of Marketing Research, 1980, .!l,153-172.

Weiss, W.media59-65.

.33

Repetition in advertising. In L. Bogart (Ed.), Psychology instrategy, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1966,

Wells, W. D., & Chinsky,laboratory simulation.141-145.

J. M. Effects of competing messages: AJournal of Marketing Research, 1965, ~ (2),

Wells, G. L., & Harvey, J. H. Do people use consensus information inmaking casual attributions? Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 1977, 35 (5), 279-293.

Westley, ·B. H., & HacLean, M. S., Jr. A conceptual model for communica-tion research. Journalism Quarterly, 1957, 34, 31-38.

Wilkie, W. L. Consumer information processing: Issues for publicpolicy-makers. In H. Denney & R. Lund (Eds.), Consumer Researchfor Consumer Policy, Cambridge: t1LT Center for Policy Alterna-tives, 1978.

Wilson, W. & Hiller, H.. Repetitiop" .. 0Fder of ,presentation, anp timingof arguments ang. .... measures .. _sas· .. ~aetermihants of opinio,r{ change.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 2, 184-188.

Winer, . B. J. Statisticalprincipa~s in experimental design, New York:, McGraw-Hill, 1971.

Winkler, R.C. & Winett, R.A., Behavioral Interventions in ResourceEconomics~ American Psychologist, April 1982.

Wright, P. L. On the direct monitpring of cognitive responses, to adver-tising. In G. D. Hughes & M.L. Ray (Eds.), Buyer/consumer infor-mation processing, Chapel Hill: University of North CarolinaPress, 1974, 249-255.

Extracting information from mass media advertisements. InA. A. Mitchell, (Ed.). The effect of information on consumer andmarket behavior, Chicago: American-Marketing Association, 1977,61-64.

Wyer,R. S., & Carlston, D. Social cognition, influence and attribu-tion, Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum, 1979.

Zajonc, R. B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Person-ality and Social Psychology Monograph Supplement, 1968, 2-,1"=-27.

\

Zielski, H. A. The remembering and forgetting of advertising. Journalof Harketing, 1959, 23 (1),239-243.

Zielski, H. A., & 'Henry, \V. A. Remembering and forgetting televisionadvertisements. Journal of Advertising Research, 1980, 20 (2),7-13.

Zuckerman, M. Use of consensus informa tion in prediction of behavior.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1978, 14, 163-171.