Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Understanding Advertising
Creativity
How perceptions of creativity influence
advertising effectiveness
Erik Modig
ll
To
Science and creativity
Foreword
This volume is the result of a research project carriecl out at the
]\ilarketing and Strategy department at the Stockholm School of
Economics (SSE).
This volume is submittedas a doctor's thesis at SSE. In keeping with the
policies of SSE, the author has been entircly free to conduct and present
his research in the manner of his choosing as an expression of his mvn
ideas.
SSE is grateful for the financial support provieled by the Torsten and
Ragnar Sderberg Foundations which has made it possible to fulfill the
project.
Gran Lindqvist
Richard vVahlund
Director of Research
Stockholm School of Economics
Acknowledgements
First, I woulcl like to thank the Torsten and Ragnar Sclerberg
Fourrelations for generous financial support. vVithout your help this
research and my years towards this PhD thesis would not have been
possiblc. I hopc that you will find my thesis a valuablc contribution in
linewith the goals of your foundations.
Besides financial support the journey towarcls this thesis would not have
been possiblc without the gcncrous intcllcctual and cmotional support by
colleagues, friendsand family.
First, I would like to thank my three supervisors and researeher gurus
lVIicacl Dahlcn, Sara Rosengren and Karl '1\1cnnbcrg. Micacl, you truly
are a marketing phenomenon. The small glimpses into your brilliant
mind, that you so gcncrously have offcrcd mc during thcsc years, have
change my way of thinking and doing research. Y ou have ahvays been
thcrc with your insights, hclp and support and for that I am very gratefuL
Sara, your support and feedback during our numerous coffee breaks
have been invaluablc for the progress of this thesis and also (cqually
important) my mental health. You are one of the brightest and most
thorough researchers I have mct and thus an important rolc modd.
Karl, with your knowledge, guidance and cheerful spirit, you
impcrsonatc the best things I know about research: intclligcncc, curiosity
and generosity. Even though our areas of expertise difler, your
enthusiasm has inspired me to be a better researeher and academic
collcaguc.
VIll
I vvould also like to thank the person that has been my wingman during
these four years. Jonas Colliander, I am very grateful for all the shared
laughs, discussions and struggles, not to mention the late nights in hotel
rooms all over Europe. I am very grateful for being able to count on you,
both as a trusted colleague and a close friencl.
Another person that has played a vital role in the making of this journey
is my boss and rolc modd, rescareher J\!Iagnus Sdcrlund. The way you
pursue your search for new knowledge has brought me a lot of
inspiration and I hope that I one day can lcave a similar footprint in the
academic world as you have. You have always cared that I have had the
mental peace to focus on my own research and develop my own vvay of
thinking. Thank you for that.
I would also like to thank all my other present and past collcagucs at
Center for Consumer JVIarketing: Claes-RobertJulander, Fredrik Lange,
Fredrik Trn, Hanna Berg, Henrik Sjdin, Jens Nordflt, Joel Ringbo,
John Karsberg, Karina Tndevold, lVfikael Hernant, Nielas hman,
Nina kes tam, Per-J onas Eliaeson, Peter Gabriclson, Rebecea
Gruvhammar och Susanna Erlandsson. You have all contributed to a
stimulating and joyful working environmcnt.
During the years I have had the privilcge to study for brilliant schalars in
courses and research seminars. Anders \Vestlund, Bjrn Alm, Corinne
Krusc, Henrik Uggla,James Burroughs,Johan Roos, Lars
Lars
Strannegrd, Page J\iloreau and Tiffany \Vhite, I would like to thank you
for the knowlcdge and feedback that you so gcnerously have been given
me. I would also like to thank all respondents to the numerous
questionnaires that led up to this research. Spccifically, I want to thank
Henrik Callerstrand, who contributed with data while working on his
master thesis. I vvould also like to thank J\!Iarie Tsujita for helping me
with all the practical details that come \vith every little steps towards a
PhD title.
lX
Chapter l
CHAPTER l
Especially, this thesis aims to answer a reoccurring plea within the field
of advertising research for more contributions about advertising
creativity (\Vhite, 1972; Zinkhan, 1993; Sasser and Koslow, 2008). One
specific gap in advertising creativity research to date is that studies have
prcdominatcly focuscd on issucs rcgarding the productian of advcrtising
creativity (Sasser and Koslow, 2008). Current research need to better
understand the response to crcativc advcrtiscmcnts by documcnting how
advertising professionals and consumer assess and value creativity
(Bcrnardin and Kcmp-Robcrtson, 2008; Sasser and Koslow, 2008). This
seems especially important as empirical studies to date reveal that
advertising professionals seems to have no formalized understanding
about hmv advcrtising crcativity work (El-Murad and \1\!cst, 2004;
Nyilasy and Reid, 2009a). In addition, research has predominately used
an information proccssing perceptive in cxplaining the positive cffccts of
creativity advertising (Sasser and Koslow, 2008). To fully understand the
cffccts advcrtising crcativit:y has on consumcrs, currcnt research should
initiate in new perspectives and new theories about how advertising
crcativity might work is nccdcd (Sasscr and Koslow, 2008). In the next
sections I will specify in more detail the purpose of the thesis and its
acadcmic and practical rclcvancc.
CHAPTER l
Il nuovo
consumatore
consumers have become more advertising savvy and are able and
inclined to assess the value of single advertisement (Dahlen and Edenius,
2007; Dahlen, Granlund, and Grenros, 2009). You could argue that
consumers have in one sense become advertising mediums themselves, as
the use of their "own" brands on blogs, Twitter, or Facebook has
incrcascd cxponcntially (Nielsen, 2011, 20 12). Thcir prcscncc in social
media and in charmels such as YouTube has given consumers a behindthc-sccncs look into advcrtising and how it work. This might affcct how
they judge and value advertising creativity. By including the consumer
pcrspcctivc this thesis aims to adel new insights about how advcrtising
creativity might work.
Third, this thesis present onc of fcw studies that comparcs advcrtising
professionals and consumers assessment of advertising creativity and
rclatcd conccpts such as divcrgcncc, rclcvancc, craftsmanship, humor
and advertising effectiveness. Thereby contributing to the current
research strcam about hmv audicnccs respond and cvaluatc advcrtising
creativity (Smith et al., 2007; Yang and Smith, 2009). Especially the
findings cxpand the literature that has stuelied the diffcrcnccs bctwccn
consumer and advertising professionals assessment (\Vhite and Smith,
2001; Koslow, Sasscr, and Riordan, 2003; \l\7cst, Kovcr, and Caruana,
2008). The findings show that advertising research might need to reasscss which factors that cxplain consumers and advcrtising profcssionals'
judgments of advertising creativity. In addition, findings suggest that
research nccd to furthcr elevdop the understanding on hmv advcrtising
professionals differ in their view of advertising creativity relative to
advcrtising cffcctivcncss.
F ourth, acadcmic research has prcdominatcly uscd an information
processing perspective to explain the positive effect creativity has on
adverting effectiveness (Sasser and Koslmv, 2008). Previous research
have focused on how a creative advertising increase processing, which in
turn lead to a stronger impact on classical hierarchy-of-effects
measurements such as ad attitude, message recall, brand attitude and
purchase intention (see Smith, Chen, and Yang, 2008; and Sasser and
Koslow, 2008 for review of previous studies). This thesis complements
and contributes to this stream of research in three ways. First it expands
the literature about signaling effects of adverting creativity (Dahlen,
Rosengren, and Trn, 2008). Findings shovv that award winning creative
advcrtiscmcnt signals morc pcrccivcd sender cffort and cxpcnsc,
campared to non-a\vard winning advertisements, which in turn has a
positive cffcct on brand cvaluation. This finding contributcs by
strengthen the notion that the positive efl'ect on brand evaluation might
not only be cxplaincd by incrcascd proccssing but could also be
explained by signal theory. Second, this thesis employ what can be called
an out-of-the-box thinking when it comes to potential effects advertising
crcativity might have. By showing that advcrtising crcativity can cnhancc
the perceived and real creativity of the audience (the reader of the
crcativc advcrtiscmcnt) it contributcs to cxisting thcorics on how
advertising creativity work. Finally, the last study highlights how
advcrtising crcativity rclatcs to other areas of research (in this casc the
artistic style of images in advertising design) in an attempt to find
similaritics and apportunitics for thcorctical syncrgics as wcll as new
ways of thinking about advertising creativity.
CHAPTER l
2008), which indirectly affects firm performance (e.g. Aaker 1996; Keller
1998). Consequently, these arguments should be sufficient to
demonstrate the practical relevance of adverting creativity, and thus this
thesis. At the same time, however, advertisers find it clifficult to manage
creativity within the aclvertising planning process (Kover, Goldberg, and
Jamcs, 1995; Hacklcy, 2003). In that sense, this thesis can be scen as onc
step in an attempt to increase the understanding and use of advertising
crcativity and thcrcby potcntially milder thosc difficultics. I ,,vill present
this practical relevance by highlighting four different areas in which this
thesis contributcs to advcrtising practicc.
First, aclvertising professionals, who are largely responsible for allotting
advcrtising funding, have no unificd thcorics on how crcativity can be
used to increase advertising effectiveness
and \Vest, 2004).
Even though thcy bclicvc it works, advcrtising professionals bclicvc the
only relevant rule for creativity is that there is no rule (Nyilasy and Reicl,
2009a). In this rcgard, thcrc is a potential valuc of rcvicwing and
summarizing existing literature on advertising creativity in order to help
bridge the gap bctwccn acadcmia and practicc. The literature review in
this thesis could expancl the knowledge of advertising creativity, and
provide advertisers and advertising ageneies with tools that will enablc
them to more effectively develop and evaluate advertising strategies. This
eould potentially improve firm competitiveness.
Second, advertising professionals face the question of w hether consumers
are able to judge the creativity of an advertisement and if their
judgments influence advertising effectiveness (vVhite and Smith, 200 l).
Both within advertising research and practice there is a history of relying
on the judgment of advertising professionals when assessing advertising
creativity (Dahlen, Rosengren, and Trn, 2008). As previously stated,
cmTent research calls for more studies on consumer response to
aclvertising in order to better understand how advertising really works
(Bernardin and Kemp-Robertson, 2008; Sasser and Koslow, 2008). This
research contributes to advertising practice by shmving that consumers
CHAPTER l
l0
CHAPTER 2
ll
Chapter 2
UNDERSTANDING ADVERTISING
CREAliVITY
Definition of Creativity
The academic interest in creativity began vvith J. P. Guilford's 1950
address to the American Psychology Association where he initiated the
call to define, measure and improve creative ability (Guilford, 1950).
Since then there has been significant efforts in defining ,,vhat creativity is
and hO\v it should be measured (Nieusburger, 2009). In the Nevv Oxford
American Dictionary (20 l O, online access August 20 12) creativity is
defined as "The use of the imagination or original ideas", thus,
highlighting the importance of doing something original (i.e., something
that is not dependent on other people's ideas, and is inventive and
unusual) in order to be creative. This definition is dominant in traditional
tests of creativity, such as the "unusual uses" test, which mainly focus on
the ability to engage in divergent thinking (l\'Ieusburger, 2009).
A more elaborate definition is offered by Oldham and Cummings (1996,
p. 608), "Produets, ideas, or proeedures that satisfy tvvo condition: (l)
12
they are novel or original and (2) they are potentially relevant for, or
useful to an organization". This definition, vvith small differences in the
vvords used, has become dominant throughout academia and in
textbooks on creativity (Nleusburger, 2009). It refers to an original iclea
as something divergent (tending to differ from the norm or develop in a
different direetion), and highlights that creativity combines both
divergenee and relevanee (closely conneeted with or appropriate to the
matter at hand). However, what is defined as divergent and relevant may
be in reference to the creator, society, or the domain within which the
CITation occurs (Meusburger, 2009), meaning that what is defined as
creative or not is in relation to a specific field, person or culture.
One of the goals with this thesis is to contribute to the definition and
understanding of creativity within the field of advertising research. In
terms of an initial viewpoint, this research rclies on the opinion each
individual holels about what is-or is not-creative, regardless of
previous definitions or ,,vhich reasoning each single individual use to
arrive at their final opinion. As such, the thesis follows the psychological
research that rclies on "laymen theory" in defining a concept (Elsbach
and Kramer, 2003; Puccio and Chimento, 2001). In other words, if a
person says something is creative, then it is creative for that person.
I have ehosen this approach for three reasons. First, as divergence and
relevance may both relate to the creator and to the field in which they
create, it is impossiblc for more than one person to share the same
unclerlying definition of creativity. In other words, each indiviclual has
his or her own perceptions about what is divergent or relevant, which
me ans that clefining creativity on the basis of these concepts can, at best,
give us a good estimate. Second, research has shown that respondents
use other factors besides divergence and relevance in their definitions of
advertising creativity (e.g., \Vest, Kover, and Caruana, 2008). Only by
not limiting my vie\v to these two elements can I find ne\v perspectives.
Third, one of the main goals of this thesis is to document hO\v different
audiences perceive advertising creativity and how their perceptions
CHAPTER 2
13
14
CHAPTER 2
15
16
Yeor Title
Journal
:V\allhevvs
197 5
Politz
1975
Creotiveness
Journol of Advertisiug
l 9 /
FraLer
19f3J
C reolive
Micheli
1984
Andrus
Can You
Kerl
and Sethi
joumol of .'.'\orketing
a Creollvejudqe
Journal of ,\dvertisinq
lmugi no tion
lournal of ,\dvertising
journal of Advcrli sirrg
l\l'.ichell
l 98-1
19f36
Journal
ond \Nicks
of Advcrli sirrg
Personnel
Hirschrnon
19f39
Bruke et ul
1990
,.o../'.cJrketing Sc:ierrce
P.enedetto, l omote,
l 99?
ond C hanelron
West
iiAarketrJoce
1993
Philosophies
Helgesen
199-1
1995
Journal
A N ow
ol Advcrli sing
Research
Appi<xJch
l\l.urphy ond
1\Aoynord
199
Toylor, lloy , o nd
1996
199/
llo ley
West ond P.erthod
Evidcncc and
Reid, Whitehill King,
1998
ond Delorme
by /\dvertisers
f- mprrrcol
lmplic:olions
Journol of Advertising
ond No'N
ol Advcrli sirrg
VVesl
1999
Journal
2001
Journol of Advertising
/ 00-1
lnternotionollournol of /\dvertising
Research
2004
joumo l of .';\orketing
2004
Horsky
700
lv\.orketrnq Science
2006
Do /Y\orkbs gol lhc A.dvorli sing Thoy N eod or lhc Advorli sing
Thcv Descwc?
/ 00/
Riordarr
Sosser, Koslow, ond
Riordarr
by /1qencres:
an
Li et ul
2008
Verbeke et of.
7008
lournal of ,\dvertisinq
V\/ofler
2010
0 11
Outcornes
Journol of Advertising
l7
CHAPTER 2
;\dvertisinq /\gencies
Sluhlfa ul
2011
of Advcrli sing
p!Cx:ess in mlverti si ng
O liver ond .A.shley
?O l ?
1976
Re id
l 'l//
\/oughn
1982
,<\!v_-:.( 7onn
t\nd rews o nd Smith
1'186
1996
Poi11t ot
Creotive.s vHrsus Re.seorc:he1.s ..'v\ust They
Advcrsarics
,\dvertisinq f-ducotion
:JCXX)
Young
Journal ol Adverlising
Be
Jorrrnul of
Re semdr
:JCX)J
l lo cklev
2C\)3
2CYJ3
:JCXb
ond Colli ns
llocktey
2(\)7
:JCXtlo
Advcrlising .A gcncios
,\gency l'ractitrcmers lheories of How ,\dvertisinq VVorks
:l() l ()
(:reative l eader5
Journol of .A.dvertrsrng
l '16()
1972
1973
1974
Journol of ;V,'Jrketinq
Jorrrnul of Adver ti sirru
ond C roalivify
Journal ol Adverlising
The Second Mecmi11g ol the 'Nord 'C reolive Shorrld Be lirs! irr
Journol ol Ad,erlising
1974
1975
1976
1982
1983
Journol ol Ad,erlising
1'18:;
1986
1'188
1992
1'193
Zinkhon
l 993
Slevvari
of .Advorlising C roalivily
Journal ol Adverlising
Journal ol Adverlising
of Ad varlising Research
Kove-r
O'Conner,
W illema in, ond
Modochlan
C7olderrber g ,
The Voluo
of Compclilion omong
Agencics in Dovdoping Ad
1999
Morketinu Science
2CYJl
Journal ol Adverlising
t'v\ozurskv, m rd
Sc)k>rnc)rl
Johar, Hollfook, and
Stern
Hockley
:JCX).)
2()'.)4
Kno-v-;?
18
Chong
?<XX>
Internationol Journol
Toub io
2CIJ6
?<X)8
,v.mketing Science
Research: W ildfire
of /\dverlising
Journal of /\dvertisinq
crevelles et d.
?<X)8
keseorch: l he
cnvisionrnq the future of /\dverlising
C onc:ept of lmaginative lntensity in /\dv'er-ti sing
Journo l of ,\dvertisinq
GoldenlJer(J o nd
MeJLurskv
(7riffin
2CIJ8
Journo l of Advertising
?<X)8
2CIJ8
?<X)8
Journol of ,\dvertisinq
in Print h.ls
Journo l of Advertising
Torres
John R
Smser
2CIJ8
2C0B
Jaya nli
2010
Campbell
?O l
2010
Journol of ,\dvertisinq
Journo l o f Consurner Mmketin(J
journal
of A.dvorli sing
Journo l of Advertisin(J
journa l of A.dvorli sing Research
Journol of ,\dvertisinq kesemch
2CIJ9
Journol of ,\dvertisinq
Journo l of Advertisin(J
Nilsson
V\ihile a nd Srnilh
200 1
\.Yest, Kover. o nd
2fJ()B
Kover. j ornes, o nd
Sonner
jour11o l of Advertisirrg
Caruona
1989
Jour11o l of Advertisirrg
1992
Kover . GoldiHf.J.
m rdjcmres
A ng and Low
1995
Sto11e. Besser. m rd
Lewis
Pielcrs, V\iorlop, ond
W ed el
Smith ond Yorrg
2()()0
20C'IJ
2C02
Breoking Through lho C luller: Bond ils or Advc rlising O rig ina lii'!
ond fomiliollt)' for flrond il.ttentron ond l .oemory
Tovmrd o (-;errero l Theory of Creotivi ty i11 Advertisinu [xomirrirrg
2CIJ4
N Co mrnerciols: /',New
lV'1onagcmcnl Science
,v.mketinu Theory
2CIJS
A ng , Lee, o nd kong
2C07
Tollisdol.
2C05
Markding Science
Jour11o l of Advertisirrg
of
Smith et ol.
?<X)/
lv\.orketrnq Science
2C0B
j ournal
l)ohlen , Rosenqren,
mrd Tr Il
?<X)8
.Advertising Creotivily
Pools a nd Dcwille
2C0B
journal
Srnilh, U ren, o nd
Ycmq
lleotlr. Noirn 0 11d
2C0B
journal
2CIJ9
l low C!teclive is
2()09
Markding Science
20 10
Jour11o l of Advertisirrg
of Advcrli sing
or A.dvorli sing
or A.dvorli sing
19
CHAPTER 2
Shemr n. Vorki. ond
A.shiHy
70 1 l
lhe Differentroi
Brcmd judgrnents
/(X)8
lournd of .A.dvertrsrng
Thaxetica! Reviews
Sa sser ond Kos lov;
20
CHAPTER 2
21
CHAPTER 2
23
24
26
28
l\'Iurad and \Vest, 2004; Smith and Yang, 2004). I \vill now discuss w-hat
we today know about different factors of advertising creativity.
Even though researchers have used different labels, all published studies
have measured the factor of divergence in some way (see Table 3). This
factor of creativity reflects a deviation from the norm-a stimulus that
previous information does not lead one to expect (Haberland and Dacin,
1992). Divergence earresponds to unexpectedness in the sense that
advertisements inconsistent w-ith other advertisements in the same
product category (see Smith and Yang, 2004).
1992
2000
White o nd Smith,
2001
Smith
2003
2007
et al , 2007
2008
2008
(2009)
201 O
20 11
n
ulvergence
Pefevonce
Orig inality
Meoningfulness,
condensation
Reformulatian
Novelty
Meoningfulness
Positive feeling
Orig rnolity
Log ic
Well-crofted
Originality
Strategy
Artistry
N oveity
Meanmgfulness,
connectedness
Divergence
Relevance
Divergence
Relevance
Orig inality
Relevonce, gool
dlrected
Divergence
Relevonce
Originality
Consideroteness,
product relevance
Novelty
Usefulness
Croftsmanship
Execution
O ther Foctors
Der1sive, humor
C larity
* There are oddit1onal outhorsthat have stud 1ed factors o f odvertis1ng creat1vity (Sm1th and Yang , 2004)
However, these studies are presenled in textbooks o r in ocodemic iournals and conference proceedings which
l consid er outside the sco pe of thrs thesis. N one of these post-dotes
relevonce For our current understanding
CHAPTER 2
29
30
CHAPTER 2
31
T o sum up, during the last years we have witnessed numerous studies
that document the positive eflects of advertising creativity. Creativity is
32
Artide
Theory
Dependent factor(sJ
Ad ottitude, recoll
Ad o nd brand a ttrtude
Reca ll
Tel Ii s et af , 2005
Information processing
Till 2008
Recall , Recognrtion
CHAPTER 2
33
34
CHAPTER 2
35
36
Chapter 3
38
the effects on the advertised brand for advertisements that have won
either a creativity award or an effectiveness awarcl. The findings show
that creative advertisements is perceived by consumers to signal more
seneler effort and expense when compared with "average" and
"effective" advertisements, which in turn positively affect brand attitude,
interest and word-of-mouth intentions. The fourth artide takes an
"outside-the-box" perspeetive on the positive effects of creative
advertiscmcnts. It shows that crcative ads not only bencfit the advertiscd
brand but also the media vehicle and those who are exposed to the
advertiscmcnt. This introduecs a new pcrspective on the cffeets of
creative advertising by measuring effects on other stakeholders. The fifth
artide links creativity to the emerging literature on the effects of artwork
indudcd in marketing tools. By investigating the rolc of art in
advertising, the artide shovvs that by enhancing perceptions of creativity,
the indusion of art can lcad to positive effects on the advertised brand.
Methodology
The first step in this research process vvas to document the researeher
perspective on advertising creativity. Thus, a theoretieal analysis was first
conducted leading to the list of l 07 academic artides that I have
described earlier. F or the empirical studies some specific requirements
was set in order to be able to investigate the research questions. As this
thesis sets out to test how different audiences perceive advertising
creativity, samples from different populations were necessary. J'vfost
important was the inclusion of a large consumer and advertising
professional sample to enable investigations and comparison of hmv
these two audiences view advertising creativity. These t\vo requirements
we re the foundation of stu dy l and 2, w hich explore how consumers and
advertising professionals think about advertising creativity. Study 3 to 5
are experimental studies used to investigate potential side effects that
creativity might have on consumers and media vehicles. Study 6
39
CHAPTER 3
Table 5. Studies
Study
Focus
Sample
Article(s)
Empirical
4,398 consumers
l , 2 and 3
Empirical
2,201 odvertismg
professionals
l ond 2
Empiricol
274 consumers
Empir1col
l 29 consu mers
Empiricol
l 2 l students
Empir1col
255 students
40
42
44
CHAPTER 3
45
46
CHAPTER 3
47
48
Chapter 4
DISCUSSION
The aim of this thesis was to contribute to the understanding of creativity
within advertising. Specifically, this thesis has adelressed the issues of who
should judge advertising creativity, how that creativity should be
measured, and the effects on marketing objectives of such creativity. This
thesis contributes to existing theories about advertising planning and
effectiveness by extending prior research (e.g. Sasser and Koslow, 2008;
Nyilasy and Reid, 2009a). By presenting the two largest studies to date
on consumers' and advertising professionals' perceptions of advertising
creativity, this thesis offers confirmatian of existing theories and new
insights about how advertising creativity works. It also offers new,
"creative" perspectives, vvhich hopefully highlight inspiring directions for
future research, not only w-ith regard to advertising creativity but also in
relation to the broader field of advertising effectiveness research.
In the follm.ving section, I discuss how this thesis contributes to
advertising research and to advertising practice. Even though each of the
five artides inclucled in this thesis contributes to a specific stream of
research, this diseussion foeuses on their eontributions to the
understanding of advertising creativity as a whole and how that creativity
CHAPTER 4
51
52
CHAPTER 4
53
54
CHAPTER 4
55
56
CHAPTER 4
57
Limitations
In this thesis I have airned at making a contribution to the academic
literature on advertising creativity. The thesis is not a comprehensive
guide about how to successful plan creativc advertising, but one attempt
to help researchers and professionals in approving advertising theories
and practice. Given this aim and scope I have had to make certain
choices regarding methods and perspectives. These choices come with
limitations and implications on my results and contribution. Each artide
has its own specific limitations, which is stated in each article. In the
following section I will highlight certain overall limitations with the
research metlwds employed.
One limitation is that these studies are carriecl out in a western European
country and therefore dcpendent on specific cultural aspects from this
part of the world. l t might not be the case that creativity is assessed in a
similar way in other parts of the world. Further, the implcmentation and
58
REFERENCES
Aaker, David (1996), Building Strong Brands. New York: The Free
Press.
Ailawadi, Kusum L., Neslin, Seott A., and Lehmann, Donald R. (2003),
"Reven u e Premium as an Outcome l\!Ieasure of Brand Equity",
Journal ofl\!larketing, 67 (October), 1-17.
Amabile, Theresa (1982) " The Social Psychology of Creativity: A
Consensual Assessment Technique", Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 43 (5), 997-1013.
Amabile, Theresa (1983), The Social Psychology of Creativity, New
York: Springer-Veclay.
Amabile, Theresa (1996), Creativity in Context, Boulder, CO: \Vestview
Press.
Amabile, Theresa (1997), "l\,fotivating creativity in organizations: On
doing vvhat you love and loving what you do" , California
lVIanagement Review, 40, 39-58.
Andrews, Jonlee and Smith, Daniel C. (1996), "In Search of the
l\!Iarketing lmagination: Factors Affecting the Creativity of
l\!Iarketing Programs for l\!Iature Products" , Journal of l\'farketing
Research, 33 (lVfay), 174-187.
Andrus, Roman R. (1968), "Creativity: A Function for Computers or
Executives," Journal oflVfarketing, 32, (April), 1-7.
Ang, Swee H. and Lovv, Sharon Y. lVL (2000), "Exploring the
Dimensions of Ad Creativity" , Psychology & l\1arketing, l 7
(October), 835-854.
Ang, Swee H., Lee, Yih H., and Leong Siew 1\!I. (2007), "The ad
ereativity cube: coneeptualization and initial validation" , Journal of
the Academy ofl\!Iarketing Science, 35, 220-232.
Ashley, Christy and Oliver,Jason D. (2010), "Creative Leaders",Journal
of Advertising, 39 (1), 115-130.
60
Baack, Daniel \V., \Vilson, Rick T., and Till, Brian D. (2008), "Creativity
and l\!Iemory Effects: Recall, Recognition, and an Exploration of
N ontraditionall\!Iedia" , Journa1 of Advertising, 3 7 (\Vinter), 85-94.
Benedetto, C. Anthony, Tamate, l\'fariko, and Chandran, Rajan (1992),
"Deve1oping Creative Advertising Strategy for the Japanese
1\!Iarketplace", Journal of Advertising Research, (January/February),
39-48.
Besemer, Susan and O'Quin, Karen (1986), "Analyzing Creative
Products: Refinement and T est ofJ udging Instrument", The J ourna1
of Creative Behavior, 20:2, 115-26.
Besemer, Susan, and Treffinger, Donald J (1981 ), "Analysis of Creative
Products: Review and Synthesis,'' The Journal of Creative Behavior,
r3 , 1-o
1:J.
:>u- 70o.
Blasko, Vincent J and 1\!Iokwa, l\!Iichael P. (1986), "Creativity in
Advertising: A Janusian Perspective", Journal of Advertising, 15 (4),
43-72.
Blasko, Vincent]. and 1\!Iokwa, l\!Iichael P. (1988), "Paradox, Advertising
and the Creative Process", CmTent Issues & Research In Advertising.
Burke, Raymond R., Rangaswamy, Arvind, vVind,Jerry, and Eliashberg,
Jehoshua (1990), "A Knowledge-Based System for Advertising
Design", l\farketing Science, 9(3), 212-229.
Bursk, Edward C. and Seth, BaWt Singh (1976), "The In-house
Adverting Agency",Journal ofAdvertising, 24-27.
Burroughs, James E. , and David G. l\!Iick (2004), "Exploring
Anteeeclents and Consequences of Consumer Creativity in a
Problem-Solving Context." Journal of Consumer Research 31 (2),
402-411.
Dahl, Darren vV., and Page C.
(2002), "The Influence and
Value of Analogical Thinking During New Product Ideation."
Journal oflVIarketing Research 39 (1), 47-60.
Dahl, Darren vV., and Page C. lVIoreau (2007), "Thinking Inside the
Box: vVhy Consumers Enjoy Constrainecl Creative Experiences."
Journal oflVIarketing Research 44 (3), 35 7-369.
Dahlen, lVIicael (2005), "The lVIedium as a Contextual Cue," Journal of
Advcrtising, 34 (Fall), 89-98.
REFEREKCES
61
62
REFEREKCES
63
64
REFEREKCES
65
66
REFEREKCES
67
Smith, Robert E., .1\fackenzie, Scott B., Yang, Xiaojing, Buchholz, Laura
l\!I. , and Darley, \Villiam K. (2007), "l\,fodeling the Determinants and
Effects of Creativity in Advertising", l\!Iarketing Science 26
(November-December), 819-833.
Smith, Robert E., Chen, Jiemiao and Yang, Xiaojing (2008), "The
Imp act of Advertising Creativity on the Hierarchy of Effects",
Journal of Advertising, 37 (\Vinter), 47-61.
Sobel, Robert S., and Rothenberg, Albert (1980), "Artistic Creation as
Stimulated by Superimposed Versus Separated Visual Images",
Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 39:5, 953-961.
Stephens, Edvvard, and Burke, Thomas ( 19 74), "Z en Theory and the
Creative Course" ,Journal of Advertising, 3(2), 38-41.
Sternberg, Robert J. (2006), "Creating a Vision of Creativity: The First
25 Years", Psychology ofAesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S(1), 212.
Sternberg, Robert J. and Lubart, Todd I. (1999), "The Concept of
Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms" in Handbook of Creativity,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Stevvart, David vV., and Furse, David H. (2000), "Analysis of the Impact
of Executional Factors on Advertising Performance", Journal of
Advertising Research (November/December), 85-88.
Stewart, JVIichelle D. and Lewis, Bruce R. (2009), "A Comprehensive
Analysis of ]\ilarketing Journal Rankings" , Journal of J\1arketing
Education, 1-18.
Stone, Gerald, Besser, Donna and Lewis, Loran E. (2000), "Recall,
Liking, and Creativity in TV Commercials: A New Approach,"
Journal ofAdvertising Research, (1\ilay/June), 7-18.
Stuhlfaut,
vV. (2011), "The Creative Code: An Organisational
Influence on the Creative Process in Advertising", International
Journal ofAdvertising, 30(2), 283-304.
Sutherland, John, Duke, Lisa, and Abernethy, Avery (2004), "A ]\ilodel
of ]\;farketing Information Flow", Journal of Advertising, 33 (4), 3952.
Sutton, Robert I. and Hargadon, Andrew (1996), "Brainstorming
Groups in Contcxt: Effcctivcncss in a Product Design Firm",
Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (4), 685-718.
68
Taylor, Ronald E., Hoy, l\ilariea Grubbs, and Haley, Eric (1996), "How
F ren ch Advertising Professionals Develop Creative Strategy",
Journal of Advertising, 25 (l), 1-14.
Tellis, Gerald J. (1998), Aclvertising and Sales Promotion Strategy,
Adclison \Vesley, Reading l\1A.
Tellis, GerarclJ. (2009), "Generalizations about Aclvertising Effectiveness
in l\'larkets", Journal of Advertising Research, 49 (2), 240-245.
Thorson, Esther and Zhao, X. (1997), "Television Viewing Behavior as
an lndicator of Commercial Effectiveness", in \Villiam D. \Vells (ed.)
Nleasuring Aclvertising Effectiveness. Nlahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Tierney, Pamela, and Farmer, Steven 1\!I. (2002), "Creative Self-Efficacy:
Its Potential Anteeeclents and Relationship to Creative
Performance", Academy oflVfanagementJournal, 45 (6), 1137-1148.
Tierney, Pamela, and Farmer, Steven ]\iL (20 11 ), "Creative Self-Eflicacy
Development and Creative Performance Over Time." Journal of
Applied Psychology 96 (2), 277-293.
Till, Brian D. and Baack, Daniel vV. (2005), Recall and persuasion. Does
Creativity lV1atter?",Journal of Advertising, 34 (Fall), 47-57.
T oubia, Olivier (2006), "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives" ,
l\1arketing Science, 25(5), 411-425.
Treadwell, Yvonne (1970), "Humor and Creativity," Psychological
Reports, 26, 55-58.
U nsworth, KelTie (200 l), "U npacking Creativity", Academy of
l\1anagement Review, 26 (April), 289-297.
Vanden Bergh, Bruce G., Reid, Leonard, N. , and Schorin, Gerald A.
(1983), "How ]\ilany Creative Alternatives to Generate?" , Journal of
Advertising, 12(4), 46-49.
Vanden Bergh, Bruce G., Smith, Sandra J., and vVicks, Jan L. (1986),
"Internal Agency Relationships: Account Services and Creative
Personnel",Journal ofAdvertising, 15 (2), 55-60.
Vakratsas, Demetrios and Ambler, Tim (1999), "How Advertising
\Vorks: vVhat Do vVe Really Know?", Journal of lVIarketing, 63
anuary), 26-43.
Vaughn, Richard L. (1983), "Point of Vicw: Crcativcs versus
Researchers: lVIust They Be Adversaries?", Journal of Advertising
Research, 22(6), 45-48.
REFEREKCES
69
70