How do consumers’ reactions differ between video and printed advertisements, specifically in the automotive industry?

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to discover the different reactions consumers have towards different methods of advertising, specifically video and print advertisements, within the automotive industry. Design/methodology/approach - This study starts by exploring literature about the automotive industry, neuromarketing and neurophysiological tools. Electroencephalography, Galvanic Skin Response and Eye Tracking were used to gather data which was then analysed and compared to existing literature. Findings - The results of this study highlight the natural reactions of male and female participants to different types of advertising stimuli. The study shows that both video and print advertising caused negative reactions and sheds light on which parts of advertisements are focused on. The findings also show that the difference these stimuli have on men and women is relatively insignificant. Research limitation/implications - The use of neurophysiological equipment meant that tests were carried out in a laboratory and thus advertisements were not experienced in their natural setting. Future studies to consider further forms of advertising and other factors related to presenting an advertisement, such as costs and resources needed, even in different industries. Practical implications - Previous studies traditionally use other ways of gathering data. The use of neurophysiological tools allow for scientific results that may be used by the industry as a starting point to build their marketing campaigns. Originality/value - Firms operating in the automotive industry must reconsider their methods of communicating with their target audience and focus on methods that are found to be pleasant and likeable.