Content Analysis as a Predictive Methodology: Recall,

Readership and Evaluations of Business-to-Business Print
Advertising
John Narrarato and Kimberley A Neuendorf
Journal of Advertising Research
Vol. 37, No. 2, March/April 1997
 
 

   Title: Content Analysis as a Predictive Methodology: Recall, Readership and Evaluations of

Business-to-Business Print Advertising
   Author(s): John Narrarato and Kimberley A Neuendorf
   Source: Journal of Advertising Research
   Issue: Vol. 37, No. 2, March/April 1997
 

Content Analysis as a Predictive Methodology: Recall,

Readership, and Evaluations of Business-to-Business Print
Advertising

John L. Naccarato
Liggett-Stashower, Inc., USA
and
Kimberly A. Neuendorf
Cleveland State University, USA

This article calls for the application of content analytic techniques to advertising as a method of predicting advertising
effectiveness. A comprehensive empirical investigation examines the effect of both form variables (e.g., headline size, use of
color, illustration placement) and content variables (e.g., subject matter, use of humor, use of fear appeals) on recall,
readership, and evaluations in the context of business-to-business print advertising. The prediction of four different outcome
variables is successful, with total variance accounted for ranging from 12 percent to 59 percent. Significant predictors vary
substantially across the dependent indicators, indicating that different advertisement characteristics are likely to be needed to
achieve various advertiser goals.

The ultimate goal of advertising is sales. As the dean of advertising David Ogilvy notes: 'I do not regard advertising as
entertainment or an art form, but as a medium of information. When I write an advertisement, I don't want you to tell me that
you find it "creative". I want you to find it so interesting that you buy the product' (Ogilvy, 1983).

ADVERTISING SUCCESS

The direct linking of sales to advertising exposure is rarely validated in practice. Even the older, classic models of advertising
and marketing (e.g., 'DAGMAR') have acknowledged the role of intermediary processes and states (Olshavksky, 1994),
including but not limited to knowledge, [positive] affect, and behavioral intention (cf., Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980).
Correspondingly, and for reasons of practicality and comparability of criteria, advertising readership studies are viewed as the
basic tool for assessing advertising effectiveness.

Readership is probably the most frequently used indicator of advertising effectiveness. Unlike inquiry reports-which count how
many readers request additional information and are a mainstay of business-to-business advertising-readership studies ask a
Downloaded from warc.com
2 

 
 

representative sample of respondents whether or not they saw the advertisement, if they read it, and perhaps how much of the
advertisement they remember seeing. Sometimes referred to as recognition or recall studies1, readership studies have
traditionally been considered to be a valid measure of whether or not the advertiser's message has reached the receivers.

Readership studies have been conducted on a continuing basis for print media since the 1920s (Hendon, 1973). There are a
number of independent organizations conducting readership studies (e.g., Starch, Ad-Q, Ad-Chart, and Harvey), plus a host of
publisher-sponsored readership services seeking to provide advertisers with information about advertising placement.
However, readership studies have come under certain criticisms in the past two decades (Edmonston, 1995; Johnson, 1982;
Rothschild, 1987; Schaefer, 1989; Sekely and Blakney, 1994; Whipple and McManamon, 1992; Wood, 1989). Additionally,
some industry observers have noted the paucity of syndicated readership research for industrial or business-to-business
advertising (Morelli, 1986).

What makes a consumer read a given advertisement? An early Ogilvy pronouncement declared that 'Every advertisement
must tell the whole sales story ... Every word in the copy must count' (Ogilvy, 1986). Images, color, and layout factors are also
of great concern in the industry (Roman and Maas, 1992). A careful examination of advertising content may shed light on the
'sales story'. The research exemplar reported here attempts to develop a practical schema applicable to a range of
advertisement types, focusing on providing a linking mechanism between the production of an advertisement and its positive
reception by consumers. The chosen exemplar examines business-to-business advertising in a trade magazine.

Advertisement characteristics and advertising success

The question of which advertisement characteristics lead to greater recall, readership, and other goals of advertising is
understudied. Against the advice of Ogilvy and others, agencies often rely on creative competitions to index the content and
persuasive potential of their advertisements, but results of these competitions may bear little relationship to the success of the
advertisement, since creative judges are primarily the advertisers' professional peers and not representative of the ranks of the
message targets. Nevertheless, the 'conventional wisdom' concerning successful advertisement creation is a powerful and
often highly valid force (Ogilvy, 1983; Roman and Maas, 1992; Schultz, Tannenbaum, and Allison, 1996).

While it may seem manifestly beneficial to designers of advertising to know what gets the reader's attention, the bulk of such
research has been left in the hands of academics (e.g., Laskey, Fox, and Crask, 1994; Tellis, 1994). This research frequently
takes the form of an experiment or field experiment (Gelb, Hong, and Zinkhan, 1985), manipulating such variables as source
credibility, the use of an appeal such -is humor, or the presence of visual imagery or music. Another, type of research has
been the emergent single-source study, which links a household's potential advertising exposure to actual household buying
behavior (Maloney, 1994; Tellis, 1994).

The typical experimental investigation deals with one variable in isolation from others and tests fairly abstract outcomes (e.g.,
positive affect toward a spokesperson in the advertisement) on non-representative samples. The average single-source study
fails to establish audience exposure to an advertisement and does not even consider advertisement characteristics. Other,
complementary studies are needed to provide practicality of prediction and generalization. Research studies that probe
naturally occurring variations in message characteristics include those that content analyze.

Content analysis as a descriptive and predictive tool

Content analysis may be defined as the systematic, objective 2, quantitative analysis of message characteristics. The

Downloaded from warc.com

3 

 
 

technique was initiated by communication, sociology, and journalism scholars some 50 years ago (Berelson, 1952) and has
gained validation as a research tool in thousands of studies examining messages ranging from television beer commercials to
news items on the Greenhouse Effect to published Republican and Democratic Party platforms (Fan, 1988; Krippendorff,
1980; Weber, 1990). There has been a recognition of the difference between form variables, those that are linked to the
formal features of the medium and cannot endure transfer to another media modality, and content or substance variables,
those that may exist independent of the medium3 (Berelson, 1952; Holbrook and Lehmann, 1980; Huston and Wright, 1983).

Most prior examinations of advertising content have analyzed the compositional form variables of print advertisements, e.g.,
characteristics of headlines, graphics, and copy, attempting to develop formulas for successful print advertisements4. While
there is near-consensus that use of color and large advertisement size are positive contributors to readership (Hanssens and
Weitz, 1980; Marney, 1985; Standen, 1989; Twedt, 1952; VandenBergh and Reid, 1980), the evidence about other form
variables is decidedly mixed (Assael, Kofron, and Burgi, 1967; Reid, Rotfeld, and Barnes, 1984).

Various content variables such as the subject of the advertisement or the approach to the subject (e.g., use of humor, fear,
puffery, celebrity endorsement, message complexity) have been analyzed, and the conclusions presented are also quite
ambiguous (Aaker and Norris, 1982; Chamblee et al., 1993; Holman and Hecker, 1983). For example, the typical study on the
use of humor in advertising concludes that 'sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't' (Gelb and Pickett, 1983; Madden and
Weinberger, 1984; Markiewicz, 1974). When form and content variables are directly compared, the more mechanical form
variables prove to be much more important predictors of readership and recall (e.g., Holbrook and Lehmann, 1980).
Importantly, the content/style variables that have been most often studied in the realm of consumer advertising do not
generally apply to industrial or business-to-business advertisements (e.g., celebrity endorser, sex appeals).

Most extant content-analytic studies have neglected a comprehensive coverage of potential important predictive variables,
opting instead to look at just one or a handful of variable(s)'.5 Those studies that have made the attempt at
comprehensiveness warrant mention.

Holbrook and Lehmann (1980) tapped 48 message and mechanical variables, predicting over 30 percent of the variance in
Starch readership scores for Newsweck and Sports illustrated. Their most important predictors included product class and the
vague construct, 'creativity'. A major contribution of this study was its clear finding that both form and content factors are
important in producing recall and readership.

The most comprehensive projects to date are studies of television commercials. Stewart and Furse (1986) developed a
151item content-analysis scheme, which they related to measures of recall, comprehension, and persuasiveness for 1,059
spots. They found both recall and persuasion to be influenced by (a) brand performance characteristics (e.g., a brand-
differentiated message, convenience of product use), and (b) attention and memory factors (e.g., humor, mnemonic devices,
front-end impact, brand sign-offs). Gagnard and Morris (1988) content analyzed 121 CLIO award-winning commercials with an
adaptation of the Stewart and Furse scheme. They found a unique set of characteristics common to the award-winning spots:
the use of male characters and few minorities, animals, or children; omnipresent music; the use of humor; and the use of a
strong front-end impact, for example. Most of the variables employed by these researchers are inapplicable to print
advertisements.

Only one major attempt has been made at identifying a comprehensive set of print advertisement characteristics that
contribute to readership. During the late 1970s and early 1980s, David P. Forsyth, vice-president of research at McGraw-Hill
Publications, analyzed nearly 3,600 print advertisements covering a five-year span of McGraw-Hill's Ad Sell Performance
Downloaded from warc.com
4 

 
 

Studies (reported in Donath, 1982, and Wood, 1989). His research found 'significant' contributors to the advertisement being
noticed included use of color and use of a spread or bleed format. Contributors to 'creating awareness', 'arousing interest', and
'building preference' were long copy (>300 words), use of tables or charts, and showing the product by itself. However, the
McGraw-Hill project was limited to mechanical form variables; no attempt was made to measure such content characteristics
as product type or persuasive appeals. The readership studies reported small sample sizes, and, unfortunately, available
reports on the project fail to supply sufficient detail to evaluate the content-analysis methodology. This leaves hollow the
claims of 'significant' findings.

Indeed, very few of the studies reviewed used all methodological standards recommended in the content-analysis literature
(Krippendorff, 1980; Riffe and Freitag, 1997)'.6 Flawed methodology is one potential reason for the wide variation in findings
across content analyses for both content and form variables. Other possible reasons include a failure to identify critical
variables in a comprehensive fashion and context specificity (e.g., what is important to the success of an advertisement in a
general interest magazine may not be the same as the set of elements that lead to success in business-to-business
advertising).

This study

There is a growing recognition that the rules of good quantitative methodology ought to apply to analyses of message content
(Krippendorff, 1980; Neuendorf, 1998; Riffe and Freitag, 1997; Zollars, 1994). The study described here has been conducted
with care given to content-analytic standards. Sampling was systematic random. The sample size was adequate to support a
large number of predictor variables. Coder training was lengthy and rigorous. Variables not achieving an acceptable level of
reliability were dropped from final analyses.

Neuendorf (1998) proposes the integrative model of content analysis, wherein message-centered variables tapped by content
analysis are linked with audience-centered variables or source-centered variables measured in additional data collections.
The study described here follows that model by linking content analysis to readership studies. Attempts to link content and
form measures to recall/ readership began in the 1950s (Twedt, 1952) and continued intermittently throughout the 1970s and
1980s, as indicated in the above review. But, there is a long gap in the literature after the mid 1980s. This study updates and
continues the quest, with a call for more rigorous research standards.

For logistic reasons, and in order to eliminate confounding factors and 'masking' effects of uncontrolled context variables, this
study has examined business-to-business advertisements in one particular publication. We have gone for depth over breadth.

This research is guided by a pair of general research questions:

1. To what extent may form and content attributes of print advertisements predict critical outcome variables such
as readership, recall, and perceptions of the advertisement (when limited to one particular type of message
pool and receiver type)?
2. Are significant predictors different across the outcome variables?

METHODOLOGY

The publication and PARR reports

The focus of this study is on both form and content variables as applied in industrial or business-to-business trade publication

Downloaded from warc.com

5 

 
 

advertisements. Specifically, eight issues of Electric Light & Power (EL&P) magazine were randomly chosen for analysis. All
advertisements in these issues were included in the analysis.

EL&P is published by PennWell Publishing Company. It is a tabloid-size monthly news magazine aimed at management,
engineering, operating, and purchasing personnel in all segments of the electric utility industry. For the advertisements studied
here, audience data were obtained from PennWell Advertising Readership Research (PARR) Reports, conducted by PennWell
at no charge to provide advertisers with a means to measure, evaluate, and compare the readership of and response to their
advertising. The PARR surveys asked the following questions:

1. Did the reader notice the advertisement?

2. If the reader noticed the advertisement, how much of it was read?

3. What was the reaction to the advertisement?

a. informative

b. attractive, attention-getting

These PARR surveys were conducted by mail. Approximately three weeks after the regular mailing of the issue, a random
sample of readers received a duplicate issue. In an enclosed letter, readers were asked to go through the issue again and
answer the questions attached to each advertisement.7 The representative sample differed by studied issue, ranging in size
from 200 to 700; response rates ranged from 10 percent to 50 percent. The publication's circulation is audited by the Business
Publication Audit (BPA) bureau, which indicates its readership as composed largely of electric utility managers, supervisors,
and consultants.8

Coding and analysis

The codebook developed for the content analysis provides measures of constructs selected for their potential predictive value
when correlated with readership scores from the PARR Reports. This comprehensive pool of measured variables was
generated from (a) a review of past research and professional guidelines, and (b) a careful examination of idiosyncrasies of
business-to-business advertisements. The full codebook contains a detailed definition of each of the 190 measured variables
and each category within the variable. The pool of variables was reduced to 75 for final inclusion in analyses, via combining
variables and eliminating variables with low reliability9 or extremely low variance.

Each construct is classified as either a form construct (pertinent to the vehicle, i.e., print magazine) or content construct
(relative to the subject matter and presentation). A list of form and content variables as used in the final analysis is presented
in Appendix A (including reliability figures). Coding was conducted by a team of four trained coders. Coding assignments were
made randomly based on a total sample size of 247 readership studied advertisements from the eight issues of EL&P. Average
inter-coder reliabilities were calculated prior to the initiation of coding and again with a 10 percent subset of the final data set.

The final analyses utilized the 54 form and 21 content independent variables listed in Appendix A10 and four dependent
variables taken from the PARR Reports: Aided Advertisement Recall, Advertisement Readership, Informativeness of the
Advertisement, and Attractiveness of the Advertisement. A stepwise multiple-regression model was developed for each
dependent variable. Categorical independent variables were included via standard procedures for dummy and effect coding

Downloaded from warc.com

6 

 
 

(Cohen and Cohen, 1983). Inspection of interitem correlations for the predictor variables and condition index/VIF coefficients
revealed no significant multicollinearity problems.

RESULTS

Advertisement aided recall

In the prediction of Aided Advertisement Recall, the step wise- multiple-regression analysis yields a total of nine predictors
from the list of seventy-five variables-eight form variables and one content variable. Table 1 displays a summary of the zero-
order correlations, reliabilities, frequencies, final betas, and levels of significance for Aided Recall. The total R2 of .59 indicates
a high level of variance explained by the nine predictors.

TABLE 1: STEPWISE PREDICTION OF AIDED ADVERTISEMENT RECALL

Independent Variable Pearson r Reliability Frequency Final Sig.

(% or r) (%) Beta

Form variables          
Fractional page -.53 96% 19.4% -.47 <.0001*
Junior page -.15 96% 47.4% -.34 <.0001*
Tabloid spread .36 96% 6.9% .31 <.0001*
Color .48 .92(r) NA .24 <.0001*
Copy on bottom half .10 78% 49.8% .18 .0002*
Copy in right half -.04 78% 14.2% -.16 .0005*
Major visual chart/graph -.12 75% 1.6% -.10 .0140
Average size of subvisuals .18 85-100% NA .09 .0336
Content variables          
Service advertised .18 84% 20.6% .12 .0059
Total R2 = .59; Adjusted R2 = .58
F (9,233) = 37.833; Sig. = .0001
Note: NA indicates the reliability or frequency is not applicable because variables in this table have been combined,
averaged, or otherwise maipulated from the original measure(s).
*Sig. holds at p < .05 using Bonferroni test (criterion = .0007) for the final 75 independent variables entered in the multiple
regression.

Final regression coefficients for the predictor variables for Aided Recall show four negative predictors-fractional page (b = -
47), junior page (-.34), copy in the right half of the advertisement (-.16), and use of a chart or graph in the major visual (-.10).
Positive contributions to Aided Recall are indicated for tabloid spread ( b = .31), color (.24), copy in the bottom half of the
advertisement (.18), service as the subject of the advertisement (.12), and the average size of secondary visuals (.09).

Predictors relating to the size of the advertisement-fractional page, junior page, and tabloid spread-thus provide some
interesting comparisons when all predictors are submitted in a regression. The frequencies indicate that junior pages are the
most-often-used page size (47.4 percent) followed by fractional pages (19.4 percent). Yet, the final standardized regression
coefficients (betas) indicate that both have rather strong negative partial relationships to Aided Recall. Both predictors are also
highly significant (p < .0001), which meets the p < .05 criterion and the stricter Bonferroni test ( < .0007; Hair, Anderson,
Tatham, and Black, 1995) employed throughout the analyses.

On the other hand, tabloid spreads have a very low frequency in this study (6.9 percent) but hold the strongest positive
relationship to Aided Recall, with a final beta of .31 (r < .0001). Taken as a whole, these findings indicate that large, tabloid

Downloaded from warc.com

7 

 
 

spread advertising units are best remembered. Unfortunately, it also seems that the unit favored by advertisers in this study,
the junior page, is poorly recalled. And, it is only marginally better remembered than the much smaller, less expensive
fractional page unit.

Not surprisingly, color is a significant (r < .0001) positive predictor of Aided Recall.11 Frequencies indicate the abundant use of
color-frequency for two-color is 10.1 percent, three-color 3.2 percent, and four-color 64.0 percent, versus black and white at
21.9 percent.

Having copy in the bottom half of an advertisement and not having copy in the right half of the advertisement relate to greater
Recall. On the other hand, having a major visual chart or graph, and a large average size of secondary visuals are weaker
predictors (negative and positive, respectively), not meeting the Bonferroni criterion.

Another notable point in Table 1 is the performance of the only significant content variable-subject of the advertisement as
service (versus product, institutional, etc.). Service's reliability (84.0 percent) is good, its frequency (20.6 percent) is second
only to product advertisements (67.6 percent), and its final beta is positive (.12).

Advertisement readership

The stepwise-multiple-regression analysis for Advertisement Readership produces two positive and three negative predictor
variables: subject apparent in the visuals ( b = .20), fear appeal used (.12), tabloid page used (-.22), logical argument as an
approach/appeal to the subject (-.16), and headline in the bottom left half of the advertisement (-.13). Three are form variables,
while two are content variables. All of the Readership independent variables meet the  r < .05 level of significance, but none 
meets the stricter r = .0007 Bonferroni level.

The summary statistics for Advertisement Readership are shown in Table 2. The total R2 is .12, and while it is not as massive
as that for Aided Recall, it does achieve a high level of statistical significance.

TABLE 2: STEPWISE PREDICTION OF ADVERTISEMENT READERSHIP

Reliability Frequency Final

Independent Variable Pearson r Sig.
(% or r) (%) Beta

Form variables
Subject apparent in visuals .19 75% 60.7% .20 .0016
Tabloid page -.18 96% 17.8% -.22 .0008
Headline in bottom left section -.08 76% 1.2% -.13 .0365
Content variables
Logical argument used -.10 60-93% 26.3% -.16 .0127
Fear appeal used .11 89-95% 11.3% .12 .0448
Total R2  = .12; Adjusted  R2  = .10
F (5.242) = 6.37; Sig. = <.0001

Once again, size of the advertisement seems to be a significant predictor in the regression, with tabloid page (r = .0008) just
shy of the Bonferroni criterion for Readership. Its frequency (17.8 percent) places it third behind junior page (47.4 percent) and
fractional page (19.4 percent). Readership for the tabloid page shows a negative relationship (b = -.22) which could indicate
the larger format is a detriment to readability.

The strongest positive relationship for Readership is having the subject apparent in the visuals, with a final beta of .20. The

Downloaded from warc.com

8 

 
 

reliability of the predictor is a respectable 75 percent, and its frequency (60.7 percent) shows that more than half the
advertisements depict the subject in the visuals. Placing the headline in the bottom left portion of the advertisement shows an
inverse relationship (b = -.13) to Readership. Overall, being able to divine the subject of the advertisement by looking at the
visuals appears to aid readership.

Two content variables are expressed in the Readership regression. The first, logical argument as an approach/appeal (b = -
.16) has a frequency (26.3 percent) that places it near the middle of the other approach/appeal variables. As a predictor,
logical argument is negatively related to Advertisement Readership-even with an audience of engineers, logical argument
discourages readership.

The second content variable in the Readership regression is the use of a fear appeal. Fear appeals are infrequently used in
these advertisements-at 11.3 percent it is third from the bottom among the 13 approach/appeal variables submitted to the
regression. Interestingly, the final beta for fear (.12) indicates it is positively related to Readership. Therefore, inducing fear in
readers cannot be discounted as a method of getting them to read advertisements.

Informativeness of the advertisement

Stepwise-multiple- regression analysis for the third dependent variable, perceived Informativeness of the advertisement,
results in two negative predictors and four positive predictors; four are form variables, and two are content variables. As in the
case of Readership, all predictors of Informativeness meet the criterion  r < .05, but none meets the stringent Bonferroni test (r 
= .0007).

Table 3 shows the summary statistics for Informativeness of the advertisement. The total R2 of .20 is highly statistically
significant (r < .0001). Once again, advertisement size variables have run the gauntlet of the stepwise multiple regression, this
time to emerge as significant predictors of Informativeness. Interestingly, the tabloid page, a large and frequently used format,
is the strongest negative predictor (b = -.19). The fractional page, a small format and frequently used unit, has the second
highest positive relationship (b = .16) for Informativeness. It seems these readers consider little advertisements more
informative than big ones.

TABLE 3: STEPWISE PREDICTION OF ADVERTISEMENT INFORMATIVENESS

Reliability Frequency Final

Independent Variable Pearson r Sig.
(% or r) (%) Beta

Form variables
Tabloid page -.25 96% 17.8% -.19 .0021
Fractional page .21 96% 19.4% .16 .0091
Headline in top half .19 96% 64.4% .15 .0119
Number of subheads .24 .81 (r) NA .19 .0025
Subject apparent in visuals .22 75% 60.7% .14 .0265
Content variables
Altruism appeal used -.13 90-96% 14.6% -.14 .0236
Note: NA indicates the reliability of frequency is not applicable because variables in this table have been combined, averaged, or otherwise manipulated
from the original measure(s).

The use of subheads and placement of the headline in the top half of the advertisement also appear to result in more
informative advertisements. Frequencies for number of subheads vary from 0 to 12 with a mean of just under 1 per
advertisement. Headline in the top half of the advertisement has the highest frequency of all positions (64.4 percent). Both are
Downloaded from warc.com
9 

 
 

positively related according to the final betas: number of subheads (b = .19) and headline in the top of the advertisement (b
=  .15). Having the subject apparent in the visuals is a positive predictor (b = .14) of Informativeness but is the least significant
of the regression predictors (r = .0265).

Altruism is the only content variable in the Informativeness regression. Its frequency is relatively low (14.6 percent) compared
to the other 12 approach/appeal constructs. It has the weakest significance of the Informativeness predictors. And, with a final
beta of -.14, its reverse relationship to Informativeness indicates that appeals to altruism in an advertisement are not viewed as
informative by the sample of readers.

Attractiveness of the advertisement

Table 4 summarizes the multiple regression for Attractiveness of the advertisement. The overall R2 is a substantial .42, once
again highly statistically significant.

TABLE 4: STEPWISE PREDICTION OF AD ATTRACTIVENESS

Reliability Frequency Final

Independent Variable Pearson r Sig.
(% or ) (%) Beta

Form variables
Fractional page -.41 96% 19.4% -.31 <.0001*
Junior page -.02 96% 47.4% -.28 <.0001*
Tabloid page .11 96% 17.8% -.14 .0189
.21 78% 49.8% .23 .0005
Copy in bottom half .03 78% 14.2% -.17 .0106
Color .50 .92 (r) NA .41 <.0001*
Number of subheads -.16 .81 (r) NA -.15 .0070
Content variables
Fear appeal used .08 89-95% 11.3% .16 .0024
Logical argument used -.08 60-93% 26.3% .15 .0049
Total R2 = .42; Adjusted R2
F (9.238) = 18.44; Sig. = < .0001
Note: NA indicates the reliability of frequency is not applicable because variables in this table have been combined, averaged, or otherwise manipulated
from the original measure(s).

*Sig. holds at p < .05 using Bonferroni test (criterion = .0007) for the final 75 independent variables entered in the multiple regression.

In the stepwise multiple regression for Attractiveness, size of the advertisement is again represented by three significant
predictors, all bearing a negative relationship to Attractiveness: fractional page at b = -.31, followed by junior page (b = -.28),
and tabloid page (b = -.14).

Two other predictors demonstrate significance that meets the Bonferroni test: color (r < .0001) and copy in the bottom half of
the advertisement (r = .0005). The frequency for copy in the bottom half of the advertisement (49.8 percent) is the highest for
all the copy position variables. These two predictors also show the strongest positive relationships: color (b = .41) and copy in
the bottom half of the advertisement (b = .23). Both having copy in the right half of the advertisement and the number of
subheads demonstrate a moderate negative contribution to Attractiveness (b = -.17 and b = -.15, respectively). Attractiveness
is most positively predicted by color and copy placement.

Two content predictors are present for Attractiveness of the advertisement: fear and logical argument as approaches/appeals.

Downloaded from warc.com

10
 

 
 

The frequency for logical argument (26.3 percent) is in the mid-range while fear (11.3 percent) is quite low. What is interesting
is that fear (b = .16) is positively related to Attractiveness. The final beta for logical argument (b = -.15) shows it to be
negatively related to Attractiveness. What makes fear a positive attribute for Attractiveness and logical argument negative is
open to speculation. Perhaps advertisers who use fear as an approach/appeal present fear in a dynamic way to draw the
reader's attention to the advertisement. And, perhaps it is difficult to devise an attractive method of expressing logic in an
advertisement.

DISCUSSION

The utility of content analysis

This research has demonstrated the manifest value of content analysis as a vital predictive tool in the process of assessing
advertisement success. Our research extends the earlier efforts of researchers (e.g., Chamblee et al., 1993; Donath, 1982;
Gronhaug, Kvitastein, and Gronmo, 1991; Soley, 1986) and provides strong evidence for the efficacy of content analyzing
relevant variables for prediction of advertising success. The variance accounted both for recall and for advertisement
evaluations exceeds that achieved by Zinkhan's (1984) innovative effort to predict buying intention from five factors of
immediate audience reactions (15 percent).

In all four regressions, we successfully predict an important component of variance in the dependent variables from carefully
measured content and form variables. For Aided Recall, the figure is .59. The prediction of Attractiveness is also quite
successful, with 42 percent of the variance explained. Even the lowest R2, .12 for Readership, is highly statistically significant.
These findings point to the value of this methodology for the building of grounded theory and for application in commercial
settings. The nearly 60 percent variance explained for Aided Recall is certainly worth even the considerable effort of a
comprehensive content analysis. We propose that content analysis be considered as an integral part of publisher and
advertiser research agendas.

Our content analysis used proper methods. Other fledgling attempts, including the most comprehensive ones (Donath, 1982),
fail to report such essentials as reliabilities and sampling methodologies (Krippendorff, 1980; Riffe and Freitag, 1997). Thus,
it's difficult to compare our results to others, and we therefore tend to view our own attempt as benchmark.

Can we identify standard or universal variables to content analyze in every case? With the evidence to date, clearly the most
universally significant variables are use of color and large advertisement size. This study provides further confirmation of these
two 'standards'. But beyond this, our current content-analysis application provides results specific to a technical audience for a
trade publication. We do not believe that the aggregate approach used by the McGraw-Hill group (as reported in Donath,
1982) is optimal, leaving variances untapped, and resulting in depressed predictive ability, 'masked' effects and patterns.
Thus, we call for replications and extensions across publications and audiences, eventually allowing for a meta-analysis
(Rosenthal, 1991). This will be our best shot at bringing resolution to divergent results and charting useful predictive models
for print advertisement development. Meta-analysis will allow the statistical tracking of the interaction of relevant content and
form variables with audience types.

Diverse advertiser goals

It is apparent that the predictors emerging for the four dependent variables are not congruent across regressions. Simply
stated, variables that predict readership are not the same as those that predict aided recall, informativeness, or attractiveness.

Downloaded from warc.com

11
 

 
 

The disagreement among predictors across the regressions is an important finding.

Although the content variables as a whole do not perform nearly as well as the form variables (consistent with much past
research, e.g., Holbrook and Lehmann, 1980), they do much better for Readership and Informativeness than for Aided Recall
and Attractiveness. This suggests 'design' variables may get noticed but it takes both 'design' and 'substance' or 'style'
variables to get an advertisement read and taken seriously.

The absence of common predictors strongly suggests readership, aided recall, and advertisement evaluations are fairly
mutually exclusive processes. The implication for advertisers is that they should set their objectives accordingly. If they wish
simply to have the advertisement (and their product, service, or company) remembered, it should be designed for that purpose.
Conversely, if the advertisement is to be carefully read, the design should reflect that goal. Informativeness should be
approached differently than Attractiveness.12

Conventional wisdom and the findings

The experiential findings of practitioners were a strong motivating force behind this research, and many of the form and
content variables were derived from industry tenets. Table 5 summarizes the findings for the four regressions in light of
practitioner recommendations.

TABLE 5: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT RESULTS, IN LIGHT OF PRACTITIONERS' 'CONVENTIONAL WISDOM'

Practitioner  Significant Predictor of:

Characteristic of
Recommendation? - Recall
Advertisement
         -Readership
                    -Informativeness
Form Variables:
                           -Attractiveness

ü Larger size +        -        -        Mixed

ü Subject apparent:  
      In headline Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø    
      In visuals Ø    +    +    Ø  
ü Copy length Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Color(s) +    Ø    Ø    +  
ü Location in publication Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
  Headline placement  
      Top Ø    Ø    +    Ø  
      Bottom left Ø    -     Ø    Ø  
  Number of subheads Ø    Ø    +    -  
  Major visual-chart or graph -     Ø    Ø    Ø  
  Larger size of subvisuals +    Ø    Ø    Ø  
  Copy placement:  
      Bottom Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
      Right Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
Content Variables:
   
ü Technical approach Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Case history approach Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Spokesperson approach Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Competitive comparison Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Question appeal Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Humor appeal Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Status appeal Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Learned motive appeal Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  

Downloaded from warc.com

12
 

 
 

ü Logical argument appeal Ø    -     Ø    +  

ü Problem/solution appeal Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
ü Calls to action Ø    Ø    Ø    Ø  
  Fear appeal Ø    +    Ø    +  
  Altruism appeal Ø    Ø    -     Ø  
  Adv. type-service +    Ø    Ø    Ø  
     
Note: The variables above are limited to those that either (a) are consistently recommended in practitioners' texts or (b) prove to be significant predictors in at
least one of this study's four regression equations. A list of all variables in the study appears in Appendix A.

'Conventional wisdom' from the advertising industry tells us to create simple, orderly print advertisements13, with readily
apparent subjects, and attractive visuals that are more important than headlines (Roman and Maas, 1992). We have been
urged to use color when possible (Sandage, Fryburger, and Rotzoll, 1989) in relatively large advertisements (Dunn and
Barban, 1986). This research confirms all those recommendations. Roman and Maas also encourage, 'don't be afraid of long
copy', and the non-significant contribution of copy length in our study supports the notion that long copy will not decrease
readership or other positive outcomes.

However, other 'old salts' from the annals of advertising are not confirmed. Offering a benefit such as status, a learned motive
(e.g., patriotism, friendship), or a solution to the reader's problem, is not found to contribute to positive advertisement
outcomes, as some practitioners would suggest (Roman and Maas, 1992). Other 'recommended' approaches and styles that
do not pan out include: testimonials, use of technical evidence, and competitive comparisons (Schultz, Tannenbaum and
Allison, 1996), use of questions, case histories, calls to action, and humorous copy (Dunn and Barban, 1986; Ogilvy, 1983),
and placement of the advertisement within the publication.

Instead, fear, altruism, and logical arguments emerge as important approaches to consider. Fear and altruism are not usually
mentioned in 'how-to' lists of recommendations for print advertisements yet are found to have positive impacts in this study.
The use of logical /rational arguments-advocated by Ogilvy & Mather (Dunn and Barban, 1986)-has mixed results. Use of such
arguments relates positively to attractiveness but negatively to readership.

CONCLUSION

This study has renewed the scrutiny of message variables for clues in the prediction of advertising success. We have
demonstrated, in a business-to-business context, the utility of conducting valid and methodologically rigorous content analyses
as an integral part of an applied research plan.

Rather than attempting to identify a host of universally predictive message variables, we instead acknowledge the
idiosyncrasies of (a) varying desired outcome variables, and (b) specialized publications and audiences. We propose the
establishment of a line of research using comprehensive content-analysis techniques with diverse dependent variables in a
variety of contexts. Meta-analysis seems ideally suited to the task of statistically profiling successful message variables for
divergent publications and audience types.

According to Schultz, Tannenbaum, and Allison (1996), 'advertising [is] just like the personal salesperson, that is, it delivers or
should deliver a sales message for the product or service being advertised'. It is through the selection of content and form
characteristics that this selling goal is variously achieved via print advertising.

This research has developed a practical, widely applicable scheme for tapping print advertisement characteristics that may

Downloaded from warc.com

13
 

 
 

predict important goals of advertising. An initial database has been constructed, which could be further developed with the
addition of data for other publications. The establishment of a broad-reaching database would be cost effective; coding could
be completed by only one or two coders, and programming is simple. And such a data service, if provided commercially, would
be an extremely economical addition to current audience research services. With this, advertisers and their agencies could
utilize the coding results as part of their marketing analysis to help answer the question of 'why' readers pay attention to and
like their advertisements.

Appendices

APPENDIX A: CONTENT ANALYTIC VARIABLES

Frequency Reliability
Form Variables
(% or mean) (% or r)

1. Tabloid spread 6.9% 96%

2. Tabloid page 17.8% 96%
3. Junior spread 6.1% 96%
4. Junior page 47.4% 96%
5. Baby spread 1.6% 96%
6. Fractional page 19.4% 96%
7. Headline in top half of ad 64.4% 76%
8. Headline in bottom half of ad 11.3% 76%
9. Headline in left half of ad 1.2% 76%
10. Headline in right half of ad 0.8% 76%
11. Headline in top left section of ad 10.5% 76%
12. Headline in top right section of ad 4.5% 76%
13. Headline in bottom left section of ad 1.2% 76%
14. Headline in bottom right section of ad 1.2% 76%
15. Headline size (>.25") 48.2% 84%
16. Headline length on words 9.53 .75
17. Subject apparent in headline 52.2% 83%
18. Number of subheads 0.98 .81
19. Major visual-full ad 25.5% 65%
20. Major visual in top half of ad 34.0% 65%
21. Major visual in bottom half of ad 10.9% 65%
22. Major visual in left half of ad 8.1% 65%
23. Major visual in right half of ad 5.7% 65%
24. Major visual in top left section of ad 2.0% 65%
25. Major visual in top right section of ad 2.8% 65%
26. Major visual in bottom left section of ad 0.8% 65%
27. Major visual in bottom right section of ad 0.8% 65%
28. Major visual a photograph 64.8% 75%
29. Major visual in illustration 25.5% 75%
30. Major visual a chart or graph 1.6% 75%
31. Size of major visual (> half of ad) 41.3% 83%
32. Subject apparent in visual(s) 60.7% 75%
33. Proportion of subvisuals that are photographs .72 84-100%
34. Proportion of subvisuals that are illustrations .20 84-100%

Downloaded from warc.com

14
 

 
 

35. Proportion of subvisuals that are charts or graphs .07 84-100%

36. Average color (1-4) of subvisuals 2.89 83-100%
37. Average size of subvisuals in columns 1.17 85-100%
38. Proportion of subvisuals in top left of ad .09 75-100%
39. Proportion of subvisuals in top right of ad .20 75-100%
40. Proportion of subvisuals in bottom left of ad .18 75-100%
41. Proportion of subvisuals in bottom right of ad .30 75-100%
42. Copy in top half of ad 9.7% 78%
43. Copy in bottom half of ad 49.8% 78%
44. Copy in left half of ad 3.2% 78%
45. Copy in right half of ad 14.2% 78%
46. Copy in top left section of ad 2.4% 78%
47. Copy in top right section of ad 1.6% 78%
48. Copy in bottom left section of ad 2.4% 78%
49. Copy in bottom right section of ad 3.6% 78%
50. Number of paragraphs of copy 4.87 .97
51. Ad located before center spread 46.6% 95%
52. Ad located after center spread 50.6% 95%
53. Ad located in premium position 2.8% 100%
54. Color(s) used in ad (1-4) 3.10 .92
Content Variables

1. Ad for product 67.6% 84%

2. Ad for service 20.6% 84%
3. Ad for process 2.4% 84%
4. Corporate ad 4.5% 84%
5. Institutional ad 0.8% 84%
6. Technical approach 55.5% 63%
7. Analogy/allegorical approach 23.9% 72%
8. Case history approach 14.6% 89%
9. Spokesperson/expert approach 3.6% 87%
10. Competitive comparison approach 23.5% 69%
11. Question appeal 10.5% 100%
12. Humor appeal 11.7% 88%
13. Fear appeal 11.3% 90%
14. Altruism appeal 14.6% 96%
15. Status appeal 49.0% 74%
16. Learned motive appeal 24.3% 73%
17. Logical argument appeal 26.3% 85%
18. Problem/solution appeal 36.0% 67%
19. Number of calls to action (e.g. coupons, 800 #s) 2.31 96%
20. Reader/customer orientation in ad 81.0% 62-67%
21. Company name in headline 22.7% 90%

Endnotes

1. The terms recognition and recall are usually intended to refer to aided and unaided recall, respectively; many commercial
services cover both. In the case of business-to-business advertising, recognition/aided recall is perhaps the more salient
criterion, since company or product recognition is often a fundamental pre-sales-call goal.
Downloaded from warc.com
15
 

 
 

2. While objectivity is the acknowledged goal of such a social scientific method, it is recognized that what is actually achieved
is more properly termed 'inter-subjectivity'.

3. Typical of some of the publications in the advertising literature, Rossiter (1981) termed form and content variables
'mechanical' and 'message' variables respectively.

4. Studies of compositional form variables in print advertisements include: Newspaper Advertising Bureau, 1986; 1989; Soley
and Reid, 1983a; 1983b; Standen, 1989; Wesson, 1989; Wesson and Stewart, 1987. There have also been studies of other
form variables-advertisement size, position in the publication, use of color, etc. (Assael, Kofron and Burgi, 1967; Industrial
Equipment News, 1979; Marney, 1985; Sales & Marketing Digest, 1988; Marketing News, 1987; Stuhlfaut, 1983).

5. For example, Rossiter (1981) examined the impact of 13 'syntax' variables on Starch readership scores for advertisements in
one issue of Newsweek. Although he explained an impressive amount of variance, he looked exclusively at picture size and
headline characteristics.

6. For example, Rossiter (1981) properly reported inter-coder reliabilities and dropped variables that did not meet a set
criterion (rho = .60) but had a very poor, non-profitability sample, making inference impossible. Holbrook and Lehmann's use of
Cronbach's alpha as an indicator of reliability is suspect. They also used a very limited, non-profitability sample and
complained about decoders becoming 'exhausted' (p. 55) after only 10 hours of coding. The first study of advertising content
as related to readership (Twedt, 1952) gave no description of its content-analysis methodology at all.

7. This classifies the PARR Reports as aided recall research, in that respondents have the opportunity to view the
advertisements.

8. A summary of the BPA statement list readers as: 'General and corporate management, including financial and
administrative, engineering management and supervision, engineers, including planning, design, performance, R & D,
operations management and supervision; Operations, including construction, maintenance and fleet, purchasing, commercial
marketing, customer service, other qualified functions' (SRDS, 1996, p.505).

9. Numerous variables were measured as they occurred in (a) the headline, (b) the visuals, and/or (c) the copy. Due to low
frequencies of occurrence, these applications were collapsed across the three before inclusion in the regression analyses.
Additionally, variables with reliability coefficients below 60 percent or r = .70 were dropped.

10. We chose not to factor analyze the predictor set, a technique used by Twedt (1952) and Holbrook and Lehmann (1980).
While a reduction in the predictor set is beneficial to degrees of freedom and power, the collapsing of variables also washes
out individual variances and potential predictive ability. Instead, we included individual variables and employed the Bonferroni
adjustment for multiple significance test.

11. Color was entered in the regression as black and white = 1, two-color = 2, three-color = 3, and four-color = 4.

12. These differential patterns may be seen quite clearly in Table 5. And, we may also note the variables that did not
contribute significantly to any of the four outcome variables: headline size, major visual size and placement, type and location
of subvisuals, copy length, advertisement location, all five different advertisement approaches (technical, analogy/allegory,
case history, spokesperson/expert use, competitive comparison), five persuasive appeals (question, humor, status, learned

Downloaded from warc.com

16
 

 
 

motives, problem/solution), calls to action, reader orientation and company name in the headline. The fact that many of these
variables have been found to be significant predictors in other studies indicates that either (a) in the presence of other,
stronger, predictors their impact is superceded, or (b) this specific application in a business-to-business context shows
different results for a technical audience.

13. However, this study found the number of subheads included in an advertisement to be positively related to advertisement
informativeness (while at the same time being negatively related to advertisement attractiveness).

References

Aaker, D. A. and D. Norris. 'Characteristics of TV Commercials Perceived as Informative'. Journal of Advertising

Research 22, 2 (1982): 61-70.

Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein. 'Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour'. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1980.

Assael, H., Kofron, J. H. and W. Burgi. 'Advertising Performance as a Function of Print Ad Characteristics'. Journal
of Advertising Research 7, 2 (1967): 20-26.

Berelson, B. 'Content Analysis in Communication Research'. New York: Hafner Press, 1952. 

Chamblee, R., Gilmore, R., Thomas, G. and G. Soldow. 'When Copy Complexity Can Help Ad Readership'. Journal
of Advertising Research 33, 3 (1993): 23-28.

Cohen, J. and P. Cohen. 'Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences'. 2nd ed.,
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1983.

Donath, B. 'Ad Copy Clinic: Q: What Makes the perfect Ad? A: It Depends'. Industrial Marketing 67, 8 (1982): 89-92.

Dunn, S. W. and A. M. Barban. 'Advertising: Its Role in Modern Marketing'. 6th ed., Chicago: The Dryden Press,
1986.

Edmonston, J. 'Syndicated Research Life Media Planning'. Advertising Age's Business Marketing, July 1995.

Fan, D. P. 'Predictions of Public Opinion from the Mass Media: Computer Content Analysis and Mathematical
Modeling'. New York: Greenwood Press, 1988.

Gagnard, A. and J. R. Morris. 'CLIO Commercials from 1975-1985: Analysis of 151 Executional Variables'.
Journalism Quarterly 65, 4 (1988): 859-68.

Gelb, B. D., Hong, J. W. and G. M. Zinkhan. 'Communications Effects of Specific Advertising Elements: An Update'.
Current Issues and Research in Advertising 1985, Vol. 2: Reviews of Selected Areas (1985): 75-98.

------ and C. M. Pickett. 'Attitude-toward-the-Ad: Links to Humor and to Advertising Effectiveness'. Journal of
Advertising 12, 2 (1983): 34-41.

Gronhaug, K., Kvitastein, O. and S. Gronmo. 'Factors Moderating Advertising Effectiveness as Reflected in 333

Downloaded from warc.com

17
 

 
 

Tested Advertisements'. Journal of Advertising Research 31, 5 (1991): 42-50.

Hair, J. F. Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and W. C. Black. 'multivariate Data Analysis with Readings'. 4th ed.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1995.

Hanssens, D. M. and B. Weitz. ' The Effectiveness of Industrial Print Advertising Print Advertisements Across
Product Categories'. Journal of Marketing Research 17, 4 (1980): 294-306.

Hendon, M. B. and D. R. Lehmann. 'Form versus Content in Predicting Starch Scores'. Journal of Advertising
Research 20, 4 (1980): 53-62.

Holman, R. H. and S. Hecker. 'Advertising Impact: Creative Elements Affecting Brand Saliency'. Current Issues and
Research in Advertising (1983): 157-72.

Huston, A. C. and J. C. Wright. 'Children's Processing of Television: The Informative Functions of Formal Features'.
In 'Children's Understanding of Television', Bryant, J. and D. R. Anderson, ed.s, New York: Thomas Publishing
Company, 1979.

Industrial Equipment News. 'The Benefits of Using Large Space Ads'. In Industrial Equipment News, New York:
Thomas Publishing Company, 1979.

Johnson, J. D. 'The Dimensionality of Readership Measures'. Communication Research 9, 4 (1982): 607-16.

Krippendorff, K. 'Content Analysis, An Introduction to Its Methodology'. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1980.

Laskey, H. A., Fox, R. J. and M. R. Crask. 'Investigating the Impact of Executional Style on Television Commercial
Effectiveness'. Journal of Advertising Research 34, 6 (1994): 9-16.

Madden, T. J. and M. G. Weinberger. 'Humor in Advertising: A Practitioner View'. Journal of Advertising Research
24, 4 (1984): 23-29.

Maloney, J. C. 'The First 90 Years of Advertising Research'. In 'Attention, Attitude and Affect in Response to
Advertising', Clark, E. M., Brock, T. C. and D. W. Stewart, ed.s, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1994.

Marketing News. '"Real-World" Device Sheds New Light on Ad readership Tests'. In Marketing News, June 5, 1987.

Markiewicz, D. 'Effects of Humor on Persuasion'. Sociometry 37, 3 (1974): 407-22.

Marney, J. 'Factors That Affect Ad Readership'. Marketing, April 8, 1985.

Morelli, G. 'Business-to-Business Readership Research'. Madison Avenue, January 1986.

Neuendorf, K. A. 'The Content Analysis Handbook'. Manuscript in Progress, 1998.

Newspaper Advertising Bureau. 'Research Facts on Position, Timing and Creativity in Newspaper Advertising'.
New York: Newspaper Advertising Bureau, Inc., 1989.

------. 'Key Facts 1989: Newspapers, Advertising & Marketing'. New York: Newspaper Advertising Bureau, Inc., 1989.

Downloaded from warc.com

18
 

 
 

Ogilvy, D. 'Ogilvy in Advertising'. New York: Vintage Books, 1983.

------. 'The Unpublished David Ogilvy'. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1986.

Olshavsky, R. W. 'Attention as an Epiphenomenon: Some Implications for Advertising'. In 'Attention, Attitude and
Affect in Response to Advertising, Clark, E. M., Brock, T. C. and D. W. Stewart, ed.s, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum, 1994.

Reid, L. N., Rotfield, h. R. and J. H. Barnes. 'Attention to Magazine Ads as a Function of Layout Design'. Journalism
Quarterly 61, 2 (1984): 439-41.

Riffe, D. and A. Freitag. 'A Content Analysis of Content Analyses: Twenty-Five Years of Journalism Quarterly'.
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 74, 3 (1997): 515-24.

Roman, K. and J. Hass. 'How to Advertise'. 2nd ed., New York: St Martin's Griffin, 1992.

Rosenthal, R. 'Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research'. Revised ed., Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications,
1991.

Rossiter, J. R. 'Predicting Starch Scores'. Journal of Advertising Research 21,5 (1981): 63-68.

Rothschild, M. L. 'Advertising: From Fundamentals to Strategies'. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath, 1987.

Sales & Marketing Digest. 'Print Ads: What Works and What Doesn't'. In Sales & Marketing Digest, January 1988.

Sandage, C. H. Fryburger, V. and K. Rotzoll. 'Advertising Theory and Practise'. new York: Longman, 1989.

Schaefer, W. 'Aided Recall and Recognition in Belson's Studies in Readership'. Marketing and Research Today 17, 1
(1989): 41-51.

Schultz, D. E., Tannenbaum, S. I. and A. Allison. 'Essentials of Advertising Strategy'. 3rd ed., Lincolnwood, IL: NTC
Business Books, 1996.

Sekely, W. S. and v. L. Blakney. 'The Effect of Response Position on /trade Magazine Readership and Usage'.
Journal of Advertising Research 34, 6 (1994): 53-60.

Soley, L. C. 'Copy Length and Industrial Advertising Readership'. Industrial Marketing Management 15, 3 (1986): 245-
51.

------ and L. N. Reid. 'Industrial Ad Readership as a Function of Headline Type'. Journal of Advertising 12, 1 (1983a):
34-38.

------ and ------. 'Predicting Industrial Ad Readership'. Industrial marketing Management 12, 3 (1983b): 201-206.

SRDS. 'Business Publication Advertising Source'. Des Plaines, IL: SRDS, 1996.

Standen, C. C. 'What makes a Newspaper Advertisement Effective? Large Illustrations, Color, Headlines and Style'.
Presstime, July 1989.
Downloaded from warc.com
19
 

 
 

Stewart, D. W. and D. H. Furse. 'Effective Television Advertising: A Study of 1000 Commercials'. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books, 1986.

Stuhlfaut, M. 'How Media Techniques Improve Ad Readership'. AGRI Marketing, may 1983.

Tellis, G. J. 'Modeling the Effectiveness of Advertising in Contemporary Markets: Research Findings and
Opportunities'. In 'Attention, Attitude and Affect in Response to Advertising', Clark, E. M., Brock, T. C. and D. W.
Stewart, ed.s, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1994.

Twedt, D. W. 'A Multiple Factor Analysis of Advertising Readership'. Journal of Applied Psychology 36, 3 (1952):
207-15.

VandenBergh, B. G. and L. N. Reid. 'Puffery and Magazine Ad Readership'. Journal of Marketing 44, 2 (1980): 78-81.

Weber, R. P. 'Basic Content Analysis'. 2nd ed., Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.

Wesson, D. A. 'Headline Length as a Factor in Magazine Ad Readership'. Journalism Quarterly 66, 2 (1989): 466-68.

------ and E. Stewart. 'Gender and Readership of heads in Magazine Ads'. Journalism Quarterly 64, 1 (1987): 189-93.

Whipple, T. W. and M. K. McManamon. 'Primacy Order Effects in the Measurement of Trade Magazine Receipt and
Readership'. Journal of Advertising Research 32, 5 (1992): 24-29.

Wood, W. 'Tools of the Trade: B-to-B's 60% Standard'. Marketing and Media Decisions, January 1989.

Zinkhan, G. M. 'Rating Industrial Advertisements'. Industrial Marketing Management 13, 1 (1984): 43-48.

Zollars, C. 'The Perils of Periodical Indexes: Some Problems in Constructing Samples for Content Analysis and
Culture Indicators Research'. Communication Research 21, 6 (1994): 698-716.

NOTES & EXHIBITS

John L Naccarato
John L Naccarato is vice president, general manager of Liggett-Stashower Interactive in Cleveland, Ohio, and
Instructor of public relations and advertising at Cleveland State University, He received his B.A.from Kent State
University and his M.A. from Cleveland State University. His 26 years in advertising, public relations, sales
promotion, research, and media have included work with regional and national clients in the fields of power
generation, steel, construction and mining equipment, medical equipment and hospitals.

Downloaded from warc.com

20
 

 
 

Kimberly A. Neuendorf
Kimberly A. Neuendorf is associate professor of communication at Cleveland State University. She received her
Ph.D. from Michigan State University. Her teaching and research interests include media use and ethnic identity,
the social impact of advertising, and research methodologies. She has served as principal investigator, advisor, or
researcher on nearly 100 content analyses. Her work has appeared in such publications as Journal of Broadcasting
and Electronic Media, Journalism Quarterly, Journal of Communication, Communication Monographs, and
Communication Yearbook.

© Copyright Advertising Research Foundation 1997

Advertising Research Foundation
432 Park Avenue South, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10016
Tel: +1 (212) 751-5656, Fax: +1 (212) 319-5265

www.warc.com

All rights reserved including database rights. This electronic file is for the personal use of authorised users based at the subscribing company's office location. It may not be reproduced, posted on
intranets, extranets or the internet, e-mailed, archived or shared electronically either within the purchaser’s organisation or externally without express written permission from Warc.

Downloaded from warc.com

21