Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

USING MEANS-END ANALYSIS TO

TEST INTEGRATED MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS EFFECTS

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Introduction
As the field of Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) has grown, it has attracted
both supporters and detractors. The supporters suggest that IMC offers competitive advantages
versus traditional marketing communications approaches because it presents a more consistent
brand image across all aspects of a brands relationship with a consumer. IMC critics question
the concepts validity and point to the fact that most of the supporting evidence of IMCs
effectiveness is anecdotal in nature. This study attempted to contribute to the debate by using an
experimental approach to test for possible IMC effects.
Literature Review
Theoretical components of IMC
A review of the literature on IMC suggests three components are at the heart of the
concept. The first is that all aspects of a brands relationship with a consumer should be
considered, not just the traditional marketing communications (MC) elements of advertising and
public relations (Duncan, 1994; Phelps & Johnson, 1996; Schultz et al., 1993; Stewart, 1996).
There is agreement in the literature that IMC is most effective when all aspects of the product
offering are considered and coordinated.
The second component is that messages should be conceptually consistent across all the
MC elements noted above. This view was confirmed by a study of MC practitioners that found
two of the most distinctive IMC features related directly to consistency. Specifically, respondents
identified the concepts of one voice and coordinated as particularly important elements of
their view of IMC (Phelps & Johnson, 1996). Schultz et al. (1993) have also argued that such
coordination of MC messages is becoming more important due to the complexity of consumer
information processing of competing brand stimuli in todays competitive mass communication

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

environment. They suggest a brand message that is more consistent in its message across
different MC media is likely to be processed more effectively.
The third component is that IMC should consist of an ongoing dialogue between
consumers and marketers (Duncan, 1994; Schultz et al., 1993). The literature suggests that IMCs
dialogue is consistent with the relationship marketing concept, an approach which has long
formed the cornerstone of many successful businesses (Payne, 1995, p. 29). The opportunities
for creating and sustaining this type of consumer-marketer dialogue have expanded with the use
of new direct marketing techniques, particularly the use of sophisticated databases.
Definitions of IMC
The literature also reveals that there are serious inconsistencies in the definition of IMC.
Definitions run the gamut from the very simple to the very complex. On the simplistic side of the
range is a definition rooted in the marketing literature, cited by Smith:
Marketing Communications means what it says. It consists of every form of
communication relevant to marketing (Smith, 1993, p. 18).

Another attempt, developed by the American Association of Advertising Agencies

(AAAA), defines IMC as:
A concept of marketing communications planning that recognizes the added value of a
comprehensive plan that evaluates the strategic roles of a variety of communication
disciplines--for example, general advertising, direct response, sales promotion, and public
relations--and combines these disciplines to provide clarity, consistency, and maximum
communication impact (Stewart, 1996, p. 148).
In its simplicity, Smiths definition has two major flaws: first, its reference to every form
of communication is obviously very ambiguous (i.e., does it include interpersonal
communication as well as mass communication?). Fortunately, the AAAA definition seeks to

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

address the ambiguity somewhat by delineating some specific communication tools which IMC
would employ. The second flaw in the Smith definition is shared by the AAAA version: both
ignore the nature of the communication which takes place. This is an important omission
because significant new strides have been made in the literature in recent years. These advances
have challenged some earlier conceptualizations of the nature of the mass communication
process as a one-way flow model, where information is transmitted from a source to a receiver
in a single-direction process of delivering a stimulus in order to elicit a consumer response. This
one-way perspective is clearly at odds with more recent literature which suggests consumers are
not simply passive receivers of communication, but rather, can be active participants who have
the potential to respond to marketing communications messagesparticularly through the use of
interactive electronic technologies. Such an interactive perspective was suggested by DeLozier in
1976, before the advent of new interactive media technologies such as the internet. But his
definition still represents an advancement over Smiths and the AAAAs:
Marketing Communications is the continuing dialogue between buyers and sellers in a
marketplace (DeLozier, 1976, p. 168).

Other, more recent definitions, including the following example developed by Duncan,
also incorporating the key notion of communication with customers and prospects, not just to
them:
(IMC is) selling with a consistent voice and look and relationship building
through interactivity (Duncan, 1994, p. 21).
Despite DeLoziers and Duncans embrace of the more contemporary dialogue view of
the IMC process, their definitions still suffer from the same lack of specificity of scope of

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

communication vehicles as the Smith definition noted above (i.e., which tools does IMC include?
Only communication tools? Or other marketing tools such as physical product attributes,
distribution availability or pricing?). The literature does include a definition that comes close to
the ideal goal of addressing both the scope and nature of the IMC process. This definition was
developed by the faculty of the IMC program at Northwestern University:
IMC considers all sources of brand or company contacts which a customer or prospect
has with the product or service as potential delivery channels for future messages.
Further, IMC makes use of all forms of communication which are relevant to the
customer and prospects and to which they might be receptive. In sum, the IMC process
starts with the customer or prospect and then works back to determine and define the
forms and methods through which persuasive communications programs should be
developed (Schultz, Tannenbaum & Lauterborn, 1993, p. 17).
Despite its attempt at addressing the scope (...all sources of brand or company
contacts...) of IMC, the Schultz et al. (1993) definition still is lacking in its specificity about the
two-way ongoing dialogue nature of the consumer-marketer communication process, suggesting
again that there is still room for improvement in the definition of the IMC concept.
A Proposed IMC Definition.
An alternative definition of IMC is proposed which builds upon the strengths of the
existing definitions noted above. This definition ideally would synthesize three critical
dimensions mentioned in the existing definitions. First, the alternative definition would recognize
the interactive dialogue aspects of the DeLozier and Duncan definitions. Second, it would offer
some specific identification of the scope of marketing communication media vehicle integration,
which the AAAA and Schultz et al. (1993) perspectives contribute. And third, it would
incorporate the notion of the consistent voice and look type of message conceptual integration
suggested in the Duncan definition. To summarize, the following is proposed:

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

IMC is a theoretical perspective that advocates a high level of communication

interaction between a brands marketers and its consumers coupled with a high degree
of message consistency across a brands entire marketing mix, ranging from the product
itself to all marketing communications media.

A Proposed IMC Model

To synthesize this definition of IMC into a testable model for the present study, the focus
was placed on two of the components of the IMC concept discussed above, the use of multiple
marketing communications (MC) media and consistency of message design across these media.
For the purposes of this study, the third dimension of the IMC concept, consumer-marketer
interaction, was not included in the test model. Future work would seek to add this third
dimension, and to test for its effects.
The first component of the model, use of multiple MC media, can be conceptualized as a
range of the number of different media vehicles used. The low end of the range would suggest a
limited use of few MC elements. The high end of the range would be consistent with the view of
Schultz et al. (1993) that IMC should include all sources of a brands contact with consumers. At
this high end of the continuum, numerous MC elements would be employed, including direct
marketing, sales promotion, web marketing, as well as advertising.
The second dimension of the model, message design consistency, can also be
conceptualized as a range. The existing literature is vague about a precise explication of the term
message consistency, with little agreement on exactly what it means for elements of an IMC
portfolio to be integrated. Stewart (1996) suggests that IMC requires clarity and consistency
between MC stimuli, and Duncan (1994) proposes that they have a consistent voice and look.
By looking at message integration as a continuum of design consistency, a spectrum of
conceptualizations could be accommodated, ranging from one extreme of messages which are

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

highly consistent in terms of design (representing the repetition of the same message imagery
across different MC elements) to the other extreme of diverse and inconsistent message imagery
across different elements.
To visualize the interaction of the two concepts in the model, a two-dimensional diagram
is suggested in Figure 1 below, with the number of MC media represented by the vertical axis
and level of message design consistency represented by the horizontal axis. The model is similar
to one proposed by McGrath (2005a), and suggests that the conditions representing the IMC
concept are depicted by a position in the extreme upper right hand quadrant of the diagram.
These conditions would be characterized by the coordinated use of multiple MC media vehicles
to deliver the brands message, coupled with a high degree of design consistency across the
media.
Figure 1 here

How This Model May Impact Persuasion

The proposed model suggests a more important question: how does it work? The IMC
literature suggests the possibility that a brand employing an IMC strategy may create a stronger
image trace in consumers memory. The implication of this stronger trace is that it might be more
easily processed than brand messages which offer bits of conflicting, or at least not highly
consistent, information across different MC elements (Schultz et al., 1993). It is then possible
that the superior processing potential of an IMC strategy could translate into more desirable
effects, including attitudes toward the message, toward the brand, and buying intentions.
The role of images across different MC elements has been explored in the literature for
imagery processing. Specifically, Lutz and Lutz (1977) found evidence supporting the imagery-

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

enhancing effects of integrating visual and verbal stimuli. They found that memory was affected
positively when the brand name, product attribute and picture were combined interactively in one
stimulus. Childers and Houston (1984) found a positive relationship between advertisements
integrating a picture with other visual cues and stronger imagery resulting in stronger brand
recall. They believed this effect was due to the chunking of these stimuli at the time they are
encoded by the brain. This may create more powerful imagery than is possible when each
stimulus is processed by the brain individually. They concluded that the stronger memory trace
caused by chunking may lead to easier retrievaland hence recall (MacInnis & Price, 1987).
This memory-enhancing role of the combined stimulus of different MC elements may
hold special significance for the proposed IMC model. It suggests that messages which are
conceptually integrated across different MC media vehicles might help create memory traces that
are reactivated and strengthened upon exposure to subsequent exposures of different MC media
vehicles using the consistent message imagery. This reactivation of existing memory traces
across multiple MC media may have a more powerful impact than either the simple repetition of
a message by one medium or by stimuli using multiple MC media that are not visually consistent.
Research Question
IMC proponents suggest that IMC differs from traditional marketing communications
because it presents a more consistent brand image across all aspects of a brands relationship
with a consumer, not just the traditional mass communications vehicles of advertising and public
relations, for example. They argue that a brand employing this image consistency has a
competitive advantage because it maximizes the synergy of a unified message across different
aspects of the brand to existing and potential consumers (Duncan, 1994; Schultz, 1996a; Stewart,
1996), making it more competitive in todays highly fragmented and complex mass

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

communications environment Schultz (1996b). Unfortunately, these hypotheses have not been
proven in a series of empirical research studies. One study has been conducted, an experiment by
McGrath (2005b), that tested for IMC effects in campaigns that featured different levels of
design consistency. That study found that a campaign that featured more consistent design
features resulted in more positive attitudes toward the brand featured in the campaign, although
the effects were not significant for recall measures.
One area of IMC effects has not been addressed, however: whether or not the use of the
IMC model produces any effects which are deeper in nature than the attitudinal and recall
measures employed in the earlier research (McGrath, 2005b). These measures, while helpful in
determining somewhat superficial levels of consumer evaluation, are limited because they do
very little to address the deeper, more abstract meanings which consumers attach to products and
marketing communications efforts (i.e., it makes me feel better about myself, or I feel safe
using it). Such meanings are important to consider, given the marketing literature tradition
which suggests that the relationship between marketers and consumers is based above all else
upon the exchange of meanings (Levy, 1959). An investigation of these meanings requires an
analysis of comprehension processes which are deeper (Peter & Olson, 1987) than the
attitudinal measures noted above.
Means-end theory (Gutman, 1982) has emerged as a helpful lens through which to view
deep comprehension. It attempts to go beyond the rather superficial measures of consumer
attitudes toward advertising or toward a brand noted earlier and delves deeper into the realm of
the meanings that consumers associate with products. Means-end theory essentially suggests that
consumers develop meanings about products only to the extent that a product offers some
characteristics which translate to higher-order benefits or costs. These benefits or costs associated

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

with the product ultimately contribute to a belief about the product that is either personally
relevant to the consumer or not. Gutman (1982) and others (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988) have
identified three critical hierarchical levels of this theory.
The first level represents product attributes. These are the most concrete, tangible level of
the hierarchy. Attributes could include such physical characteristics of a product as the type of
hops or yeast used in brewing a beer, for example. These attributes represent the means which
can help contribute to the achievement of higher-order end states, according to the theory
(Gutman, 1982).
The second level of the means-end hierarchy represents the real or perceived
consequences which occur or could occur as a result of using a product with the attributes noted
above. These consequences can manifest themselves as benefits or costs associated with using
the product (Gutman, 1982). Using the beer example, the attributes of imported hops and yeast
could lead to the consequence of a more bitter-tasting beer commonly associated with imported
brands.
The final level of the hierarchy is characterized by the least concrete, most abstract,
values which represent the end state suggested by means-end. These end values can be
thought of as the cognitive representations (Kamakura & Novak, 1992, p. 119) of very
fundamental human needs. These needs can include not only basic biological necessities, but also
some of the social interactional and self-completion needs discussed earlier. Rokeach (1973) has
further defined these values as an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of
existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or endstate of existence (Rokeach, 1973, p. 5).

10

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

The critical integrative aspect of means-end theory is how the concept marries the
analysis of the content of each of the hierarchical levels with an analysis of how the different
levels are connected to each other (Gutman, 1982; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988). The benefit of
using means-end analysis to examine the content of consumer cognitive structures for this project
is that it would be able to provide a deeper level of understanding of consumers meanings
(Olson, 1986, p. 280).
Research tools have been developed that use means-end theory to investigate the deeper
meanings which consumers associate with products and marketing communications efforts.
Laddering (Olson & Reynolds, 1983; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988) is such a technique, and its
methodology has been used to examine a number of different marketing communications case
studies, including non-alcoholic beverages (Olson & Reynolds, 1983), ski resorts (Klenosky,
Gengler & Mulvey, 1993), pet foods, (Gengler & Reynolds, 1995), and vacuum cleaners
(Reynolds, Olson & Rochon, 1997). The use of means-end analysis in these situations provides
an opportunity for this project to test the effects of IMC versus traditional marketing
communications efforts in their relative ability to influence deeper consumer meanings.
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed to test IMC effects by applying meansend theory:
H1: Measures of means-end cognitive structures for a given brand will be significantly
different in response to a set of marketing communications stimuli which employ the IMC
model than for those which employ a more traditional approach.
Methods
Test Product Selection and Development
To address the hypothesis, an experimental design was adopted using a series of three
studies. The series included two pretests prior to the administration of the main study.

11

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Prior to the beginning of the research process, two test products were selected and
developed. Fictitious brands were created due to the difficulty in securing MC materials from
existing brands that would have satisfied exactly the manipulation requirements of the study, and
because fictitious brands helped eliminate bias toward existing brands.
The literature on product involvement was consulted to determine appropriate types of
products. Hupfer and Gardner (1971) and Laurent and Kapferer (1985) provided a useful
reference, although Zaichkowskys (1985, 1994) work provided the most practical application,
with the Personal Involvement Inventory (PII). This tool measures and compares consumer
involvement levels for different classes of products. Applying Zaichkowskys PII to the present
study, test products representing average involvement levels were selected: facial tissues and
pain relievers.
Next, fictitious brand names were created for each of these test products using a
qualitative exploration with two requirements. First, the brand names must be appropriate for the
type of product featured and offer a positive connotation, and second, they must be unique and
not currently used by existing brands. Two brand names were generated that met these
requirements: Softies facial tissue and Relief-24 pain reliever.
Finally, a professional graphics artist developed packaging for each test brand, as well as
two sets of MC stimulus materials for each brand. One set was designed to be very visually
consistent from one piece to another, in accordance with the IMC concept. The other set of MC
materials were designed to be less visually consistent. Each set of materials included four
possible MC stimuli (see Appendix 1a and 1b for visuals of the stimulus materials).
The first set of stimulus materials consisted of 8 x 11-inch four-color simulated
magazine ads promoting the two test brands. The nature of these pieces varied according to the

12

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

design consistency conditions: in the high design consistency condition, they included specific
copy items and graphic design elements highly consistent with those featured in the brands
packaging. In the low design consistency condition, the ads featured the same exact copy points,
but with visuals which were not as consistent with the brand packaging and the other
accompanying stimuli as those materials in the high design consistency condition. These pieces
of stimuli were intended to represent the medium of advertising, and were described by the
researcher using the standardized script as a prototype of an ad that might appear for this brand
in popular magazines should this product ever be introduced on the market.
The second set of stimuli consisted of four-color tri-fold 8.5 x 11-inch brochures. In a
manner similar to that described for the advertising pieces noted above, the presentation of these
pieces varied according to design consistency condition: in the high consistency condition, they
included visuals highly consistent with those presented on the packaging and with the other
accompanying stimuli; in the low consistency condition, they featured the same copy, but with
visuals that were not as highly consistent. These pieces were intended to represent the medium of
direct marketing, and were described by the researcher as a prototype of the type of direct mail
piece you might receive in the mail should this product ever be introduced on the market.
The third set consisted of four-color pre-printed coupons designed to replicate those
found in freestanding inserts in newspapers. The presentation of these pieces also varied
according to the design consistency condition in a manner consistent with the materials noted
above. These pieces were intended to represent the medium of consumer sales promotion and
were described by the researcher as prototypes of the type of coupon you might see in your
Sunday newspaper coupon section should this product ever be introduced on the market.

13

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

The fourth set consisted of complete web sites. The web sites included a home page, as
well as operational hyperlinks to three other pages of content materials including consumer
testimonials, uses for the products, and free sample offers. The copy presented in all these pages
was exactly the same, consistent with the other pieces of stimuli described above. The web sites
were posted on the server at the researchers university, and could be accessed by subjects at the
computers at their test station in the lab. The presentation of these stimuli also varied according
to the design consistency condition in a manner consistent with the pieces noted above. These
items were intended to represent the medium of web communications and were described by the
researcher as a prototype of the type of web site you might see should this product ever be
introduced on the market.
Design Consistency Pretest
This pretest was designed to determine if the stimulus materials accomplished the goal of
creating two different message design consistency conditions (high versus low consistency).
The pretest employed a 2 (message design consistency) x 2 (product) factorial design with
design consistency as a within-subjects variable and product as a between-subjects variable. Two
sets of stimulus materials were exposed to subjects, who were then asked to evaluate the
materials. Subjects were either shown two sets of pain reliever materials or two sets of facial
tissue materials. Two questionnaire instruments were employed to measure subject evaluations.
The approach was consistent with the pretest methodology used by Goldberg and Gorn (1987) to
select television commercials with different levels of emotional appeal.
To collect measures, a perceived design consistency scale was developed. Each of the
three items in the scale employed seven-point bipolar semantic differential scales. The first item
asked for subjects perceptions of the visual appearance of the materials. It was anchored by

14

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

the statements: very inconsistent/very consistent. The second item asked for perceptions of the
messages contained in the materials and was anchored by the same statements. The third item
asked for perceptions about the overall tone and personality portrayed by the materials and was
again anchored by the same bipolar statements.
Forty-nine subjects were recruited for this study from among the population of
undergraduate students at a small university in the United States. This sample was consistent
with the size of the Goldberg and Gorn (1987) commercial pretest noted earlier.
Half of the subjects were exposed to the materials for the Softies brand and half were
exposed to the material for Relief-24. The stimulus material presentation order was identical:
each group was exposed to the low design consistency set of materials first, followed by the
administration of the first questionnaire to measure their evaluations of the materials.
The results indicated a statistically significant main effect for design consistency, with the
mean design consistency score for the high design consistency materials (M = 6.08, SD = .744)
significantly greater than the mean design consistency score for the low design consistency
materials (M = 4.54, SD = 1.69), F (1, 47) = 36.2, p <.001. This pretest confirmed that subjects
perceived that the stimulus materials in the high design consistency conditions were more
consistent in visual appearance and those in the low design integration conditions.
Affect Pretest
This pretest was designed to ensure that affect levels were balanced in each of two design
consistency conditions.
The pretest employed a within-subjects experimental approach. All subjects were exposed
to a series of 16 different pieces of MC stimulus materials. A series of 16 questionnaires were

15

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

administered to subjects, one after the exposure of each piece of stimulus material. Each
questionnaire was identical and employed three scales.
The first scale was designed to measure Aad, using one employed by Hastak and Olson
(1989) in a study of consumer cognitive structures. The second scale was adapted from one used
by Kamp and MacInnis (1995) in their study of the emotions portrayed in television
commercials. The third scale was also adapted from the work of Kamp and MacInnis (1995) and
was designed to measure overall impressions of the ad. It featured three semantic differential
items. The first asked for subjects reactions to this ad, and provided a seven-point evaluation
scale anchored by the terms bad impression/good impression. The second item asked subjects
to what degree to you feel positively toward this ad, and provided a seven-point evaluation
scale anchored by the terms very negative/very positive. The third item asked overall, how
well do you like this ad? It provided a seven-point scale anchored by the terms: dislike very
much/like very much.
Thirty-two subjects were recruited for this study from among the population of
undergraduate students at the same university noted above.
A paired samples t test was conducted for each of the corresponding eight sets of stimulus
materials (i.e., low design consistency Softies magazine ad versus high design consistency
Softies magazine ad). Results of this pretest confirmed there was no statistically significant
difference in the mean overall impression of the ad scores for six of the eight sets of materials.
For the two pairs for which there was a statistically significant difference, mean scores were
higher for low design integration pieces than for high integration pieces at the p = .003 and p =
.000 levels.

16

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Main Study
The design of the main study focused on the first independent variable representing the
IMC model noted in Figure 1 (high versus low design consistency, as depicted in Table 1 below).
The study also addressed the second independent variable, number of MC elements, by balancing
the number of different media stimuli exposed to subjects.

Table 1 here
A sample of 30 subjects was recruited for this study from among the population of
undergraduate students at the same university noted above. This study was a subset of a larger
IMC quantitative research project involving 144 subjects. All subjects were offered course credit
in exchange for their participation. Subjects in the larger study were asked to volunteer their
time for approximately 30 additional minutes to complete the qualitative procedure for this study.
Thirty subjects volunteered for this extra qualitative session. The sample was skewed toward
females at 70% versus 30% males.
The primary focus of the recruiting was to balance the number of subject volunteers in the
high and low design consistency conditions. This objective was achieved, with 15 subjects
assigned to the high conditions and 15 to the low conditions.
However, the goal of simultaneously balancing the other independent variable, number of
media, was not achieved. Specifically, subjects assigned to the high media conditions
outnumbered the low media conditions by a margin of six subjects (18 volunteers in this study
were exposed to the low media condition in the earlier, larger quantitative experiment versus 12
who were exposed to the high media condition). To correct for this imbalance, six low media
condition cases (every third case) were removed from the sample. The removal of these cases

17

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

preserved a balanced number in each of the design consistency conditions (12 each). It also
resulted in more balanced gender composition with 62.5% female cases versus 37.5% male
cases.
The resulting sample for analysis purposes was 24 subjects. Obviously, such a small
sample would be inadequate for traditional quantitative studies, but it was judged to be adequate
for this study for two reasons. First, the present study uses a qualitative methodology, employing
the use of depth interviews, which, while not quantitative in nature, is nevertheless useful in the
collection of deeper individual thoughts and motivations. Second, the laddering techniques used
in the study (explained in detail below), yielded significant amounts of data, essentially resulting
in the creation of 48 unique ladders for analysis.
The procedure for the main study used the same stimulus materials described in the
pretests, and followed techniques developed by means-end researchers noted above (Olson &
Reynolds, 1983; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988).
In step one, as part of the quantitative study, the researcher presented the MC stimuli to
subjects in small groups. The presentation order of the four different types of media was balanced
to attempt to control for order effects. The order was varied in different combinations, altering
the presentation of the timing of the test product (pain reliever or facial tissue) as well as the
medium (magazine ad, brochure, coupon or website). This process ranged in length from
approximately 25-40 minutes.
In step two, all but one of the subjects from each of the quantitative study groups were
dismissed, leaving the single subject who volunteered for the qualitative means-end laddering
procedure. The researcher explained that the purpose of the one-on-one interview was to secure
in-depth information that might not be available in a group discussion. The researcher advised

18

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

the subject that a number of probing questions would be asked about the two brands of
advertising materials they had seen.
In step three, the researcher used an approach suggested by Reynolds and Gutman (1988)
to help initiate the process. Specifically, the researcher used information gathered in the openended questions of the two pretests to develop a list of seven or eight of the most common
attributes of each of the test brands. For the facial tissue category represented by Softies, this list
included soft, smooth, fluffy, smells nice, clean, pure, designs on box, lotion, and
cost. For the pain reliever category, represented by Relief-24, this list included color of pill or
caplet, strength of medicine, how long the pain relief lasts, gentleness on my stomach,
other side effects, possibility of becoming dependent, and cost.
In accord with Reynolds and Gutmans technique, the researcher presented a sheet of
paper with this list of attributes for the brand being discussed. The researcher asked the subject to
review the list, and to add to it if they felt any attributes were missing. Then the researcher asked
the subject to choose the two most important attributes from among those listed.
In step four, the researcher focused on the top two attribute selections noted in step three
for each brand, and began the laddering process by probing for progressively more abstract
meanings by asking the subject open-ended questions about why each of the attributes they
selected were important to them. This interview technique eventually led the subjects to suggest
consequences for each of the attributes, and ultimately, the values that underlie their feelings.
In cases where the laddering process began to falter short of the identification of a value,
the researcher presented the subject with a sheet of paper providing a listing of common values
identified in the research on value measurement. This body of literature is based upon the work
of Rokeach (1973), Kahle (1983) and others, and is cited in a laddering study by Goldenberg,

19

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Klenosky, OLeary and Templin (2000). This work suggested the use of a LOV (list of values)
which included the following: security, self esteem, excitement, self fulfillment, sense
of belonging, and sense of accomplishment. Other values were also listed, based upon work
done by Bell (2000) in identifying core values. These included comfort, freedom,
responsibility, peace of mind, control, and family duty. The use of this list as a prompt in
some cases helped the subjects identify the most appropriate value. Once the researcher was
satisfied that the ladder had satisfactorily reached the values level of abstraction, he moved on to
the second attribute selected by the subject and began the process again. This process was then
repeated for the second test brand.
As a result of this process, two ladders were developed for each test brand for each
subject, resulting in a total of 48 ladders for the sample.
The duration of the laddering interview process averaged approximately 30 minutes.
The primary independent variable employed in this study was design consistency. The
main studys approach to this variable was consistent with the descriptions offered above for
each of the two pretests, including the use of the same product packages and MC stimulus
materials.
The second independent variable employed in this study was the number of media
vehicles. As noted above, the number of media exposed to subjects was balanced, either two
items (for the low media condition), or four items (for the high media condition).
Means-end structures were operationalized via the laddering techniques described in
detail above. The qualitative data generated by these techniques resulted in the creation of
ladders that were refined and quantified using the LadderMap software (Gengler & Reynolds,
1995). The LadderMap data was, in turn, transferred to SPSS to analyze the mean scores for

20

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

each cognitive response on the three levels of means-end analysis (attributes, consequences and
values). Data for each of these measures were then compared between the two primary
conditions, high versus low design consistency.
Data Collection and Analysis
Five steps were involved in the collection and analysis of this data, all of which were
greatly facilitated by the use of the LadderMap software.
The first step in the data tabulation and analysis process was the entry of verbatim
responses from each of the interviews. These responses were entered into the LadderMap
program, and classified by the researcher either as an attribute, a consequence or a value.
The second step involved the identification of a set of synonyms to categorize each level
of responses (attributes, consequences values), followed by the actual synonym categorization
task, performed independently by two researchers, and then cross-checked for inter-coder
reliability (Klenosky et al., 1993). Of the 240 categorizations of consequences and attributes
(respondents had already selected specific attributes during the experimentand therefore these
did not need to be further categorized by judges) the judges agreed on 183 decisions yielding a
reliability rate of 76.2%. This relatively low level of reliability was due to the subjective nature
of coding for the highly abstract verbatim responses. Ultimately, however, the 57 coding
disagreements were resolved by the mutual agreement of two judges.
The third step involved the creation of an implication matrix (Reynolds & Gutman,
1988), aided by the LadderMap software, which identified and summarized the total number of
times each concept was associated (paired) with another concept by all subjects across all the
one-on-one interviews. Once the pairings were identified, the program assigned them a binary
code depending upon whether they were judged to be among one of the most frequently

21

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

associated pairings (value =1), or among those pairings judged to have a much less frequent
number of associations (value = 0).
The fourth step was the creation of a hierarchical value map (Reynolds & Gutman,
1988) for each of the two primary conditions by the LadderMap software. This type of map
depicts the relative location and strength of the attributes, consequences, and values which
comprise the means-end structure for the condition. An example of the specific hierarchical value
maps generated for this study is depicted below in Figure 2. This specific map illustrates the
composite hierarchy of subject responses to the high design condition for Relief-24. The
hierarchy begins at the attribute level at the lowest row of the diagram, progresses upward to the
consequence level in the light shaded areas, and finally to the values level represented by the dark
shaded areas at the top. Similar composite ladders were created for the other three conditions of
the study (low design condition for Relief-24 and high and low design for Softies).

Figure 2 here

The final step was the transfer of the LadderMap data into an SPSS database to facilitate
conventional statistical analysis. This step represented a departure from the majority of the
literature on means-end analysis. Specifically, the literature suggests that the laddering approach
has been primarily used as a diagnostic tool in helping to define consumer meanings and to
identify promising marketing communications strategies. However, this study relied upon a
technique pioneered by Gengler, Howard and Zolner (1995) in a study comparing the cognitive
structures of different groups of sales professionals. In that study, the researchers demonstrated
that data generated by LadderMap could be analyzed using a t test.

22

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Results
A series of independent samples t tests were conducted to evaluate the hypothesis that
there would be differences in the cognitive structures of subjects exposed to high design
consistency stimulus materials versus those exposed to low design consistency materials. The
tests were run on each of the three levels of cognitive structures identified in the means-end
literature noted earlier.
A compromise power analysis (Erdfelder, 1984), employing Cohens (1977) effect size
conventions, indicated that the sample size for this study was adequate to detect both medium
and large effect sizes for t tests (.83 for eta2 = .50 and .94 for eta2 = .80). However, the analysis
indicted that the sample size was inadequate to detect small effect sizes (.65 for eta2 = .20).
The results of tests conducted on concepts at the attribute level of the means-end
hierarchy were all nonsignificant, ranging from t (94) = .000, p = 1.00 to t (94) = -1.016, p =
.312. The results of the tests are detailed in Table 2 below.

Table 2 here
The results of tests conducted on concepts at the consequence level of the means-end
hierarchy were also all nonsignificant, ranging from t (94) = .000, p = 1.00 to t (94) = -.733, p =
.465. The results of the tests are detailed in Table 3 below.

Table 3 here
The results of tests conducted on concepts at the values level of the means-end hierarchy
were also all nonsignificant, ranging from t (94) = .000, p = 1.00 to t (94) = -1.694, p = .094. The
results of the tests are detailed in Table 4 below.

23

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Table 4 here
Based on the findings noted above, H1 was not supported since there were no statistically
significant differences in the nature of the means-end structures formed in response to the
stimulus materials for the high versus the low design consistency condition, as predicted.
Discussion
The results described above represent a disappointment to the advocates of IMC. They
failed to demonstrate the proposed IMC models hypothesized effects given the current sample
and experiment. A discussion of two critical areas might help to explain the findings, as well as
to suggest future research work. The first is a discussion of possible theoretical explanations; the
second is an investigation of possible methodological flaws.
Possible Theoretical Explanations and Implications
One possible theoretical explanation comes from the Heuristic-Systematic Model.
Ironically, if IMC mediates cognitive processing as the proposed model suggests, it may also
promote one of the HSMs two hypothesized routes to persuasion: heuristic processing. As Eagly
and Chaiken (1993) suggest, heuristic processing occurs when an individual either lacks the
opportunity or the motivation to carefully consider a message. The HSM explains this lack of
motivation as a common human tendency to expend the least effort necessary to process a
message. As a result, consumers tend to process heuristic messages in a more cursory way, using
the types of mental shortcuts implied by the term heuristic. Unfortunately, the HSM also suggests
that this type cursory processing results in more limited cognitive processing or elaboration
(borrowing from Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). This lower level of elaboration, in turn, leads to
persuasion which tends to be more fleeting and less resistant to counterarguments than messages
which are processed more intensively. Could it be that an IMC strategy, relying on its repetition

24

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

of one voice, one look messages, encourages a more heuristic level of processing? This
outcome would suggest that IMCs hypothesized benefits might be counteracted, if not negated
entirely, by the type of heuristic processing it would promote.
The possibility of heuristic processing of IMC messages suggests an opportunity for
future research to employ some HSM research techniques to determine whether or not IMC
stimulus materials are processed any differently than traditional materials. These techniques
could include the type of experimental manipulations of stimulus materials similar to those used
by Jain and Maheswaran (2000). They exposed subjects to information about a brand featuring
the types of cues which would tend to encourage heuristic processing (i.e., an attractive source),
versus exposure to information designed to encourage more systematic processing (i.e., objective
ratings of a brand). Other types of manipulations used by Kalyanaraman and Oliver (2001) might
also be considered. They manipulated three variables, including endorser credibility, animation
(for web site stimuli) and messages of different argument strength.
Another possible theoretical explanation comes from the literature on consumer varietyseeking. This notion suggests that consumers sometimes choose variety in their behavior--even
when this is a departure from familiar and positive past behaviors (Kahn, 1998). Three of the
most common explanations for variety-seeking behavior are the cognitive need for stimulation, a
natural desire for curiosity, or the suggestion that consumers may simply reach a threshold of
exposure to a stimulus. Beyond this threshold of exposure, consumers may become satiated and
more open to considering alternative stimuli (Ratner, Kahn & Kahneman, 1999). Varietyseeking theory would therefore seem to run counter to the one voice, one look consistency of
messages advocated by the IMC conceptand suggest that IMC might accelerate the process of
reaching the threshold of exposure noted above--therefore prompting consumers to seek variety

25

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

in the visual appearance of MC stimuli. As a result, IMCs hypothesized benefits might be

moderated.
These variety-seeking behaviors suggest an opportunity to adapt the methodology used by
Ratner et al. (1999) to test consumer reactions to repeated tracks of music. They varied exposure
of repeated segments of songs that subjects rated positively versus negatively utilizing computer
programs to record subject reactions. Perhaps this methodology could be adapted for use in
testing groups of messages employing an IMC strategy versus messages employing a more
traditional strategy. Such an approach could help to address the possibility, noted earlier, that the
repetition of messages employing an IMC strategy may accelerate subject satiation and therefore
help promote variety-seeking behavior.
Possible Methodology Flaws and Implications
One possible methodological flaw could have been the selection of two products from a
single involvement level. The problem may not lie in the choice of facial tissues and pain
relievers, but in the selection of only average involvement products rather than a mix of products
of high, average and low involvement. Could it be that IMC effects might be moderated for
average involvement products since these products tend to stimulate neither high nor low levels
of cognitive processing? Would the inclusion of products with different involvement levels have
elicited different effects, not only for the IMC condition, but for the other conditions as well?
Would the inclusion of a high involvement product encourage more central processing?
This learning suggests that future research should consider the use of test products from
multiple involvement levels. Such a variation in involvement might be more effective than this
project in eliciting the hypothesized IMC effects.
Another flaw could be related to the design of the stimulus materials. First, the Affect

26

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Pretest was designed to ensure that each piece of stimulus material in the high design integration
conditions was liked no more than its corresponding piece in the low design consistency
conditions. The results confirmed that this desired outcome occurred. In fact, in two of the eight
cases, the affect scores for the high design consistency condition pieces were significantly lower
than their low design consistency counterparts. Did these lower affect scores handicap the high
design consistency conditions? If so, this may have suppressed the dependent variable measures
for the IMC condition. Second, even though the Design Consistency Pretest indicated that there
was a significant perceived difference between the two conditions, the design consistency
manipulation check of the main study failed to mirror this result. This weakness in the desired
manipulation could have also moderated the hypothesized effects.
This learning suggests that, in future research, test materials should be pretested and
revised, where necessary, to achieve a goal of equal affect levels between conditions. Where
differences are found, a graphic designer should use the input from newly added open-ended
questionnaire items as diagnostic information to revise the materials to achieve the desired
balance of affect. This input might also help design stimulus materials that achieve a stronger
manipulation of design consistency differences that hold up in pretests as well as the main study.
Promotion Management Implications
From an industry standpoint, this study sought to confirm an idea that some marketing
communications professionals have believed for years: that consumer attitudes toward a brand
may be enhanced by pursuing a strategy that consistently integrates messages across advertising,
consumer sales promotion, direct marketing and other marketing communication tools.
Unfortunately, the present studys results did not support this view. However, if some of

27

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

the suggested methodology improvements noted above were followed, future research might lend
statistically significant support to the hypothesized beneficial role of IMC.
Such findings would have far-reaching impact on marketersand their supporting
agencies, ranging from packaging consultants to advertising agencies. The result would be clear:
it is not only desirable, but cost-effective to ensure the consistency of brand messages across all
elements of a brands offering. This would probably encourage two competing trends in the
industry. First, marketers could use the results to force their suppliers to work much more closely
with one another to better integrate their message design efforts on behalf of their clients. Or
second, marketers could instead increasingly opt to turn to large agency holding groups that are
already integrating diverse marketing communications functions under one roof such as package
design, web design, direct marketing and advertising. Either way, the result would likely be
more of the seamless one voice, one look consistency across all aspects of the product offering
suggested by IMC proponents.
Conclusion
The objective of this project was to add additional experimental research to the very
shallow body of such work in the IMC field, and to provide some empirical evidence to support
the proposed IMC models hypothesized effects. This study failed to find any support given its
methodology. The project did succeed, however, in one key respect. It provided a foundation for
the study of IMC effects in future research. The study builds on earlier work testing IMC effects
using attitudinal measures. It also broke new ground by using means-end analytical techniques.
Hopefully, this learning can be employed by other researchers to continue the quest toward a
definitive answer to the IMC debate.

28

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

References
Bell, S. L. (2000). The core of great communications. American Gas, 82 (5), 16-18.
Caywood, C., Schultz, D., & Wang, P. (1991). Integrated marketing communications:
A survey of national consumer goods advertising. Northwestern University Report.
Childers, T. L., & Houston, M. J. (1984). Conditions for a picture-superiority effect on
consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 643-654.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (revised edition).
New York: Academic Press.
DeLozier, M. W. (1976). The marketing communications process. New York: McGrawHill.
Duncan, T. R. (1994). New sides of IMC. In C. Faure, & L. Klien (Eds.), Marketing
communications strategies today and tomorrow: Integration, allocation, and
interactive technologies. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. New York: Brace
Jovanovich.
Erdfelder, E. (1984). Zur Bedeutung und Kontrolle des -Fehlers bei der
inferenzstatistischen Prfung log-linearer Modelle. [On significance and control of
the error in statistical tests of log-linear models]. Zeitschrift fr
Sozialpsychologie, 15, 18-32.
Gengler, C. E., Howard, D. J., & Zolner, K. (1995). A personal construct analysis of
adaptive selling and sales experience. Psychology and Marketing, 12 (4), 287-304.
Gengler, C. E., & Reynolds, T. J. (1995). Consumer understanding and advertising
strategy: Analysis and strategic translation of laddering data. Journal of Advertising

29

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Research, July/August, 1995, 19-33.

Goldberg, M. E., & Gorn, G. J. (1987). Happy and sad TV programs: How they affect
reactions to commercials. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 387-403.
Goldenberg, M. A., Klenosky, D. B., OLeary, J. T., & Templin, T. J. (2000). A
means-end investigation of ropes course experiences. Journal of Leisure Research,
32 (2), 208-235.
Gutman, J. (1982). A Means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes.
Journal of Marketing, 46, 60-72.
Hastak, M., & , J. C. (1989). Assessing the role of brand-related cognitive responses as
mediators of communication effects on cognitive structure. Journal of Consumer
Research, 15, 444-456.
Hupfer, N. T., & Gardner, D. M (1971). Differential involvement with products and issues: An
exploratory study. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the Association for
Consumer Behavior.
Jain, S. P., & Maheswaran, D. (2000). Motivated reasoning: A depth-of processing perspective.
Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 358-371.
Kahle, L. R. (1983). (Ed.) Social values and social change: Adaptation to life in America.
New York: Praeger.
Kahn, B. E. (1998). Dynamic relationships with customers: High-variety strategies.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26 (1), 45-53.
Kalyanaraman, S. & Oliver, M. B. (2001) Information processing of multiple peripheral cues.
Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication
Association.

30

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Kamakura, W. A. & Novak, T. P. (1992). Value-system segmentation: Exploring the

meaning of LOV. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 119-132.
Kamp, E. & MacInnis, D. J. (1995). Characteristics of portrayed emotions in commercials:
When does what is shown in ads affect viewers? Journal of Advertising Research, 35,
19-28.
Klenosky, D. B., Gengler, C. E., & Mulvey, M. S. (1993). Understanding the factors
influencing ski destination choice: A means-end analytic approach. Journal of Leisure
Research, 25 (4), 362-379.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal
of Advertising Research, 11, 33-38.
Levy, S. J. (1959). Symbols for sale. Harvard Business Review, 37, 117-119.
Lutz, K. A., & Lutz, R. J. (1977). The effects of interactive imagery and learning:
Application to advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 493-498.
MacInnis, D. J., & Price, L. L. (1987). The role of imagery in information processing:
Review and extensions. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 1-23.
McGrath, J.M. (2005a). IMC at a crossroads: A theoretical review and a conceptual framework
for testing. Marketing Management Journal, 15 (2), 55-66.
McGrath, J.M. (2005b). A pilot study testing aspects of the Integrated Marketing
Communications Concept. Journal of Marketing Communications, 11 (3), 191-214.
Olson, J. C. (1986). Meaning analysis in advertising research, in Advertising and Consumer
Psychology. J. C. Olson & K. Sentis (Eds.), New York: Praeger.

31

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Olson, J. C., & Reynolds, T. J. (1983). Understanding consumers cognitive structures:

Implications for advertising strategy. In L. Percy & A.G. Woodside (Eds.) Advertising
and consumer psychology (pp. 77-90). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Payne, A. (1995). Advances in relationship marketing. London: Kogan Page.
Peter, J. P., & Olson, J. C. (1987). Consumer behavior: Marketing strategy perspectives.
Homewood, Ill.: Irwin.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: central and peripheral
routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Phelps, J., & Johnson, E. (1996). Entering the quagmire: examining the meaning of
integrated marketing communications. Journal of Marketing Communications, 2, 159172.
Ratner, R. K., Kahn, B.E., & Kahneman, D. (1999). Choosing less-preferred
experiences for the sake of variety. Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (1), 1-15.
Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and
interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research, 2, 11-31.
Reynolds, T. J., Olson, J. C., & Rochon, J. P. (1997). A strategic approach to measuring
advertising effectiveness, in Measuring advertising effectiveness. W. D. Wells (Ed.).
Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
Schultz, D. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Lauterborn, R. F. (1993). Integrated marketing
communications. Chicago: NTC Publishing.
Schultz, D. E. (1996a). Is IMC finally becoming mainstream? Marketing News, 30 (14), 4.
Schultz, D. E. (1996b). The inevitability of integrated communications. Journal of Business

32

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Research, 37, 139-146.

Smith, P. R. (1993). Marketing communications, an integrated approach. Guildford
(U.K.): Biddles.
Stewart, D. W. (1996). Market-back approach to the design of integrated communications
programs: A change in paradigm and a focus on determinants of success. Journal of
Business Research, 37, 147-153.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer
Research, 12, 341-352.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and
application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 23, 59-70.

33

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Figure 1.
A Visualization of the IMC Concept
_______________________________________________________________
Number of Media
High
(Use of many media vehicles
featuring a consistent design)

IMC
Design
Consistency

Low

High
High
(high
of
(Highdegree
degree
visual
of consistency
visual
between MC
consistency
materials)
between
MC
materials)

(Little or no visual
consistency
between MC
materials)

Low
(Use of few media vehicles
featuring a consistent design)

_______________________________________________________________

34

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Table 1.
Two Primary Conditions of Main Study
Low Design Consistency

High Design Consistency

Weak design consistency

between product packaging and the
following additional MC stimuli:

Strong design consistency

between product packaging and the
following additional MC stimuli:

- 2 vehicles (low media condition)

- 2 vehicles (low media condition)

- 4 vehicles (high media condition)

- 4 vehicles (high media condition)

35

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Figure 2.
Example of Hierarchical Value Map
(for Relief 24 High Design Consistency Condition)

Values Level
Comfort
N=9
Freedom

N=3

Enjoyment

N=2

Peace
of Mind

N=2

Responsible

Control
N=4

Accom plishment

Safety
N=6

N=2

N=2

Consequences Level
Relief
N=3

Budget
N =3

Wrong
Medicine

Convenience
N=3

N=1

Danger
N=4

1e

Fast
Acting
N=9

Not Long
Lasting
N=1

Effective
N = 10

Attributes Level
Speed of
Relief
N=9

Strength
N=7

Type of
Relief
N=1

Price
N=2

Length of
Relief
N=8

Side
Effects
N=3

36

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Table 2.
Attribute Level Cognitive Concepts
t Test Results

Attribute
Soft

Low Design
Consistency
M
S.D.
.17
.377

High Design
Consistency
M
S.D.
.23
.425

Differences Between
Conditions
t
p
-.763
.448

Price

.21

.410

.17

.377

.518

.606

Speed

.15

.357

.13

.334

.295

.768

Strength

.15

.357

.15

.357

.000

1.00

Length

.06

.245

.06

.245

.000

1.00

Side Effects

.06

.245

.06

.245

.000

1.00

Fluffy

.04

.202

.04

.202

.000

1.00

Sanitary

.02

.144

.06

.245

-1.016

.312

Designs

.02

.144

.02

.144

.000

1.00

Lotion

.02

.144

.02

.144

.000

1.00

Prints

.00

.144

.02

.144

.000

1.00

Type

.02

.144

.00

.000

1.000

.320

Gentle

.00

.000

.02

.144

-1.000

.320

Scent*

.00

.00

.00

n/a

n/a

* Data for this attribute totaled zero when six Low Media condition cases were removed

37

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Table 3.
Consequence Level Cognitive Concepts
t Test Results

Consequence
Budget

Low Design
Consistency
M
S.D.
.17
.377

High Design
Consistency
M
S.D.
.17
.377

Differences Between
Conditions
t
p
.000
1.000

Effective

.23

.425

.13

.334

1.335

.185

Not painful

.10

.309

.11

.312

-.035

.972

Fast acting

.15

.357

.08

.279

.956

.342

Not rough

.10

.309

.10

.309

.000

1.000

Convenient

.04

.202

.04

.202

.000

1.000

Relief

.06

.245

.10

.309

-.733

.465

Danger

.06

.245

.06

.245

.000

1.000

Clean

.06

.245

.06

.245

.000

1.000

No red nose

.04

.202

.06

.245

-.455

.650

No difference

.06

.245

.00

.000

1.770

.080

Durable

.02

.144

.04

.202

-.581

.5623

Matches

.00

.000

.02

.144

-1.000

.320

Wrong type

.02

.144

.02

.144

.000

1.000

Nauseous

.00

.000

.02

.144

-1.000

.320

Variety

.02

.000

.00

.144

-1.000

.320

Not long

.02

.021

.00

.000

1.000

.320

Feels good

.02

.144

.00

.000

1.000

.320

38

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Table 4.
Values Level Cognitive Concepts
t Test Results

Values
Comfort

Low Design
Consistency
M
S.D.
.35
.483

High Design
Consistency
M
S.D.
.33
.476

Differences Between
Conditions
t
p
.213
.832

Responsibility

.19

.394

.13

.334

.838

.404

Control

.10

.309

.13

.334

-.317

.753

Safety

.15

.357

.10

.309

.612

.542

Esteem

.02

.144

.10

.309

-1.694

.094

Peace of mind

.08

.279

.02

.144

1.377

.172

Accomplishment

.04

.202

.04

.202

.000

1.000

Freedom

.04

.202

.04

.202

.000

1.000

Enjoyment

.06

.245

.04

.202

.455

.650

Family duty

.00

.00

.02

.144

-1.00

.320

39

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Appendix 1a.
Facial Tissue Stimulus Materials
High Design Consistency Condition

Magazine Ad

Direct Mail Piece

Website

Coupon

Low Design Consistency Condition

Magazine Ad

Direct Mail Piece

Website

Coupon

40

Testing IMC Effects With Means-End Analysis

Appendix 1b.
Pain Reliever Stimulus Materials
High Design Consistency Condition

Magazine Ad

Direct Mail Piece

Website

Coupon

Low Design Consistency Condition

Magazine Ad

Direct Mail Piece

Website

Coupon

41