Damaris Plocher & Helena Romfeld

The Impact of Visual Metaphors

on Brand Image

Business Administration Master’s Thesis

30 ECTS

Term: Spring 2018

Supervisor: Dr. Jakob Trischler

Acknowledgement

Firstly, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to our supervisor Jakob

Trischler for the continuous support and insightful comments as well as

encouragement and guidance. We could not have wished for a better advisor

and mentor for this thesis.

Besides, our sincere thanks goes to Carolin Plocher, who assisted us in the field

of statistical analysis with advice and deeds.

Abstract

This thesis aims to investigate the impact of visual metaphor advertising on

brand image by focusing on the metaphor’s different levels of complexity. The

focus is hereby set on visual metaphors with low and medium complexity. To

investigate this impact, a quantitative research design comprising a field

experiment with 102 participants has been carried out. After conducting a one-

way MANOVA, the empirical results suggest that visual metaphors have a

positive impact on the consumer’s perception of a brand. The comparison of

the two levels of complexity, however, resulted in no significant difference,

which shifts the focus of the metaphor creation to the recipients’

comprehension instead of focusing on the ultimate level of complexity to trigger

the most positive reaction. In sum, the findings of this thesis provide several

practical implications, especially in helping marketers by using marketing

metaphors to establish a positive bond between the communicating brand and

the observer.

Keywords: marketing metaphors, visual metaphor advertising, levels of

metaphors’ complexity, brand image

Agenda

List of figures .................................................................................................... 2

List of tables ...................................................................................................... 2

1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 3

1.1. Background ................................................................................................. 3

1.2. Problem discussion .................................................................................... 4

1.3. Aim and research question ........................................................................ 6

1.4. Structure ...................................................................................................... 6

2. Theory ........................................................................................................ 7

2.1. Branding ...................................................................................................... 7

2.1.1. Importance and current situation .................................................... 7

2.1.2. The brand and its functions ............................................................. 8

2.2. Metaphor advertising ................................................................................. 9

2.2.1. Definition of visual metaphors ........................................................ 9

2.2.2. Metaphors in marketing research ................................................. 10

2.2.3. Complexity levels of visual metaphors ........................................ 11

2.3. Brand image ............................................................................................. 13

2.3.1. Definition and classification .......................................................... 13

2.3.2. Influencing factors .......................................................................... 14

2.3.2.1. Brand experience ........................................................................ 15

2.3.2.2. Brand associations ...................................................................... 15

2.4. Hypothesis development ........................................................................ 16

3. Method ..................................................................................................... 20

3.1. Quantitative research design .................................................................. 20

3.2. Experiment ............................................................................................... 21

3.2.1. Experimental design ....................................................................... 21

3.2.2. Procedure ......................................................................................... 22

3.3. Sample ....................................................................................................... 24

3.4. Measures ................................................................................................... 24

3.5. Data analysis............................................................................................. 26

3.6. Trustworthiness ....................................................................................... 27

3.6.1. Criteria .............................................................................................. 27

3.6.2. Application ....................................................................................... 28

4. Empirical material and results ............................................................... 30

4.1. Descriptive statistics ................................................................................ 30

4.2. Group results ........................................................................................... 32

4.2.1. Heineken .......................................................................................... 33

4.2.2. Heinz ................................................................................................. 34

4.3. Manipulation check ................................................................................. 35

5. Analysis .................................................................................................... 37

5.1. Evaluation of hypotheses H1 and H1a ................................................ 37

5.2. Evaluation of hypothesis H1b ............................................................... 40

6. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 44

6.1. Theoretical reflection .............................................................................. 44

6.2. Managerial implications .......................................................................... 45

6.3. Limitations and future research recommendations ............................ 46

References ....................................................................................................... 48

Appendix ......................................................................................................... 54

2

List of figures

Figure 1: Different types of visual metaphors: (a) no metaphor, (b) juxtaposition, (c) fusion, and (d) replacement. ..................................................... 12

Figure 2: Theoretical model .................................................................................... 19

Figure 3: Procedure of the field experiment ........................................................ 23

List of tables

Table 1: The measurement items of the questionnaire ....................................... 25

Table 2: Group comparison of gender and age ................................................... 30

Table 3: Group comparison of the influencing factors ...................................... 31

Table 4: Group comparison of the frequent buyers ........................................... 31

Table 5: Variable-related results of Heineken ...................................................... 33

Table 6: Selected variables of Heineken ............................................................... 33

Table 7: Variable-related results of Heinz ............................................................ 34

Table 8: Selected variables of Heinz ...................................................................... 35

3

1. Introduction

In the first chapter of this thesis, the background and present problem are

explained. This includes highlighting the relevance and significance of the

central issue and defines the aim and research question that follow from the

problem definition. Lastly, an overview of the thesis’ structure is provided.

1.1. Background

“Marketing’s broader importance extends to society as a whole” (Kotler &

Keller 2012, p. 4). This is true for the today’s business situation, where

marketing plays a key role due to its function of dealing with the demand as the

essential factor for the companies’ profit (Kotler & Keller 2012; Meenaghan

1995). Moreover, today’s markets are characterised by a variety of products

within the same category. Accordingly, customers are overstrained and face

difficulties to distinguish between similar products (Chen et al. 2012).

Consequently, the main goal of companies to succeed in those markets is to

establish long-term competitive advantages. To manage this, brand

management is one of the most important and promising tools to differentiate

the offer from the competitors (Chen et al. 2012). Building strong brands and

ensuring customer loyalty contribute heavily to the overall company value

(Kotler & Keller 2012). Thus, brands comprise indispensable assets for the

holding companies and precious benefits, also for the customers (Kotler &

Keller 2012).

One significant element of a brand is its image, which constitutes the picture of

a brand in the consumer’s mind (Esch et al. 2005a). The brand image affects

sales directly and, thus, companies invest millions of dollars every year to

develop and promote their brand images. Therefore, companies set up a broad

combination of brand-related actions, e.g. communication (Park et al. 1986).

To succeed in positively influencing the brand image, marketers are equipped

with a toolbox of various possibilities (Kotler & Keller 2012). One such tool is

advertising, which is a key element of the marketing communication mix;

specifically, it is a non-personal mass communication channel, paid by the

advertising company (Bruhn 2009; Kotler & Keller 2012). Advertising includes

several different types of media, whereby the focus of this thesis lies on print

media, like newspapers and magazines, and display media including billboards,

signs and posters (Kotler & Keller 2012). The current significance of mass

media is still justified, although personal communications were used increasingly

4

by the marketing departments and despite the growing importance of the

Internet (Kotler & Keller 2012). Additionally, especially for consumer goods

companies, mass media and media advertising are the most important

communication instruments. Accordingly, they hold the major part of the

communication budget and provide a various field of applications (Bruhn 2009).

Within print and display media, there are several instruments that can be applied

to accomplish the pursued reaction of customers. This thesis focuses on the

essential tool of marketing metaphors as a stylistic device. Metaphors within

research comprise not a new topic, but with regard to the current studies, their

today’s importance is clearly given. Metaphors play a dominant role in modern

advertising and communication (Phillips 2003). Moreover, researches show that

75% of print advertisements have at least one metaphor in their headlines (Kim

et al. 2012). According to Zaltman & Coulter (1995), metaphors are potentially

important devices for getting useful insights into consumers, thoughts and

behaviour. Moreover, previous studies show that conceptual metaphors – in

pictures or words – enhance the power of advertisements (Shan et al. 2017).

Additionally, metaphors include several advantages, such as, e.g. the better

understanding of seemingly distant messages (Capelli & Jolibert 2009).

Consequently, a well-chosen metaphor can raise the attractiveness of a particular

product or brand and, thus, can be effective in persuasion (Shan et al. 2017).

1.2. Problem discussion

As illustrated above, a key aim of a company’s marketing activities is to

positively influence the consumer’s perception and attitudes towards the brand.

Thereby, the purpose is to create a strong and unique brand image in consumers’

minds (Aaker 1991).

One tool to positively influence the brand image involves metaphors within

advertisements. As highlighted above, metaphors are an important

communication element in modern advertising (Shan et al. 2017). Therefore,

metaphors have the power to increase the impact of an advertisement (Grey

2000). Previous studies show that a customer can get affected more intensively

by a metaphorical advert than by an advert without this stylistic device. This

impact concerns the recipients’ attention, receptivity, involvement and

emotional reactions (Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Mothersbaugh et al. 2002;

McQuarrie & Mick 2003; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; Phillips 1997; Phillips &

McQuarrie 2009; Toncar & Munch 2001).

5

This thesis focuses on print and display advertising and, thus, visual metaphors

since this media relies heavily on visuals to convince and persuade stronger than

verbal messages (Scott 1994). Additionally, visuals capture a large part of

magazine adverts in comparison to the decreasing number of words (McQuarrie

& Phillips 2005). Moreover, several approaches to categorise visual metaphors

share the consensus of referring to their different complexity levels (van Mulken

et al. 2014). Hence, this thesis concentrates not only on visual metaphors in

general, but on the complexity levels, as well.

Since metaphors are a widespread and often-used tool of advertisements, they

have been examined by several studies (e.g., Capelli & Jolibert 2009; Cornelissen

2003; Shan et al. 2017). These, however, primarily focused on verbal metaphors,

like in headlines (e.g., Hitchon 1991; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; Phillips 2000).

Furthermore, diverse studies concentrated on more specific topics, such as the

different types of metaphors (Gkiouzepas & Hogg 2011; Yu 2009), the effect

of visual metaphor on advertising response (Sakr 2016), the openness of

metaphorical advertisements (Lagerwerf & Meijers 2008), the comprehension

or interpretation of customers regarding metaphor advertising (Morgan &

Reichert 1999; Phillips 1997; van Mulken et al. 2014), or its use and impact on,

e.g. brand extension (Shan et al. 2017).

Moreover, the focus of additional studies lies not only on metaphors, but

examines them as one part of the research, like McQuarrie and Mick (1999)

investigated visual rhetoric in advertising, Toncar and Munch (2001) who

studied consumer responses to rhetoric figures in print advertising, or DeRosia

(2008) who discovered the audience response of rhetorical figures. In addition,

several studies focused on the influence of metaphors on the brand choice,

interest or attitudes towards the brand (e.g., Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Chang &

Yen 2013; Jeong 2008; Kim et al. 2012; McQuarrie & Mick 2003; Shan et al.

2017; Morgan & Reichert 1999). However, those studies did not examine the

essential concept of brand image, but only the less significant approaches of

brand attitudes, brand awareness or similar drafts. Regarding the complexity of

metaphors in advertisements, van Mulken et al. (2014) examined only the

effectiveness. Thus, to the authors’ knowledge, this thesis’ investigation aim

uniquely analyses the influence of the complexity of purely visual metaphors on

brand image.

6

1.3. Aim and research question

Derived from the theoretical marketing background and the presented problem

discussion above, the aim of this paper is to investigate the impact of visual

metaphor advertising on brand image by focusing on the metaphor’s different

levels of complexity. Thus, the thesis’ research question is:

How do different levels of complexity of visual metaphor advertising

influence the brand image?

To address the research question, this thesis uses a quantitative research design.

The investigation includes a field experiment, which serves for a comparison

between a non-metaphorical advertisement and adverts including visual

metaphors of either low or medium complexity. Additionally, follow-up

questions are asked to support the results of the field experiment and to gain a

deeper understanding of the advertisements’ impacts.

1.4. Structure

The remainder of this thesis is structured as follows. Next, the theoretical

chapter is presented, which is divided into four parts: branding, marketing

metaphors, brand image and hypotheses development. The third chapter

concerns the methodology of this thesis. After explaining the research design

including the quantitative methodology, the field experiment, the sample, the

measures and the data analysis are presented. The trustworthiness closes this

chapter. The empirical material and results are presented in chapter 4, while

chapter 5 focuses on the analysis of the data. Finally, chapter 6 concludes the

existing study and discusses managerial implications and limitations. The thesis

closes with outlining recommendations for further research.

7

2. Theory

This chapter clarifies the underlying theory of the thesis. First, the general topic

of branding is explained to classify the background of the subject area. The

focus of this thesis lies on marketing metaphors, which are carried out in detail

in section 2.2. Afterwards, the second focal point is given by defining and

classifying brand image, followed by the hypotheses development, which closes

this chapter.

2.1. Branding

This chapter defines and discusses the concept of branding. Hence, it serves as

a broad and general inauguration and classification for the key marketing points

of this thesis since brand image and metaphor advertising both comprise sub-

items of branding. The significance of a brand explains the general importance

of the brand management including diverse tasks, e.g. the handling of the best

possible brand image. Moreover, the brand functions show various tools to

succeed by profitably managing a brand. Several of those functions can be

influenced by the instrument of marketing metaphors and, thus, lead to brand

success. Accordingly, this first part of the theoretical chapter functions as a

foundation for the following sections. Due to the limited extent of this thesis,

the individual parts focus on the key points and assume a basic knowledge of

branding.

2.1.1. Importance and current situation

Since the brand has been identified as a major asset, it has become an

increasingly focused topic of marketers and marketing researchers (Del Río et

al. 2001; Esch et al. 2005b; Kotler & Keller 2012). The mega topic of brands is

justified by the enormous influence of brands on the consumer behaviour. Clear

brand images lead to relationships between customers and brands and, thus, to

increased purchases (Esch 2005). Generally, companies as well as customers

benefit by gaining a value from brands. They can improve customers’ lives and

leads to increasing sales and a grown market share (Del Río et al. 2001; Kotler

& Keller 2012). To sum up the current situation: More and more brands struggle

in more and more media for the favour of passive acting and poorly involved

customers (Esch et al. 2005a). This product and brand inflation results in

unmanageable offers within several product areas and industries. On the one

hand, this oversupply implies a multiplicity of provision and, thus, a great

freedom of choice (Esch et al. 2005b). On the other hand, consumers are

8

overloaded and lose the overview of the product range. The consequences

include a limitation of the perceived brands to avoid this overload (Esch et al.

2005b). The aim of the brand offering companies is, therefore, to bring their

brands into the minds of the customers. Hence, the concept of branding can be

characterised by its relating nature between the brand and the customer

(Meenaghan 1995).

2.1.2. The brand and its functions

According to the American Marketing Association, a brand can be defined as

“a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended to

identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate

them from those of competitors” (Kotler & Keller 2012, p. 241). Thus, brands

build a relationship between the customer and the offered products/services or

the company itself. By doing so, brands do not only supply a name and a logo,

but also add emotional and/or symbolic attributes to a regularly rather

functional, rational and tangible product (Kotler & Keller 2012). The

intangibility forms another crucial characterisation of brands. They consist in a

great extent of subjective impressions of the consumers and, hence, take place

in the consumers’ minds and imaginations primarily (Esch et al. 2005b).

It becomes clear that a brand labels a product or service for several reasons. The

main function is the differentiation from other brands (Esch et al. 2005b;

Hansen & Christensen 2003; Kotler & Keller 2012; Miletsky & Smith 2009). On

saturated markets with a various offer, brands make the difference to endow the

products with preferences. Hence, the customer can reduce the functional,

social and psychological risks of a purchase and thereby simplify the orientation

within the variety of the supplies (Esch et al. 2005b). Another function regards

the providing of information by endowing a product or service with a brand.

This can be fulfilled by, e.g. the tool of metaphor advertising (Shan et al. 2017),

to be reminded positively (Hansen & Christensen 2003). Furthermore,

endowing the companies’ offer with the charisma and power of a brand hides

several more advantages, like the potential of brand loyalty, a bigger price range,

the protection from external influences, e.g. competition or trademarks, and the

possibility of licensing or brand extension (Esch et al. 2005b; Kotler & Keller

2012).

9

2.2. Metaphor advertising

A well-created metaphor can enable a brand to be reminded more positively

(Shan et al. 2017). A metaphorical message can thereby be visual and/or verbal

(McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). In comparison to verbal metaphors, visually

displayed metaphors possess additional benefits (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005).

Pictures are known to outperform words in terms of drawing attention (Pieters

& Wedel 2004), stimulating the imagination (Kisielius & Sternthal 1986) and

increasing recall (Lutz & Lutz 1977). In addition, modern advertising has

constantly intensified its focus on pictures over words throughout the last

century (Phillips & McQuarrie 2002). As a result, today’s advertising is

predominantly visual and, thus, this thesis focuses on visual metaphors. This

chapter defines and explains visual metaphors and highlights different types. In

addition, reference is made to current literary findings.

2.2.1. Definition of visual metaphors

Visual metaphors play a dominant role in modern advertising and a central role

in modern communication (Phillips 2003). They are by definition a tool “for

seeing something in terms of something else” (Burke 1945, p. 503). Visual

metaphors belong to the class of rhetorical figures, which in turn present an

artful deviation from expectation (McQuarrie & Mick 1996). They are known

to be used by people to facilitate the understanding of an abstract concept by

referring to a concrete one. Metaphors put two ideas in relationship to each

other by using one of them to conceptualise the other (Lakoff & Johnson 1980).

Thereby, two objects are being compared through an analogy by implying that

one object is figuratively like another, even though they are quite different in a

literally manner (Stern 1990). The interaction between these objects can hereby

be in harmony as well as contradicting (Grey 2000; Zymner 1993). The key is

hence to highlight their common elements (Corbett 1965; Cornelissen &

Kafouros 2008).

Advertisements are predominantly using visual metaphors, which contain cross-

domain comparisons (Lakoff & Johnson 1980). Thereby, metaphors point out

the similarities between the presented ideas and domains while simultaneously

creating similarity within them (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). The focus lies on

the target situation in which the metaphor highlights the matching

characteristics and masks the ones that are not matching the situation (Phillips

& McQuarrie 2009). In addition, metaphors do not communicate

straightforward, but leave the recipient with a riddle that needs to be solved to

10

fully understand the destined message (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). Thereby,

the metaphor’s statement often conflicts with the assumptions of the recipient

(Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). When the recipient solves the riddle, it flatters

his/her intellectual capabilities (Phillips 1997), thus creating a bond between the

recipient and the communicator (Norrick 2003). Therefore, metaphors can be

seen as the recipient’s process of revealing the intended meaning.

Simultaneously, it underlines the importance of caution with which the

metaphor needs to be designed (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005).

2.2.2. Metaphors in marketing research

Some studies imply that the use of metaphors represents no guarantee for

favourable results. This becomes evident when looking at studies focusing on

differences between metaphors and literal messages in terms of changes in

consumer attitudes regarding the advertised products or brands which resulted

in unstable and contradicting outcomes (Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Ashley 2004;

Nelson & Hitchon 1995). Likewise, it is doubted by some researchers that

metaphorical messaging is effective in persuasion (Bosman & Hagendoorn

1991; Sopory 2008).

When looking at creative and novel advertisements in general, however,

numerous studies report that they typically entail a positive change in brand

attitude and purchase intention (McQuarrie & Mick 2003; Phillips & McQuarrie

2009). Furthermore, research on rhetorical figures shows an increasing effect on

the recipient’s message elaboration (Hoeken et al. 2009) and, therefore, intensify

the advertisement’s persuasiveness (McQuarrie & Mick 2009; Stathakopoulos et

al. 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).

In addition, these studies (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009; van Mulken et al. 2014)

suggest that metaphors as rhetorical figure have the very same effect. The

reasoning for this assumption is the resource-matching theory, which compares

the metaphor with a riddle that needs to be solved, as mentioned above

(Huhmann & Albinsson 2012). The interpretation of the riddle depends

strongly on the individual and his/her subjective opinion (van Mulken et al.

2014). The degree to which an individual believes to have fully decoded and

understood the metaphor’s meaning is called subjective comprehension.

Comprehension is a precondition to experience pleasure (van Mulken et al.

2014). Attitude changes as well as advert credibility are closely linked to the

subjective comprehension of an advert (Mick 1992). If the recipient’s cognitive

resources match the complexity of the rhetorical figure, it confers the advert a

11

higher degree of persuasiveness and subsequently readily recalled (van Mulken

et al. 2014).

Accordingly, previous studies provide evidence that metaphors increase

receivers’ attention and involvement (Mothersbaugh et al. 2002; Phillips 1997;

Phillips & McQuarrie 2009). It is even suggested that metaphors possess the

advantage of causing more cognitive elaboration compared to literal and direct

messages (Toncar & Munch 2001). Furthermore, metaphors have the power to

trigger cognitive and emotional reactions (Ang & Ching Lim 2006; McQuarrie

& Mick 2003; Mothersbaugh et al. 2002; Phillips 1997). Moreover, they are

attributed to increase the recipient’s receptivity to multiple, pronounced,

positive inferences regarding the product or brand being advertised (McQuarrie

& Phillips 2005) and manage to increase the advert’s overall impact and enhance

the recipient’s receptiveness and responsiveness by overcoming literal

deficiencies (Grey 2000).

The novelty and complexity of the message is said to increase the recipient’s

motivation to decode and interpret the advertisement (Bulmer & Buchanan-

Oliver 2004; Morgan & Reichert 1999). As such, metaphors have the ability to

generate more interest than non-metaphoric adverts and, thus, are more likely

to generate positive responses (Chang & Yen 2013). Hence, several studies

imply an out-performance of metaphors over literal alternatives.

The metaphor’s encryption and decryption represent thereby its core value.

Metaphors require an interplay between recipient and creator by combining

linguistic elements with cognitive attributes. The recipient’s positive emotions

felt while successfully solving the riddle may lead to a positive valuation of the

advertised product or brand (Berlyne 1974).

2.2.3. Complexity levels of visual metaphors

Visual metaphors appear frequently in contemporary advertising. Therefore, it

is necessary to categorise them. Metaphors ordinarily consist of three elements

(van Mulken et al. 2014). The first element is the source whose properties and

attributes are used to transfer it to the target, which represents the second

element (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014). The target is thus an object

that takes on the source’s attributes (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).

The third element is the ground, which connects the two named elements with

each other by providing the fundamentals for a comparison (van Mulken et al.

2014).

12

While there are several approaches to categorise visual metaphors, they all share

the consensus of referring to the complexity of metaphors. In general,

complexity contrasts simplification and can refer to numerous definitions since

complexity itself can only be explained in a determined context (Baechler &

Seiler 2016). For example, complexity occurs in everything that holds a

structure, in language, and also in more defined areas, such as advertising. It

always refers to the mental capacity of the recipient and can, hence, be

recognized very differently (Baechler & Seiler 2016). In the area of advertising,

complexity can be defined in terms of geometrical characteristics of a picture (Morrison

& Dainoff 1972). Within this thesis, the level of complexity refers to the spatial

distribution of the pictorial elements within a metaphorical advertisement,

which are briefly described below (van Mulken et al. 2014).

In Forceville's approach (2008), the delineation of levels of complexity becomes

most apparent. He states that the complexity of a metaphor increases with the

visual structure and the rising necessary amount of inference in order to be able

to interpret the visual metaphor appropriately (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et

al. 2014). Forceville (2008) distinguishes between three different levels of complexity:

going from pictorial similes (juxtaposition) to hybrid metaphors (fusion) up to

contextual metaphors (replacement). The classification is thereby strongly based

on the visibility of the target, which is illustrated in figure 1.

Figure 1: Different types of visual metaphors: (a) no metaphor, (b) juxtaposition, (c) fusion, and (d) replacement (van Mulken et al. 2014).

Within a juxtaposition (pictorial simile), the target and source “are saliently

juxtaposed” (Forceville 2008, p. 7). Thereby, the target as well as the source are

visually shown separately while similarities are generated between them through

the help of one or more visual traits, such as colour, size or posture as shown

in figure 1 (Forceville 2008).

According to Forceville (2008), the complexity level increases along with the

necessary time for the process of inferring in order to interpret the visual

metaphor appropriately. For this reason, he implies an increasing complexity

from juxtaposition to fusion to replacement. Since the target is clearly shown

13

within a juxtaposition, it involves the least amount of inference to successfully

solve the riddle of a metaphor. Consequently, it represents a visual metaphor

with a low level of complexity (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).

The fusion (hybrid metaphor) presents the metaphorical relationship between

target and source by uniting them into one unrealistic object, as illustrated in

figure 1 (Forceville 2008). This means that the target is no longer shown in its

original form and requires a longer process of inferring. Accordingly, a fusion

represents a metaphor of medium complexity (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et

al. 2014).

The last category represents the replacement (contextual metaphor), where the

source itself is not visually shown (see figure 1), which increases the level of

difficulty solving the riddle of the metaphor. The visual placement of the target,

however, “invites the viewer to evoke the identity of the source” (Forceville

2008, p. 7). A replacement requires therefore more effort and time to solve the

riddle and, hence, constitutes the most complex metaphor, which results in a

considerable complexity level (Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).

In addition to Forceville’s categorisation, visual metaphors can be differentiated

based on the visually shown brand image (Chang & Yen 2013). An explicit

metaphor integrates the product or brand image into the advertisement and

clearly shows it (Chang & Yen 2013). An implicit metaphor, in contrast, presents

the product or brand image in a less obvious way, which supports its passive

role within the advertisement (Chang & Yen 2013).

For the further course of this thesis, the complexity categorisations are applied,

as described above.

2.3. Brand image

Besides marketing metaphors, brand image represents a key element of this

thesis. It is a crucial factor to make the brand noticeable, to differentiate it from

the competitors’ brands, and to communicate the benefits clearly to the target

customers (Esch et al. 2005b). Therefore, this chapter defines the brand image

and classifies it within the marketing context, clarifies its importance in the

marketing world and its influencing factors.

2.3.1. Definition and classification

“Brands allow marketers to add meanings to products and services, but it is

consumers who ultimately determine what a brand means” (Batey 2014, p. 22).

14

While related concepts, like brand attitude or brand awareness, only scratch the

surface, the brand image comprises the most significant and universal brand

concept (e.g., Dobni & Zinkhan 1990; Nandan 2004; Park & Rabolt 2009).

Brand image is the picture of a brand which arises and exists only in the minds

of the customers. It can only to a certain extent be controlled by the owner of

the brand (Batey 2014; Esch et al. 2005a; Meenaghan 1995). Tools to influence

the image are, e.g. advertising. The concept of the brand, which can be fully

controlled by the brand holding company, is called brand identity (Batey 2014;

Esch et al. 2005a; Meenaghan 1995). The identity of a brand includes its

attributes, promises, values and personality. Those elements are determined by

the company and the aim is to realise them (Esch et al. 2005a). The brand

identity reflects all strategic ideas of a company towards a fundamental

substantially orientation of a brand (Esch et al. 2005a). The company strives for

the greatest overlap of brand identity and brand image. Consequently, brand

identity is the brand’s self-perception and brand image is the foreign picture of

a brand (Esch et al. 2005a).

The customers’ identification with a brand is an essential aim of companies

regarding the target customers. At best, the customers add the brand image to

their self-image and, thus, gain an ideal self (Batey 2014). In conjunction with

this, a central marketing management task is to endow the product with a

personality embodied by the brand and reflected as the brand image in the minds

of the customers. Hence, the mentioned essential link between the product and

the customer can be established (Meenaghan 1995). This relationship should

lead to a brand preference due to the unique and relevant brand image. It forms

the basis for the attractiveness of a brand (Esch et al. 2005b). To clarify this, the

special brand image results in an independent positioning in the heads of the

customers to differentiate it towards the competitors. Long-term aims of the

brand preference include a scope of the price policy, brand loyalty and brand

bonding (Esch et al. 2005b).

2.3.2. Influencing factors

Due to the structure of the underlying field experiment, the aim is to isolate the

pure impact of metaphors on brand image. Therefore, in the frame of this thesis,

the influencing factors on brand image are examined. The basic factor

constitutes the brand experience of the customer, which includes several

elements, like brand awareness, brand knowledge and brand usage.

15

Furthermore, the second determinant comprises the brand associations, which

are explained in detail in section 2.3.2.2.

2.3.2.1. Brand experience

Brand experience represents the first out of two significant determinants of

brand image. It constitutes two components: first, external points by the

company and competition as, e.g. marketing activities or the positioning of the

brand, which are based on the brand identity and the highest possible fit of

identity and image (Dobni & Zinkhan 1990; Esch et al. 2005a). The second

component is the subjective processing and perceiving in the mind of the

customer formed by the external factors and his/her own practice with the

brand (Esch et al. 2005a). Therefore, brand experience plays a major role when

shaping the brand image. The brand experience is based on the brand

knowledge, which includes all information obtained by the customer, e.g. the

acquired recommendations. Moreover, it refers to the brand awareness and

brand usage of the customer (Esch et al. 2005a; Shank & Langmeyer 1993).

Another significant point of brand experience regards the degree of consistency

of the communication of the brand identity that leads to an equally consistent

brand image. For example, frequent changes of the brand campaigns can have

a negative effect on the consumer, so that his/her brand experience gets

confused and less clear (Esch et al. 2005a). Thus, the brand image can suffer

from inconsistency.

There are additional possible influencing factors regarding brand image, which

are seen as less important for this thesis due to the plain focus on visual

advertisements. For this reason, there are listed exemplary in the following, but

are not explained in detail due to the limitation of this thesis: the country of

origin (Allman et al. 2016), price strategies (Hunt & Keaveney 1994), cultural

values (Park & Rabolt 2009), brand appearances (van Reijmersdal et al. 2007),

or wording actions (Wänke et al. 2007).

2.3.2.2. Brand associations

Since brand associations can be named as “the heart and soul of the brand”

(Aaker 1991, p. 8), they constitute the second significant determinant of brand

image. The customer reflects his/her perceptions of the brand and summarises

those to a cluster of associations (Del Río et al. 2001). These associations come

into the customer’s mind when he/she thinks about the brand name (Del Río

et al. 2001). Additionally, both, companies and customers can benefit from

16

brand associations which support the consumer by classifying and recapturing

brand information. Furthermore, brand associations position and differentiate

the brand and offer reasons to purchase the branded product (Till et al. 2011).

Thus, “all companies strive to build a brand image with as many strong,

favourable, and unique brand associations as possible” (Kotler & Keller 2012,

p. 10). Derived from that, it becomes clear that brand associations serve as the

basis for brand image (Till et al. 2011).

According to Keller (1993), brand associations can be classified into attributes,

benefits and attitudes. Attributes concern the detailed characteristics of a

product/service (Keller 1993). They refer to the main functions and features

that the consumer thinks of when dealing with the purchase decision or direct

consumption. Benefits, in turn, apply to the personal value the consumer adds

to the product (Keller 1993). Hence, this is what the product does for the

customer personally. Lastly, the attitudes refer to the general view and valuation

of the consumers, which is, therefore, one part of the foundation of consumer

behaviour (Keller 1993).

2.4. Hypothesis development

Following the detailed literature review, it is now important to apply the

knowledge gained to this thesis. The independent variable of this thesis, whose

impact and effects are more closely examined, is the visual metaphor. As

mentioned above, a visual metaphor represents a rhetorical figure in which an

idea or product is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in

order to suggest a resemblance (Burke 1945; Stern 1990). In comparison to non-

metaphorical adverts, which highlight the product’s benefits in a direct and

straightforward way (Chang & Yen 2013), visual marketing metaphors leave the

recipient with a riddle that needs to be solved to fully understand the destined

message (Phillips & McQuarrie 2009).

It has already been shown by previous research that metaphors can influence

the consumer in general (Shan et al. 2017). Within this thesis, visual metaphors

are seen as a possible tool to enhance the brand image. As prior defined, brand

image equals all the attributes of a brand as perceived by potential and actual

customers (Batey 2014) and, thus, represents the dependent variable within this

thesis. Marketing metaphors and brand image are closely related, as suggested

by several researcher: Previous studies (e.g., Ang & Ching Lim 2006; Jeong 2008;

Kim et al. 2012; McQuarrie & Mick 1999, 2003) show that marketing metaphors

can influence the consumer’s attitude towards the advertisement or brand.

17

Indirect persuasion, like metaphors, can possibly make recipients more

receptive to conclusions about the marketed brand and simultaneously transmit

the key message of the advert (McQuarrie & Mick 2003). In addition, marketing

metaphors provide insights and illuminate the subjects that they advertise

(Cornelissen 2003) and can, thus, affect the perceived image of a brand.

Also, metaphors cover persuasive messages in a subtle way, so that the recipient

may be convinced in a more elegant and compelling manner than with a direct,

straightforward message (Jeong 2008; McQuarrie & Mick 1999; McQuarrie &

Phillips 2005). These hidden visual arguments provide a subconscious

conviction of the customer regarding his/her attitude towards the brand

(McQuarrie & Mick 1999), which results in an enhanced brand image. In

conjunction with this, metaphor advertising includes the possibility to

effectively communicate brand attributes to positively influence the brand image

(McQuarrie & Mick 1999), since metaphors can be evaluated as being exciting

and sophisticated (Ang & Ching Lim 2006).

In addition, creative metaphors with decorative imagery can counterbalance

what a functional product lacks (Ang & Ching Lim 2006) and endow a product

with emotions. Phillips and McQuarrie (2009) found out that metaphors in

advertisements can influence the consumer belief positively, if the recipient

perceives the advert “as an artful deviation from expectation” (Phillips &

McQuarrie 2009, p. 59), and thereby aim to ease the persuasion. Consequently,

the first hypothesis can be formulated as followed:

H1: Visual metaphors have a significant positive impact on

brand image.

However, a condition for a positive impact of visual metaphors on brand image

is the right management, control and use of metaphors and, hence, the

appropriate handling of the identity. Otherwise, unclear metaphors could

confuse the consumer (Cornelissen 2003) and then falsify the image. For this

reason, a visual metaphor needs to be designed with great caution (McQuarrie

& Phillips 2005). Thereby, the complexity level is essential. According to van

Mulken et al. (2014), metaphors complexity and pleasurable feelings share a

positive relation “until a tipping point is reached, when complexity outweighs

comprehension” (van Mulken et al. 2014, p. 333).

On the one hand, a riddle that is either too simple or too challenging to solve

will not give pleasure to the recipient (Huhmann & Albinsson 2012). On the

18

other hand, however, highly complex metaphors, if correctly comprehended,

are assumed to trigger greater and therefore more effective assumption and

power of recall (van Mulken et al. 2014). However, the risk that the recipient is

not able to decode the message rises with the complexity of the metaphor

(McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). Hence, a medium complexity level is needed in

order for the recipient to experience enjoyment while processing the advert

(Huhmann & Albinsson 2012), which in turn promotes a positive brand image.

This thesis focuses therefore on visual metaphors with a medium level of

complexity. In addition, visual metaphors of low complexity are included in this

study to identify possible differences in regard of their impact on brand image.

This thesis adopts the complexity categories by Forceville (2008) and van

Mulken et al. (2014) as described in section 2.2.3. Consequently, the first

overarching hypothesis can be divided into two sub-hypotheses:

H1a: Visual metaphors of low complexity have a significant

positive impact on brand image.

H1b: Visual metaphors of medium complexity have a

significant more positive impact on brand image than visual

metaphors of low complexity.

Furthermore, this thesis only makes use of explicit metaphors, which clearly

show the product or brand image within the advertisement since the brand

needs to be visible to test the metaphor’s impact on brand image (Chang & Yen

2013).

To analyse the actual impact of visual metaphors on brand image, it is necessary

to isolate the influencing factors, which were identified in section 2.3.2.

Additionally, the comprehension of metaphors succeeds stronger, if the

recipient has a certain degree of product knowledge (Roehm & Sternthal 2001).

Therefore, brand experience and brand associations are the relevant influencing

factors to be considered. In this context, it must be mentioned that brand

experience consists of several elements, such as brand awareness, brand

knowledge, brand usage, and consistency of the communication. To be able to

control the influencing factors as good as possible, brands with inconsistent

brand communications are dispensed within the experiment. Thus, consistency

of the communication is an irrelevant influencing factor. The theoretical model

depicting these relationships is shown in figure 2.

19

Figure 2: Theoretical model (own research).

20

3. Method

Since research focuses on knowledge and the optimal accomplished “truth”, the

underlying methodology is significant for the comprehensive research study

(Newman & Benz 1998; Sale et al. 2002). Therefore, this chapter clarifies the

research design, followed by the experiment, sample, measures, data analysis

and the trustworthiness, which closes this third part of the thesis.

3.1. Quantitative research design

This thesis uses a quantitative approach. In contrast to a qualitative design,

which focuses on deriving meaning and exploring a phenomenon where little

previous research exists, quantitative research focuses on testing theory

(Amaratunga et al. 2002; Newman & Benz 1998; Sale et al. 2002). Since this

thesis draws on established theories, the quantitative design is deemed

applicable.

Quantitative studies can be seen as the more traditional research design

(Amaratunga et al. 2002; Newman & Benz 1998) since they “have been the

dominant methods of research in social science” (Newman & Benz 1998, p. 10).

Quantitative approaches can be characterised by their objective, measuring, data

analysing and statistical nature (Amaratunga et al. 2002). In addition,

quantitative studies focus on the generalisability of the sample in regard to the

population, control of variables, validity and reliability of the results and

randomisation (Newman & Benz 1998). Whereas interpretation and meaning

are in the focus of qualitative research, quantitative methods concentrate on an

objective reality independent from the subjective perception of humans in

general (Sale et al. 2002). Thus, quantitative research bases on a view from the

outside and, hence, on the independence of the interviewer from the

interviewee, on objective measures and on “hard data”. In contrast, subjectivity,

reflection and intuition are not in demand (Amaratunga et al. 2002).

A deductive approach implies drawing conclusions from theories and applying

them to a defined phenomenon (Gratzer & Tesfaye 2006). Thereby, theory

always builds the starting point for the inspection of a phenomenon (Gratzer &

Tesfaye 2006). This thesis is based on theories concerning marketing metaphors

and brand image. The contents of the theories and the consequent hypotheses

are then reviewed and analysed in the form of an experiment. Thus, a deductive

approach is applied.

21

3.2. Experiment

The framework for the quantitative research design is a field experiment, which

is combined with a survey. An experiment is by definition an investigation under

controlled conditions that is made to test a pre-set hypothesis (Shadish et al.

2002). This is done by manipulating the independent variable (the cause) and

measuring the size and change of each dependent variable (the effect) (Saunders

et al. 2012; Shadish et al. 2002). Any extraneous variables are thereby controlled

to the most possible extend (Saunders et al. 2012; Shadish et al. 2002).

For this thesis, a field experiment is chosen. In contrast to a laboratory

experiment, a field experiment is carried out in the natural environment of the

participants, such as a classroom or the workplace (Dennis 1990; Saunders et al.

2012). The independent variable gets still manipulated, but in a real-life setting

(Dennis 1990; Saunders et al. 2012). Hence, the observed causal relationships

are more likely to reflect real life due to its natural setting (Saunders et al. 2012).

On the other side, a field experiment has less control over extraneous variables

that might bias the results (Saunders et al. 2012). This makes it difficult for

another researcher to replicate the study in exactly the same way.

The unique strength of experiments lies within the causal description of the

consequences based on the intentional change of a variable (Shadish et al. 2002).

With the help of experiments however, it is only partially possible to explain the

mechanism behind the causal relationship and the conditions which assure it

(Shadish et al. 2002). Therefore, follow-up questions are being asked

additionally, to fully understand the relationships between the variables.

3.2.1. Experimental design

A between-group design serves as foundation for the field experiment. The

between-group design is defined as an experiment that consists of two or more

groups of subjects (Charness et al. 2012). Thereby, each participant gets tested

on only one treatment. Results are obtained by comparing the behaviour of

participants of one treatment with those exposed to the other treatments

(Charness et al. 2012). The experiment of this thesis consists of two treatment

groups and one control group. All participants are equal in all relevant aspects

to the research except the fact whether the participants are exposed to a

manipulation or not.

Furthermore, two brands are chosen in preparation for the experiment.

Thereby, the following criteria served as guideline: The first precondition is that

the participants are familiar with the shown brand. Therefore, the brand needs

22

to be well-known in Sweden since the experiment takes place in a Swedish city.

Second, the brand needs to provide a consistent continuous brand

communication to exclude the extraneous variable consistency of the

communication, as explained in section 2.4. Third, it is made a condition that

the selected brands belong to the same industry to enable a better comparison.

Fourth, the brand must use metaphor advertising in real life to guarantee

truthfulness of the used adverts within this experiment. Based on these named

criteria, the American ketchup brand Heinz and the Dutch beer brand Heineken

are selected as representative brands of the food industry.

For each brand, three specific advertisements are selected, which were published

and used by the respective brand. Those three advertisements include one non-

metaphorical advert and two metaphorical adverts, whereby one is of low

complexity (juxtaposition) and the other one of medium complexity (fusion).

Since replacements exceed the level of complexity for this thesis, they stay

unnoticed, as explained in section 2.2.3. As mentioned in section 2.4., all

advertisements visually display the brand name as precondition to measure a

possible impact on brand image.

3.2.2. Procedure

The participants are approached by researchers within their natural

surroundings as, e.g. the library, lecture halls and private homes. None of the

participants has the chance to prepare answers since questions are not handed

out in advance and the people interviewed are chosen randomly. The

quantitative survey starts with questions referring to the respondents’

background, such as gender and age, followed by more in-depth questions

concerning the extraneous variables (i.e. brand experience and brand

associations) and brand image (see appendix A). The components of brand

experience are queried in the following order: brand awareness, brand

knowledge and brand usage. The in-depth questions are all related to one of the

two selected brands (e.g. brand A).

Afterwards, the participant is shown an advertisement of the same brand about

which he/she was just interviewed (brand A). Whether the advert is a non-

metaphorical advert, a juxtaposition or a fusion depends on which group he/she

belongs to (see appendices B1, B2, B3). All participants are assigned randomly

to the groups.

Figure 3 depicts the experimental procedure. Participants belonging to the first

treatment group are shown metaphorical adverts of low complexity (M+), while

the second treatment group consists of metaphorical adverts of medium

23

complexity (M++). The control group, in contrast, gets to see non-metaphorical

adverts (Mo). The advertisements are submitted to each participant with the

same set instructions. After he/she was able to take a closer look at the advert,

the participant’s brand image gets queried again. This is followed by four follow-

up questions to find out why the participant's brand image either stayed the

same or has deteriorated or improved.

After this procedure, the second pass takes place, as shown in figure 3. It

includes the very same steps as the first one. The only difference is that the

second run relates to the second brand that has not been queried yet (brand B).

Accordingly, the advertisement of the second brand is shown (brand B).

Whether the first pass concentrates on brand A or B is decided randomly. In

total, every participant gets to see two different advertisements of the same kind.

Figure 3: Procedure of the field experiment (own research).

Brand image, as the dependent variable within this thesis, gets measured prior

to and after the manipulation of the independent variable (visual metaphor).

This applies for the two treatment groups as well as the control group. It enables

a comparison of the results before and after the manipulation. Consequently, it

is expected that differences concerning brand image between the treatment

groups themselves, and in comparison to the control group can be attributed to

the intervention.

24

To ensure that the changes on brand image actually refer to the visual

metaphors, the participants get assigned randomly to the groups. Moreover,

using a control group enables the checking of possible alternative explanations

for changes of the dependent variable. Since the control group underlies the

same external influences as the treatment groups, it can be expected that all

changes originate from the experiment itself and, thus, the independent variable.

Plus, differences caused due to possible different composition of the three

groups cannot be taking into account since all participants are randomly

assigned. Finally, to evaluate as to whether the treatment worked (manipulation

check), each participant is asked follow-up questions immediately after the

experiment. Specifically, questions asked include:

Did you like the shown advertisement? And if so, why/why not?

After having seen the advertisement, have the brand characteristics

changed? Why has/hasn’t it changed?

3.3. Sample

This thesis is conducted among a homogeneous population. The term refers to

people who share the same context and have therefore physical and

organisational proximity. Students are constrained and dependent on the

university and, thus, form a homogeneous population (Vandebosch 2008). This

guarantees that voluntary participants will not be notably different from non-

respondents (Saunders et al. 2012).

The sample size is 102 students referring to the calculation outcomes of the

statistical analysis program G*Power. This program provides several tools, e.g.

an analysis to determine the appropriate sample size (Faul et al. 2009). The basis

comprises three variables: the significance level, the requested statistical power,

and, lastly, the effect size of the pursued population (Faul et al. 2009). The 102

students study at the Karlstad University in Sweden, whereby 56% is female and

44% is male. The age range goes from 19 to 45 with 24 as the average age. A

total of 32 participants belongs to the first treatment group, while 33 participants

are part of the second one. The control group consists of 37 people. This

circumstance creates a solid base for comparisons of the three groups.

3.4. Measures

The questionnaire aims to measure brand image as well as its most important

influencing factors, which are brand experience and brand associations, as

explained in section 2.3.2. Brand experience is divided into brand awareness,

25

brand knowledge and brand usage. Thus, the questionnaire includes five

measurement items which compromise 31 statements, respectively questions.

All questions of a measurement item are based on verified and confirmed

statements of previous researchers as shown in table 1.

Table 1: The measurement items of the questionnaire (own research).

26

The statements to measure brand awareness are adopted almost unchanged

from Lee and Leh (2011). A minor rewording was required to avoid a double

negation as the survey is not conducted in the respondent's mother tongue. The

basis for the questions referring to brand associations is also provided by Lee

and Leh’s (2011) statements, which, however, had to be cut down due to their

size. In addition, they are very broad and cover several areas, but only a few

specific statements are of interest to this thesis. While some referring to the

participant’s perceived value, trustworthiness and social image are crucial,

statements concerning the flawlessness in the product’s physical construction

are irrelevant for this thesis. Likewise, associations concerning the country-of-

origin as well as the corporate social responsibility do not matter, as the shown

adverts do not allude to these topics. As a result, brand associations are

measured with a reduced number of eight meaningful and insightful statements.

The questions concerning brand awareness and brand associations are scaled

using the 5-point Likert scale, whereby 1 equals strongly agree, 2 stands for

agree, 3 represents neutral, 4 means disagree and 5 stands for strongly disagree.

Brand knowledge, in contrast, is queried with two statements based on Zhou et

al. (2010), whereby the respective statement must be ticked. Questions referring

to the participant’s brand usage are direct questions, as are the questions of

gender and age, which is why no previously tested questions by researchers are

needed.

To measure brand image, a semantic differential is used. The semantic

differential measures people's reactions to contrasting adjectives at each end on

a bipolar scale. Thereby, a total of 15 bipolar adjectives are used based on Low

& Lamb Jr.’s (2000) selection of adjectives. Hereby, a prior selection of the

adjectives is made in line with the selected brands. Each response option

represents a point value from 5 to 1, whereby 5 stands for a strong tendency to

the positive adjective and 1 to the negative one. Furthermore, the questionnaire

offers as a sixth answer option “not applicable” to reduce the amount of missing

and untrue answers (Revilla et al. 2014).

3.5. Data analysis

To analyse the results of the underlying experiment, the participants’ answers

must be evaluated at first. This evaluation is conducted by using the statistical

program SPSS. First, descriptive statistics are used to analyse the two treatment

groups and the control group regarding their structure and characteristics, e.g.

age and gender. Since the brand image is queried twice and consists of 15

27

dependent variables (see section 3.2., appendix A), a one-way multivariate

analysis of variance (MANOVA) is applied. Within this analysis, Wilk’s Lambda

is documented as one part of the outcome. It is a classical and commonly used

tool for conclusions about the crucial significances (Todorov & Filzmoser 2010)

and, thus, used within this thesis to assure the accuracy of the results of the

MANOVA. Because MANOVA evaluates significances of all groups, but

cannot distinguish between the single groups, a post-hoc test is applied

afterwards.

The selected post-hoc test compares the means of several groups. In contrast

to other post-hoc tests, such as Bonferroni, the Scheffé procedure suits best as

it conducts simultaneously comparisons in pairs for all possible combinations

of means (Savin 1980). Furthermore, the Scheffé procedure does not focus on

one special comparison, but values all groups in the same way, whereby

Bonferroni distinguishes between data sets of primary and secondary interest

(Savin 1980). Hence, the Scheffé test is applied using SPSS and shows the most

important outcome, which is the significance value. The three tested groups are

contrasted in each combination, so that three data sets of significances result

(treatment group 1 vs. control group, treatment group 2 vs. control group,

treatment group 1 vs. treatment group 2). Furthermore, the answers of the

follow-up questions (see section 3.2.) are summarised and systematically listed,

with special regard to their similarities and differences. All answers are analysed

and put into patterns in the same way without exception.

3.6. Trustworthiness

Since unreliable, invalid studies are seen to be worthless, the trustworthiness

must be ensured. Thus, the quality of research is proven by meeting universal

criteria (Amankwaa 2016). Those are explained first, followed by the application

of those criteria on the underlying study of this thesis.

3.6.1. Criteria

In the conventional research, reliability and validity are the common criteria for

quantitative designs (Amankwaa 2016; Connelly 2016; Korstjens & Moser 2017;

Krefting 1991).

Validity is split into internal and external validity. Internal validity deals with the

generality of the research, especially the surroundings and findings of the study

(Krefting 1991). This criterion can be assured by detailed descriptions of the

investigation, especially the results (Krefting 1991). External validity handles the

28

degree of a study to be applicable to similar situations, circumstances or samples

(Krefting 1991).

Moreover, the study must be reliable to be officially accepted. The aim of this

criterion is to “minimise errors and biases in a study” (Amaratunga et al. 2002,

p. 29). Thus, the consistency of the findings or rather data is important to

ensure, which is directly connected to the external validity (Krefting 1991). It

deals with the degree of consistency of the data, if the study was repeated using

the same sample or same situation (Amankwaa 2016; Amaratunga et al. 2002;

Krefting 1991). In conjunction with this, a necessary degree of neutrality or

rather objectivity must ensure the high quality of research (Amankwaa 2016;

Krefting 1991). In quantitative methods, neutrality regards the distance between

the researcher and the recipients to reduce bias by, e.g. randomisation.

Therefore, the researcher does not influence the investigation in a biased way

and is, hence, objective (Krefting 1991).

3.6.2. Application

Several instruments can be applied to establish trustworthiness within the

research (Amankwaa 2016; Amaratunga et al. 2002; Korstjens & Moser 2017;

Krefting 1991). First, a procedure protocol has been set up, so that the

researchers do not forget any major or minor steps of the investigation,

especially concerning the analysis of the results.

To guarantee validity, a prolonged engagement with the participants was carried

out. It gives the participants enough time to become familiar with the situation

and tasks (Korstjens & Moser 2017). This is significant since it builds trust and

avoids misunderstandings. Besides, validity can be ensured through the semi-

structured design of the follow-up questions, which encourage the participant

to go into further details or give examples (Korstjens & Moser 2017). Another

tool is data triangulation (Korstjens & Moser 2017). For this research it means

collecting data at different times of day and at different places as, e.g. the

university or student homes. In addition, investigator triangulation is given by

the two investigating researchers.

Moreover, the structure of the experiment ensures internal validity since the

assignment of all participants to the groups and the order of the shown

advertisements happened randomly. Furthermore, an additional control group

serves as reference and, consequently, ensures that every change of the

dependent variable is indeed a direct result of the independent variable.

29

Since not every approached person is willing to participate, the volunteers might

not be representative, which leads to problems of external validity. However,

this study focuses on students only, which represent a homogeneous population

(Saunders et al. 2012). In addition, a cross-analysis of two selected brands with

multiple advertisement sets has been carried out to increase external validity.

To maintain reliability, peer-debriefings of the two researchers were held.

Additionally, the procedure of investigation was discussed with the supervisor

and other researchers. Thus, biases from one of the researchers could be

prevented (Connelly 2016). Moreover, detailed notes of the process of the

analysis were written down for comprehension.

30

4. Empirical material and results

This chapter provides a presentation and overview of the collected data. In

order to best illustrate the results, tables are developed according to the

collected data.

4.1. Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics serve the purpose of summarising and describing the

empirical data in a clear way. In order to find an actual effect caused by the

experiment, it is necessary that the two treatment groups and the control group

are similar in their characteristics. For this reason, in the first step, the different

characteristics of the individual groups are examined and compared. A data

screening indicates a confirmation of the necessary precondition for this thesis

as shown in table 2 and 3.

Table 2: Group comparison of gender and age (own research).

As illustrated in table 2, the gender distribution in the three groups is irregular.

However, due to gender, no strong different influence is assumed since the two

queried products are consumed by both sexes. In contrast, the average age in

the individual groups is almost identical, which supports the similar structure of

the groups.

Furthermore, the total amount of participants is nearly the same in the two

treatment groups, whereas the control group has a few more participants. This

circumstance, though, creates a more solid basis for comparison in regard to the

two treatment groups. Concerning the analysis, however, one participant

belonging to treatment group 1 must be excluded for the brand Heineken due

to too many missing answers. With regard to the second brand Heinz, the

participant will continue to be considered since all questions have been

answered.

Table 3 provides an overview on the queried influencing factors according to

the different groups and brands. Again, overall similarities between the three

groups are recognizable. When focusing on each influencing factor individually,

minor differences become evident, which, however, are not crucial.

31

Table 3: Group comparison of the influencing factors (own research).

Without exception, all respondents indicated to know both brands. In the case

that one participant would not have known one of the two brands, it would

have led to the immediate exclusion from the analysis of the respective brand.

In general, it is noticeable that the values in relation to Heinz are slightly higher

than those for Heineken. The phenomenon is evident in all three groups. This

suggests that the participants are more familiar with Heinz than Heineken.

Likewise, Heinz is rated more positively.

According to the data regarding brand awareness, it is equally hard respectively

easy for all group members to imagine the two brands and distinguish them

from other competing brands. Moreover, values concerning brand knowledge

are consistent in all three groups. This indicates that the groups hold a very

similar level of knowledge about the brands.

Table 4: Group comparison of the frequent buyers (own research).

The question of whether participants see themselves as a frequent buyer is of

particular importance, as these answers make it clear how strongly the

participants are attracted to the brand. Most of the participants tend to negate

the question as shown in table 4. In every group, Heinz has a higher number of

frequent buyers in comparison to Heineken. Nevertheless, regardless of the

32

respective brand, the number of those who do not consider themselves a regular

buyer outweighs the number of regular buyers in any case. The only exception

is the number of frequent Heinz buyers in the control group.

A look at table 3 indicates that the values in relation to brand associations are

also similar. However, the calculation of the mean values takes place regardless

of the question whether the participants see themselves as proud owners of the

respective brand. For both brands, the question is excluded from the calculation,

as more than 30% of participants responded with "I do not own a product".

More precisely, 40 participants ticked this answer option for Heineken and 20

times for Heinz.

The overall picture implies that the prerequisite for investigating an effect on

the brand image caused by the experiment is given. All three groups, which

include two treatment groups and one control group, seem to be similar in their

characteristics. Despite the random assignment to the group, the outcome

signifies three well-comparable groups.

4.2. Group results

As explained in 3.5., the results of the block of questions regarding brand image

are evaluated by using MANOVA and the Scheffé procedure. This results in

values that are either significant or not. In the following, the first table shows all

variables of one brand and the significance value for all three groups evaluated

by MANOVA. This table serves as a basis for the selection of variables used for

the Scheffé test. Afterwards, the individual significances of those selected

adjectives are presented for each group comparison (see section 4.1. for the

division into three data sets). Statistical significance describes a range of

amounts less or equal 0,05. Thereby, the range from 0,05 down to 0,01 refers to

the lowest significance level. A number less or equal 0,01 is very significant and

an amount of less or equal 0,001 represents a highly significant result (Carver

1978).

The chapter is divided into two subchapters. First, the results will be presented

in relation to Heineken, followed by the results of Heinz.

33

4.2.1. Heineken

Table 5: Variable-related results of Heineken (own research).

Table 5 shows the overall significances of all three data sets in relation to

Heineken as evaluated by MANOVA. This serves as a basis for the selection of

variables, which are measured afterwards by the Scheffé procedure for each

compared group. First, the significances are in the focus. Since thirteen out of

fifteen queried adjectives are statistically significant, the researchers concentrate

on the highly significant variables, which are the first five variables listed in table

5. However, the selection is not based solely on the results of the Scheffé test.

In addition, the selected metaphorical adverts by Heineken are used as a second

selection criterion. The adjectives fresh and appetising refer to the product itself

and the topic of the advertisement since Heineken uses the word “fresh”

directly. Additionally, fun and exciting can be related to the metaphor and the

underlying riddle. Being able to solve the metaphor can evoke positive feelings

in the viewer, combined with fun and excitement, as explained in section 2.2.2.

Lastly, the adjective friendly is included in the selection due to the high

significance value.

Table 6: Selected variables of Heineken (own research).

34

Table 6 shows the significance results evaluated by the Scheffé procedure for

the selected five variables. Every column displays one data set of two compared

groups. The first two columns are highlighted in grey colour due to their very

and highly significant values. Hence, nine out of ten values are highly significant

and one value is very significant (more precisely, the adjective fresh in the

comparison of treatment group 2 vs. control group). The comparison of

treatment group 1 vs. treatment group 2, on the other hand, results in no

significant values.

4.2.2. Heinz

Table 7: Variable-related results of Heinz (own research).

As explained in section 4.2.1., the significances shown in table 7 constitute the

basis for the selection of variables for the post-hoc test in relation to Heinz. As

illustrated in table 7, eight out of fifteen variables are highly significant, which is

why they get considered for the final selection. Due to the consistency of this

evaluation within this thesis, the same number of adjectives is selected for both

brands, resulting in five per brand. Likewise, the procedure is the same for both

brands. Here, too, attention is paid to the metaphorical adverts used by Heinz

when selecting the variables. Fresh and natural refer to the product group of food

and, in addition, Heinz’ advertisements aim to reach those brand values which

becomes obvious due to the constant visual placement of fresh tomatoes. Fun

and exciting relate again to the riddle behind the used metaphor. Furthermore,

good performance constitutes an adjective describing the general power or rather

achievement of a brand. This results in a total of five adjectives for Heinz, which

35

will be analysed more closely. Modern and attractive packaging are excluded as these

adjectives are not in the focus of the chosen adverts of Heinz. Good style is not

selected either because the five adjectives chosen above are seen as more

suitable.

Table 8: Selected variables of Heinz (own research).

Table 8 indicates multiple significances like table 6. The grey highlighted table

fields indicate very and high significant values of the three compared data sets.

The Scheffé procedure reveals consistent significances for the second data set,

while the first compared groups lack only one significant value. This time,

however, there is one significant value in the comparison of treatment group 1

and treatment group 2.

4.3. Manipulation check

To evaluate whether the above effects did in fact originate from the independent

variable (treatment), a manipulation check was performed in the form of follow-

up questions. These were conducted immediately after the first and second run

of the questionnaire – each referring to a different brand (i.e. Heineken and

Heinz). All participants belonging to the same group answered similarly,

supporting the results of the field experiment. Thus, the manipulation check

worked successfully.

Specifically, most participants belonging to the first treatment group, which

were shown metaphorical adverts of low complexity, perceived the adverts as

creative, funny and smart. Both, the advertisements of Heineken and Heinz, caused

majorly a positive change of brand image since Heineken appeared to be fresher

and tastier and Heinz made a more natural and organic impression. Members of

treatment group 2, who were given metaphorical adverts of medium complexity,

answered similarly. Again, the adverts triggered positive feelings referring to the

inventive visualisation of the brand. Both products were considered more

appealing and appetising, whereby Heineken mostly occurred as lighter and fresher

and Heinz often got related to as being homemade and green. The last group, which

is the control group, got to see non-metaphorical adverts. Here, the answers

36

majorly referred to the adverts as plain, boring and common. Most often, no change

of brand image occurred since the adverts were seen as too passive and neutral.

37

5. Analysis

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate how different levels of complexity of

visual metaphor advertising influence brand image and, thus, to understand how

visual metaphors can allow marketers to enhance a firm’s brand image. Three

hypotheses were defined to address the research question, which investigates

how different levels of complexity of visual metaphor advertising influence the

brand image. The hypotheses were tested through quantitative data that was

collected by means of field experiments involving a total of 102 participants. All

respondents are students who were interviewed in their natural surroundings,

such as the library. The survey included two identical runs, each referring to a

different brand (i.e. Heineken and Heinz). The results of this field experiment,

as presented in chapter 4., serve as a basis for the subsequent analysis. In the

first step, the overarching hypothesis H1 and the first sub-hypothesis H1a are

evaluated. This is followed by the analysis of the second sub-hypothesis H1b.

5.1. Evaluation of hypotheses H1 and H1a

The first hypothesis H1 examines whether visual metaphors have a significant

positive impact on brand image. This hypothesis is considered as the

overarching hypothesis for the following two sub-hypotheses H1a and H1b,

which deepen the first assumption by focusing on the complexity of the

metaphor.

To test H1, two treatment groups (low and medium complexity metaphor) were

compared with a control group (no metaphor). The comparison of treatment

group 1 and the control group shows a significant difference for nine out of ten

values. The values even yield ten out of ten significant variables by contrasting

treatment group 2 and the control group. Thus, the first hypothesis is supported

by the results of the field experiment as expected based on the previous

literature review. The results implicate that metaphors possess the ability to

generate more interest than non-metaphorical adverts. Consequently, it is also

likely that they are more inclined to elicit positive emotions, as suggested by

Chang & Yen (2013). In terms of implementation, this means that metaphors

are indeed a useful tool for attracting people to a brand.

At this point, it is important to refer to the first sub-hypothesis H1a, which

focuses on visual metaphors of low complexity and states that these have a

significant positive impact on brand image. The decision whether to support or

falsify the hypothesis H1a is, therefore, based on the comparison of treatment

38

group 1 and the control group. Since this inspection is already included in the

analysis of the results of hypothesis H1, it can be said that by supporting the

overarching hypothesis H1, H1a is automatically supported as well.

In the following, the data are examined and discussed in detail – initially in

general and then based on the two brands used in the experiments (i.e. Heinz

and Heineken). With a closer look at the values, it becomes clear that all

adjectives except one have improved significantly after the participants have

seen the metaphorical advertising – regardless of the participants’ affiliation to

either treatment group 1 or 2, or Heineken or Heinz. Moreover, there seem to

be little effects following from the metaphors’ different level of complexity (low

vs. medium).

All values are in the highest significance range, suggesting that the difference

between the two treatment groups and the control group is high and relevant.

These results signify that visual marketing metaphors can have a positive effect

on the way participant perceive a particular brand. This positive effect might be

attributed to the riddle behind the metaphor as several answers of the follow-

up questions reveal. Participants of treatment group 1 and 2 describe the

advertisements as creative, clever and appealing, while participants belonging to the

control group use words like boring and common to express their opinion about

the given advertisements. This supports previous findings (e.g., Jeong 2008;

McQuarrie & Phillips 2005) implying that metaphors convince in a more elegant

and compelling way in comparison to non-metaphorical adverts. In addition,

this field experiment supports that metaphorical adverts are viewed as exciting,

as stated by Ang & Ching Lim (2006). Consequently, a higher performance

following from metaphorical adverts over direct and straightforward messages

can be supported by the results of this thesis.

Simultaneously, the outcome reveals the high potential of using metaphors in

the daily advertising business. Visual metaphors should therefore be used with

increased frequency. However, metaphors require the utmost care during the

inventive creation process (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). The metaphors core

value is the decryption of the metaphor itself. As explained in chapter 2, section

2.2.3., a metaphor consists of three elements: the source, the target and the

ground. In order for the viewer to solve the riddle behind the metaphor, it must

be created in a way that the connection between source and target becomes

apparent. If no obvious connection between these two elements is apparent to

the viewer, he/she remains confused, which in turn can lead to negative feelings

towards the brand. To avoid this reaction, it is firstly important to carefully select

39

the source, and secondly, to successfully imply that target and source share a

common meaningful element. Assuming that the points mentioned are taken

into account, metaphors can be used to establish a positive relationship between

the viewer and the communicator (Norrick 2003), as supported by the results

of this thesis.

When only focusing on the values of Heineken, it becomes clear that the highest

values are found for the adjectives appetising and exciting, as shown in table 6.

Heineken's two metaphorical adverts are designed to highlight the freshness and

coolness of the beer by associating it with a popsicle (see appendix B2). Several

participants emphasized how much the adverts triggered their desire for a cold

beer. As far as the participants are concerned, the presentation of the popsicle

has thereby strongly contributed to the temptation to drink a beer as it made

the beer seem more enticing and appetising. Thus, the interaction between source

(beer) and target (popsicle) has been successfully implemented.

The non-metaphorical advertisement, in contrast, contains only a simple image

of the beer and has not triggered such a need. According to the participants, the

advert was too common and too well-known to trigger any strong emotions. Fun is

the adjective with the third highest scores, followed closely by friendly (see table

6). Again, both adjectives can be traced back to the used metaphors based on

popsicles. Above all, the depiction of palm trees in the juxtaposition contributes

greatly to the fun factor and supports a friendly atmosphere. With still

outstanding values, fresh is the last adjective, which gets closer examined. The

word “fresh” is used literally in both metaphorical adverts, which was expected

to increase the variable’s value. The researchers are aware that this could have

positively influenced the impact of metaphors. Therefore, it is reassuring to see

that other adjectives have been more strongly influenced, which reinforces the

effect of visual metaphors on brand image.

The values of Heinz are shown in table 8. The adjectives with the highest

significances are fun and exciting. As already explained by Heineken's results, a

close relation to the used metaphors can be drawn. Heinz's metaphorical adverts

highlight tomatoes as the main ingredient in ketchup, claiming the natural

characteristic of ketchup (see appendices B1, B2). The juxtaposition implies that

the ketchup bottle grows out of the ground like tomatoes, by showing the

ketchup bottle surrounded by a tomato plant and within the fusion, several

tomato slices form the ketchup bottle. For both advertisements, most of the

participants subsequently stated how creative and unusual the visualisation of the

message is. In some cases, the adverts even made the participants grin or laugh.

40

Partly, this response is also due to the superior feeling of a few participants who

are convinced that ketchup is not purely natural. Still, the participants stated to

appreciate the creative adverts. This reaction suggests that here, too, the

interplay between source (ketchup) and target (fresh tomatoes) has succeeded.

The adjective fresh is closely related to the metaphorical adverts’ aim of

emphasizing the natural ingredient, and thus, the freshness. However, only

treatment group 2 shows a significant value for fresh (see table 8). A possible

reason for this result is the visualisation of several tomato slices within the

fusion, which are displayed relatively large in comparison to the juxtaposition,

where only small tomatoes are displayed. Good performance has also achieved

highly significant values, as shown in table 8. According to the participants,

these values can be attributed to the recognition of the overall appealing and

creative advertising. Lastly, the attitude of associating ketchup with unhealthy

ingredients may be a possible reason why the adjective natural shows lower

values in comparison to the other selected adjectives. Nevertheless, natural has

achieved significantly higher scores within the treatment groups than in the

control group. This may be due to the rather simple non-metaphorical advert

of Heinz, which shows the ketchup bottle in front of a white background and,

thus, does not highlight tomatoes as natural ingredients in any way.

In summary, the deeper analysis supports hypothesis H1 and the first sub-

hypothesis H1a. The results imply that metaphorical advertisements can indeed

have a positive impact on the consumer perception of brand image. Likewise,

this is supported in terms of low complexity metaphorical adverts.

5.2. Evaluation of hypothesis H1b

The second sub-hypothesis H1b states that visual metaphors of medium

complexity have a significant more positive impact on brand image than visual

metaphors of low complexity. This assumption digs deeper into the theoretical

basis of metaphors since it refers to the two selected levels of complexity. The

different levels of complexity have been defined and categorised based on

Forceville (2008) and van Mulken et al. (2014). The authors assumed a

meaningful significance to reveal, premised on the underlying theory (see

chapter 2, sections 2.2., 2.4.; e.g., Huhmann & Albinsson 2012; McQuarrie &

Phillips 2005). The riddle behind the metaphor becomes harder to solve as the

level of complexity rises (McQuarrie & Phillips 2005). When the so-called

tipping point is reached, the recipient is not any longer able to solve the riddle

due to the high degree of difficulty that outweighs his/her comprehension (van

41

Mulken et al. 2014). Hence, in this thesis, low and medium complexities of

metaphors are compared. The focus is thereby set on juxtapositions and fusions,

as explained in chapter 2, section 2.4. As a result, the assumption of a significant

difference between treatment group 1 and 2 developed. Therefore, the

experiment holds the purpose of finding out, if there is a disparity between

juxtaposition and fusion in terms of their impact on brand image.

The experimental results suggest that hypothesis H1b cannot be supported. This

result is based on the outcomes of the MANOVA (see table 6 and 8), which

comprises nine out of ten variables with no statistical significance. Only one

variable (fresh, see table 8) shows a significance. However, this single significant

result appears to be less meaningful in comparison to the other nine not

significant variables. The significance for the adjective fresh can be justified by

the visualisation of tomatoes within the adverts from Heinz, as explained above.

Furthermore, the disproof of the hypothesis is additionally substantiated by the

answers of the follow-up questions, which are very consistent.

The lacking support for sub-hypothesis H1b contrasts the findings reported in

previous studies (see chapter 2, sections 2.2., 2.4.; e.g., Forceville 2008; van

Mulken et al. 2014). Specifically, theory suggests that the positive feelings

towards a metaphorical advert should increase with the levels of complexity

until a certain tipping point is reached (van Mulken et al. 2014). However, the

underlying experiment indicates that the participants evaluated both types of

metaphors as equal, as derived from the significance values and the answers of

the follow-up questions. Therefore, it becomes clear that both levels of

complexity are recognized by the participants as similar regarding their

attractiveness and impact. Possible reasons for this outcome are explained in

detail in the subsequent paragraphs.

First, the answers of the follow-up questions of the brands are analysed to show

the lack of significant differences between the advertisement including a

juxtaposition (metaphor of low complexity) and the advert using a fusion

(metaphor of medium complexity). Heineken is the first brand to be analysed,

followed by Heinz. Before the experiment, several recipients of treatment group

1 had a negative or just neutral opinion of Heineken and changed their mind to

the positive after seeing the juxtaposition, which reminded them of summer and

a refreshing feeling. This change also occurred within treatment group 2, where

participants were shown a fusion. When looking at Heinz, a similar outcome is

determined. Both juxtaposition and fusion influenced the participants in the

same way. The majority changed their opinion to the positive due to the natural

42

and funny attributes of the advertisement. However, among the participants

were also people who felt fooled after having seen the advert since they knew

that Heinz is not only made of tomatoes. Hence, they did not change their

opinion. To sum this up, the follow-up questions of both brands regarding

juxtaposition and fusion result in very similar answers, thus, no significant

differences between the levels of complexity.

Two variables (appetising for Heineken and natural for Heinz) even reveal a higher

value for treatment group 1 than treatment group 2. In addition, several answers

of the follow-up questions imply that the juxtaposition of Heineken was

recognized as being more attractive than the fusion. The literature review,

however, assumes more positive feelings towards the fusion since the solution

of the riddle requires more competence and thus flatters the viewer more (e.g.,

Forceville 2008; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; van Mulken et al. 2014). More

precisely, if a riddle is simple to solve, the recipient feels less challenged and,

thus, less satisfied after solving the riddle in comparison to successfully figuring

out a riddle of higher complexity (van Mulken et al. 2014). Therefore, the

fusions of the advertisements were expected to hold a higher increase of positive

opinions towards the brand. Possible causes for the appearance of higher values

in treatment group 1 concern the style of the shown advertisements (see

appendices B1, B2). More precisely, the selected juxtapositions and fusions hold

stylistic similarities in terms of the adverts’ colours and topics. Thus, the

deficiency of significant differences means that there are no preferences towards

one level of complexity. This explains small amplitudes in both directions,

towards more positive results of treatment group 1 or 2. To illustrate this, the

similarities will be explained in the following, ordered by brand.

For Heineken, it is the different background and presentation of the

advertisements that could have prevented a significant more positive effect of

the fusion. To clarify, the fusion is presented with a plain green background,

whereby the juxtaposition uses palm trees and different shades of green and

yellow. This more colourful background of the juxtaposition was recognized as

being more attractive than the plain green one, which constitutes a limitation of

this experiment (see section 6.3.). Regarding Heinz, the advertisements were not

recognized as being very different either. Several participants replied similarly to

the follow-up questions for the juxtaposition and the fusion in terms of the style

of the shown advertisements. The similarity of these two adverts is further

supported as they address the same issue – tomatoes as natural ingredients.

43

Thus, the selection of advertisements might have supported the similar

responses to the two different levels of complexity.

In a nutshell, the field experiment resulted in the support of hypotheses H1 and

H1a, but hypothesis H1b was not supported. Thus, the first two conjectures

confirm previous findings, while the last assumption contrasts preceding

studies. Possible explanations were discussed to interpret the outcomes based

on the empirical results and the underlying theories.

The results of this study imply the possible success of correctly implemented

visual metaphors. They suggest that visual metaphors can indeed positively

change the perception of a brand. Metaphors are attributed to increase the

advert’s overall impact (Grey 2000). In addition, the results show that

metaphors enhance the recipient's receptivity to multiple, positive inferences

regarding the brand being advertised. This knowledge should be used, by

purposefully using visual metaphors to improve the image of a brand.

The favourable attitude change caused by a visual metaphor is closely linked to

the subjective comprehension of an advertisement (Mick 1992). With regard to

the implementation, it should therefore be noted that the precondition for the

viewer to experience pleasure is his/her comprehension of the metaphor (van

Mulken et al. 2014). If this circumstance is given, it confers the advert a higher

degree of persuasiveness (van Mulken et al. 2014). As a result, it is wise not to

make the metaphor too complex, and thereby, too difficult to comprehend.

Consequently, the focus of the metaphor creation should lie on the recipients’

comprehension, since the underlying experiment indicates no impact of the

metaphor’s complexity.

44

6. Conclusion

This final chapter summarises the underlying thesis by providing a brief

theoretical reflection about the purpose, method and results of the applied field

experiment. Moreover, managerial implications comprise advices for marketers

regarding the use of visual metaphors within print advertising. This thesis

concludes with outlining limitations and future research recommendations.

6.1. Theoretical reflection

The aim of this thesis was to investigate the impact of visual metaphor

advertising on brand image by focusing on the metaphor’s different levels of

complexity. The focus is hereby set on visual metaphors with low and medium

complexity. Complexity refers to the spatial distribution of the pictorial

elements within a metaphorical advertisement and the increasing necessary time

for the process of inferring to interpret the visual metaphor appropriately

(Forceville 2008; van Mulken et al. 2014).

Previous studies have shown that the customer’s attention, receptivity,

involvement and emotional reaction can get more intensively affected by a

metaphorical advert than by a non-metaphorical advert (Ang & Ching Lim 2006;

Mothersbaugh et al. 2002; McQuarrie & Mick 2003; McQuarrie & Phillips 2005;

Phillips 1997; Phillips & McQuarrie 2009; Toncar & Munch 2001). However, to

the authors’ knowledge, the impact of metaphorical advertisements on brand

image has not yet been investigated. This is surprising because the marketing

activities of a company should primarily aim to positively influence the

consumer’s perception and attitudes towards the brand and, thus, the brand

image. Hence, this thesis addresses this knowledge gap. The findings will help

marketers to understand, if and how visual metaphors can allow them to

enhance a company’s brand image.

To investigate the impact of visual metaphors on brand image, a quantitative

research design has been chosen. Thereby, a field experiment with two

treatment groups (i.e. low and medium complex metaphorical adverts) and one

control group (i.e. non-metaphorical adverts) served as the base. In total, 102

people participated in the study. Each participant got tested on only one

treatment and got then compared to those exposed to the other treatments. The

empirical results suggest that visual metaphors can have a positive impact on

the consumer’s perception of a brand. This finding indicates that the riddle

behind the metaphor can make a positive impression for the viewer of the

45

advertisements, and thus enables marketers to establish a positive relationship

between the communicator and the viewer (Berlyne 1974; Huhmann &

Albinsson 2012; McQuarrie & Mick 1999; Norrick 2003; van Mulken et al.

2014).

Based on the comprehensive literature review, it was assumed that the different

complexity levels of the metaphor reveal a significant difference regarding their

impact on the participants’ brand image (see e.g., Huhmann & Albinsson 2012;

McQuarrie & Phillips 2005; van Mulken et al. 2014). The results of this study,

however, do not support the findings of these previous studies. In fact, the

experiment results suggest that the metaphor’s different level of complexity (low

vs. medium) hardly differ in their impact. This finding implies that the level of

a metaphor’s complexity might not in all cases play a decisive role in terms of

its influence on brand image. Instead, the results suggest that the key point to

achieve a positive evaluation of the brand is the metaphorical understanding of

the riddle. In sum, the results of this thesis highlight that the use of visual

metaphors can have positive effects for the underlying company, if

implemented correctly (Chang & Yen 2013; Grey 2000; McQuarrie & Phillips

2005; Norrick 2003).

6.2. Managerial implications

The findings of this thesis provide several practical implications, especially in

helping marketers by using marketing metaphors to establish a positive bond

between the communicating brand and the observer.

Firstly, the comparison of the two levels of complexity (i.e. low vs. medium

complexity) resulted in no significant difference, which shifts the focus of the

metaphor creation to the recipients’ comprehension. Consequently, marketers

should optimize the comprehension of the riddle instead of focusing on the

ultimate level of complexity to trigger the most positive reaction.

Second, the results of this thesis indicate how crucial the riddle of the metaphor

is for a successful implementation. When using marketing metaphors, it is

therefore important to ensure that the interplay between target and source is

understandable. To achieve this, marketers should carefully select the object

whose attributes are transferred to the advertised product. Once a good

selection has been made, it is then necessary to successfully establish a clear link

between the advertised product and the source. It should be apparent to the

viewer (i.e. the consumer) that these two elements share at least one feature

46

attribute. If this circumstance is given, it confers the advert a higher degree of

persuasiveness, and, thus, leads to a better evaluation of the advertised brand.

Thirdly, this thesis indicates that the mere fact that the viewer successfully

solved the riddle has already a positive effect on the brand. Hence, the

favourable attitude change triggered by a visual metaphor is closely linked to the

subjective comprehension of the metaphorical advert. With regard to the

implementation, it should therefore be noted that the precondition for the

viewer to experience pleasure is his/her comprehension of the metaphor.

Marketers should hence focus on the clarity and coherence of the riddle. The

complexity level of the riddle can thereby be adapted by the marketers, for

example, based on the educational level, of the underlying target group.

Overall, the findings of this thesis support a higher performance resulting from

metaphorical adverts over direct and straightforward messages and, thus, draws

attention to the potential of using visual metaphors in the daily advertising

business. Consequently, visual metaphors should therefore be used with

increased frequency to enhance the impact of print advertising.

6.3. Limitations and future research recommendations

Although this thesis was planned and carried out with care, it is subject to some

limitations, which are briefly described here. These limitations open up new

avenues for future research which are discussed in this section.

Firstly, a critical reflection is required concerning the sample of the underlying

field experiment. Strictly speaking, no random selection has been carried out

since the selection of participants comprises only students of the Karlstad

university. Nevertheless, the participants represent typical consumers of these

brands and were queried in their natural surroundings. Thus, further research

could apply the same procedure to a different sample and/or without a

geographical restriction.

The second limitation concerns the application of the experiment. Participants

had to undergo two identical runs of the questionnaire due to the two queried

brands. The same procedure might have led to a research design that was to a

certain extent obvious to the respondents. This may have enabled the

participants to guess which results the researchers were seeking for (i.e. learning

effect). In addition, a psychic phenomenon may have occurred, which can be

described as a prompting character (Hilgert et al. 2016). This refers to the

researchers’ presence which unintentionally might have asked for something

47

specific. Hence, the respondents may have had the intention to help the

researchers by answering in a way they assumed to be helpful (Hilgert et al.

2016). However, to prevent such behaviour or researchers’ bias, a control group

has been used to assure valid results. In addition, no hints were given away, and

after the explanation of the questionnaire, the researchers kept a proper

distance.

In addition, the selection of brands and, thus, advertisements require critical

reflection. As explained in section 5.2., possible reasons for the lack of the

impact’s difference between low and medium complex metaphors might be

related with the style of the selected advertisements. The brands including their

advertisements, however, were carefully chosen based on well-established

criteria (see section 2.4.). An interesting future study could show the visualised

metaphor within an advert by excluding the background and just present the

pure visual metaphor. Thereby, outer factors, like the style or headings of the

advert, could be eliminated. This could be done by using a lab experimental

design.

Moreover, one of the selected brands advertises an alcoholic drink (i.e. beer).

This could lead to the assumption that some of the participants, who

intentionally avoid alcoholic beverages, might not have been able to answer the

questions accordingly. However, for the underlying experiment this fact might

have been of minor importance. To illustrate this, the few interviewed students

who were not beer drinker, were still able to answer the questionnaire in an

appropriate way since they knew Heineken and did not need to be consumers

to answer questions referring to the brand image appropriately. However, this

thesis focused only on two well-known brands in the food industry. Therefore,

it is necessary to further investigate the impact of visual metaphors on other

product categories and industries. In addition, future studies are required that

concentrate on new, less well-known brands to see if there are differences

regarding their impact.

Finally, future research recommendations include the enhanced research on

metaphors’ complexity levels, since there are few previous studies regarding this

topic and, additionally, this thesis contrasts theory concerning those levels and

their different impacts.

48

References

Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. New York: The Free Press.

Allman, H. F., Fenik, A. P., Hewett, K. & Morgan, F. N. (2016). Brand Image Evaluations: The Interactive Roles of Country of Manufacture, Brand Concept, and Vertical Line Extension Type. Journal of International Marketing, 24(2), 40–61.

Amankwaa, L. (2016). Creating Protocols for Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 23(3), 121–127.

Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., Sarshar, M. & Newton, R. (2002). Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the Built Environment: Application of “mixed” Research Approach. Work Study, 51(1), 17–31.

Ang, S. H. & Ching Lim, E. A. (2006). The Influence of Metaphors and Product Type on Brand Personality Perceptions and Attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 35(2), 39–53.

Ashley, A. L. (2004). Figurative Language Effects on the Processing of Persuasive Discourse. University of Memphis.

Baechler, R. & Seiler, G. (2016). Complexity, Isolation, and Variation. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Batey, M. (2014). Creating Meaningful Brands: How Brands Evolve from Labels on Products to Icons of Meaning. In Kompella, K. (ed.) The Definite Book of Branding. California: SAGE Publications, 22–44.

Berlyne, D. (1974). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics. New York: University of Illinois Press.

Bosman, J. & Hagendoorn, L. (1991). Effects of Literal and Metaphorical Persuasive Messages. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 6(4), 271–292.

Bruhn, M. (2009). Mediawerbung. In Bruhn, M., Esch, F.-R. & Langner, T. (eds.) Handbuch Kommunikation. Grundlagen – Innovative Ansätze – Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Gabler, 45–66.

Bulmer, S. L. & Buchanan-Oliver, M. (2004). Meaningless or Meaningful? Interpretation and Intentionality in Post-Modern Communication. Journal of Marketing Communication, 10(1), 1–15.

Burke, K. (1945). A Grammar of Motives. New York: Salem Press Encyclopedia of Literature.

Capelli, S. & Jolibert, A. (2009). Metaphor’s Validity in Marketing Research. Psychology & Marketing, 26(12), 1079–1090.

Carver, R. P. (1978). The Case Against Statistical Significance Testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48(3), 378–399.

Chang, C-T. & Yen, C-T. (2013). Missing Ingredients in Metaphor Advertising: the Right Formula of Metaphor Type, Product Type and Need for Cognition. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55–65.

49

Charness, G., Gneezy, U. & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental Methods: Between-subject and Within-subject Design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1(81), 1–8.

Chen, C.-C., Chen, P.-K. & Huang, C.-E. (2012). Brands and Consumer Behavior. Social Behaviour and Personality, 40(1), 105–114.

Connelly, L. M. (2016). Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research. MEDSURG Nursing, 25(6), 435–436.

Corbett, E. P. J. (1965). Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cornelissen, J. P. (2003). Metaphor as a Method in the Domain of Marketing. Psychology & Marketing, 20(3), 209–225.

Cornelissen, J. P. & Kafouros, M. (2008). Metaphors and Theory Building in Organization Theory: What Determines the Impact of a Metaphor on Theory? British Journal of Management, 4(19), 365–379.

Del Río, B., Vázquez, R. & Iglesias, V. (2001). The Effects of Brand Associations on Consumer Response. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(5), 410–425.

Dennis, M. L. (1990). Assessing the Validity of Randomized Field Experiments: An Example of Drug Abuse Treatment Research. Center for Social Research and Policy Analysis- Research Triangle Institute Evaluation Review, 14(4), 347–373.

DeRosia, E. D. (2008). Rediscovering Theory: Integrating Ancient Hypotheses and Modern Empirical Evidence of the Audience-Response Effects of Rhetorical Figures. In Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (eds.) Go Figure: New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 21–34.

Dobni, D. & Zinkhan, G. M. (1990). In Search of Brand Image: A Foundation Analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 17(1), 110–119.

Esch, F.-R. (Ed.) (2005). Moderne Markenführung. Grundlagen - Innovative Ansätze - Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

Esch, F.-R., Langner, T. & Rempel, J. E. (2005a). Ansätze zur Erfassung und Entwicklung von Markenidentität. In Esch, F.-R. (ed.) Moderne Markenführung. Grundlagen - Innovative Ansätze - Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, 103–130.

Esch, F.-R., Wicke, A. & Rempel, J. E. (2005b). Herausforderungen und Aufgaben des Markenmanagements. In Esch, F.-R. (ed.) Moderne Markenführung. Grundlagen - Innovative Ansätze - Praktische Umsetzungen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, 3–55.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A. & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical Power Analyses Using G*Power 3.1: Tests for Correlation and Regression Analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.

Forceville, C. (2008). Pictorial and multimodal metaphor in commercials. In McQuarrie, B. & Phillips, J. (eds.) Go Figure! New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric. Armonk N.Y.: Routledge, 272–310.

Gkiouzepas, L. & Hogg, M. K. (2011). Articulating a new framework for visual metaphors in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 103–120.

Gratzer, K. & Tesfaye, B. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility – a case study on private and public corporations in Sweden. Stockholm: South Stockholm University.

50

Grey, W. (2000). Metaphor and Meaning. Minerva: An Internet Journal of Philosophy, 4, 1–7.

Hansen, F. & Christensen, L. B. (2003). Branding and Advertising. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur Press.

Hilgert, L., Kroh, M. & Richter, D. (2016). The Effect of face-to-face Interviewing on Personality Measurement. Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 133–136.

Hitchon, J. (1991). Effects of Metaphoric vs. Literal Headlines on Advertising Persuasion. Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 752–753.

Hoeken, H., Swanepoel, P., Saal, E. & Jansen, C. J. M. (2009). Using Message Form to Stimulate Conversations: The Case of Tropes. Communication Theory, 19(1), 49–65.

Huhmann, B. A. & Albinsson, P. A. (2012). Does Rhetoric Impact Advertising Effectiveness with Liking Controlled? European Journal of Marketing, 46(11/12), 1476–1500.

Hunt, K. A. & Keaveney, S. M. (1994). A Process Model of the Effects of Price Promotions and Brand Image. Psychology & Marketing, 11(6), 511–532.

Jeong, S.-H. (2008). Visual Metaphor in Advertising: Is the Persuasive Effect Attributable to Visual Argumentation or Metaphorical Rhetoric? Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(1), 59–73.

Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.

Kim, J., Baek, Y. & Choi, Y. H. (2012). The Structural Effects of Metaphor-elicited Cognitive and Affective Elaboration Levels on Attitude toward the Ad. Journal of Advertising, 41(2), 77–96.

Kisielius, J. & Sternthal, B. (1986). Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(4), 418–431.

Korstjens, I. & Moser, A. (2017). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 1–5.

Kotler, P. & Keller, K. L. (2012). Marketing Management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214–222.

Lagerwerf, L. & Meijers, A. (2008). Openness in Metaphorical and Straightforward Advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 37(2), 19–30.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lee, G. C. & Leh, F. C. Y. (2011). Dimensions of Customer-Based Brand Equity: A Study on Malaysian Brands. Journal of Marketing Research and Case Studies,, 1–10.

Low, G. S. & Lamb Jr., C. W. (2000). The Measurement and Dimensionality of Brand Associations. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(6), 350–370.

Lutz, K. A. & Lutz, R. J. (1977). Effects of Interactive Imagery on Learning: Application to Advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 493–498.

51

McQuarrie, E. F. & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of Rhetoric in Advertising Language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(4), 424–438.

McQuarrie, E. F. & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual Rhetoric in Advertising: Text-Interpretive, Experimental, and Reader-Response Analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(1), 37–54.

McQuarrie, E. F. & Mick, D. G. (2003). Visual and Verbal Rhetorical Figures under Directed Processing versus Incidental Exposure to Advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 579–587.

McQuarrie, E. F. & Mick, D. G. (2009). A Laboratory Study of the Effect of Verbal Versus Repetition when Consumers are not Directed to Process Advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 287-31.

McQuarrie, E. F. & Phillips, B. J. (2005). Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7–20.

Meenaghan, T. (1995). The Role of Advertising in Brand Image Development. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 4(4), 23–34.

Mick, D. G. (1992). Levels of Subjective Comprehension in Advertising Processing and Their Relations to Ad Perceptions, Attitudes, and Memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 411-424.

Miletsky, J. I. & Smith, G. (2009). Perspectives on Branding. Boston: Course PTR.

Morgan, S. E. & Reichert, T. (1999). The Message is in the Metaphor: Assessing the Comprehension of Metaphors in Advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 1–12.

Morrison, B. J. & Dainoff, M. J. (1972). Advertisement Complexity and Looking Time. Journal of Marketing Research, 9(4), 396–400.

Mothersbaugh, D., Huhmann, B. & Franke, G. (2002). Combinatory and Separative Effects of Rhetorical Figures on Consumers’ Effort and Focus in Ad Processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 589–602.

Nandan, S. (2004). An Exploration of the Brand Identity–Brand Image Linkage: A Communications Perspective. Brand Management, 12(4), 264–278.

Nelson, M. R. & Hitchon, J. C. (1995). Theory of Synesthesia Applied to Persuasion in Print Advertising Headlines. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 72(2), 346–360.

Newman, I. & Benz, C. R. (1998). Qualitative-Quantitative Research Methodology: Exploring the Interactive Continuum. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issues in Conversational Joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(9), 1333–1359.

Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J. & MacInnis, D. J. (1986). Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management. Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 135–145.

Park, H.-J. & Rabolt, N. J. (2009). Cultural Value, Consumption Value, and Global Brand Image: A Cross-National Study. Psychology & Marketing, 26(8), 714–735.

52

Phillips, B. J. (1997). Thinking Into It: Consumer Interpretation of Complex Advertising Images. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 77–87.

Phillips, B. J. (2000). The Impact of Verbal Anchoring on Consumer Response to Image Ads. Journal of Advertising, 29(1), 15–24.

Phillips, B. J. (2003). Understanding Visual Metaphor in Advertising. In Scott, L. M. & Batra, R. (eds.) Persuasive Imagery: A Consumer Response Perspective. Mahwah, NF: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (2002). The Development, Change, and Transformation of Rhetorical Style in Magazine Advertisements 1954–1999. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 1–13.

Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (2009). Impact of Advertising Metaphor on Consumer Belief. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 49–61.

Pieters, R. & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention Capture and Transfer in Advertising: Brand, Pictorial, and Text-Size Effects. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 36–50.

Revilla, M., Saris, W. & Krosnick, J. (2014). Choosing the Number of Categories in Agree-Disagree Scales. Sociological Methods & Research, 43(1), 73–97.

Roehm, M. L. & Sternthal, B. (2001). The Moderating Effect of Knowledge and Resources on the Persuasive impact of Analogies. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(2), 257–272.

Sakr, A. (2016). The Effect of Visual Metaphor on Advertising Response: an Integrative Framework. Birmingham: Aston University.

Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H. & Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research. Quality & Quantity, 36(1), 43–53.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students. 6th edition. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Savin, N. E. (1980). The Bonferroni and the Scheffé Multiple Comparison Procedures. Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 255–273.

Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in Advertising: The need for a Theory of Visual Rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 252–273.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Shan, C., Mingyang, Y. & Xue, K. (2017). Effects of Metaphor Advertising on Brand Extension Evaluation: Construal Level as Mediator. Social Behavior & Personality: an international journal, 45(6), 967–985.

Shank, M. D. & Langmeyer, L. (1993). Does Personality Influence Brand Image? The Journal of Psychology, 128(2), 157–164.

Sopory, P. (2008). Metaphor and Intra-Attitudinal Structural Coherence. Communication Studies, 59(2), 164–181.

53

Stathakopoulos, V., Theodorakis, I. G. & Mastoridou, E. (2008). Visual and Verbal Rhetoric in Advertising: The Case of Resonance. International Journal of Advertising, 27(4), 629–658.

Stern, B. B. (1990). Beauty and Joy in Metaphorical Advertising: The Poetic Dimension. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 71–77.

Till, B. D., Baack, D. & Waterman, B. (2011). Strategic Brand Association Maps: Developing Brand Insight. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 20(2), 92–100.

Todorov, V. & Filzmoser, P. (2010). Robust Statistic for the One-way MANOVA. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 54(1), 37–48.

Toncar, M. & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer Responses to Tropes in Print Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55–65.

van Mulken, M., van Hooft, A. & Nederstigt, U. (2014). Finding the Tipping Point: Visual Metaphor and Conceptual Complexity in Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 333–343.

van Reijmersdal, E. A., Neijens, P. C. & Smit, E. G. (2007). Effects of Television Brand Placement on Brand Image. Psychology & Marketing, 24(5), 403–420.

Vandebosch, H. (2008). Captive Population. In Given, L. M. (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles, London: SAGE Publications.

Wänke, M., Herrman, A. & Schaffner, D. (2007). Brand Name Influence on Brand Perception. Psychology & Marketing, 24(1), 1–24.

Yu, C. (2009). Metaphors in Food Advertising Slogans. Kristianstad: Kristianstad University College.

Zaltman, G. & Coulter, R. H. (1995). Seeing the Voice of the Customer: Metaphor-Based Advertising Research. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(4), 35–51.

Zhou, L., Yang, Z. & Hui, M. K. (2010). Non-local or Local Brands? A Multi-level Investigation into Confidence in Brand Origin Identification and its Strategic Implications. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(2), 202–218.

Zymner, R. (1993). Ein fremdes Wort: Zur Theorie der Metapher. Zeitschrift für Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft, 25, 3–33.

54

Appendix

Appendix A: Questionnaire

55

56

– Advertisement treatment –

– Follow-up questions –

57

58

– Advertisement treatment –

59

– Follow-up questions –

60

Appendix B1: Treatment group 1 - ads with metaphors of low complexity

Heineken:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f3/36/7d/f3367dc862422a35824d4bb644be52e8.jpg

Heinz Ketchup:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/04/98/cd/0498cdd66d92739bbe7b9fac5a5646b2.jpg

61

Appendix B2: Treatment group 2 - ads with metaphors of medium complexity

Heineken:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b9/6d/5f/b96d5f80c4df3426b4e6294380d6e325.jpg + customisation of the lettering ”be fresh” from another Heineken advertisement

Heinz Ketchup:

https://wba-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Heinz-European-ad.jpg

62

Appendix B3: Control group - non-metaphorical ads

Heineken:

https://naotw-pd.s3.amazonaws.com/nairo_aotw.jpg

Heinz Ketchup:

https://themarketingagenda.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/heinz-header-2.png?w=1200