226 CHAPTER 7 ADVERTISINGmessages are counter-productive. According to this theory, people deny their fear of death and attempt to enhance
their positive self-esteem, for instance by means of speeding, as a way of managing this fear.
The Protection Motivation Theory (PMT),^99 on the other hand, prescribes that four independent cognitive
responses mediate the impact of a threat appeal on coping attitudes, intentions and behaviour: perceived severity , an
individual’s beliefs about the seriousness of the threat; perceived susceptibility or probability of occurrence , an individual’s
beliefs about his or her chances of experiencing the threat; perceived response efficacy , an individual’s beliefs as
to whether a response effectively prevents the threat; and perceived self-efficacy , an individual’s belief in his or her
ability to perform the recommended response. Perceived severity and susceptibility represent the perceived level of
threat, perceived response efficacy and self-efficacy represent the perceived level of efficacy. Threat messages
consequently lead to protection motivation which, in turn, has an impact on attitudes and coping intention and
behaviour. Evoked fear may affect attitudes and behaviour through its impact on perceived severity and probability
of occurrence, but fear is not a necessary prerequisite for compliance with the message recommendation.
The PMT does an excellent job in explaining the factors leading to message acceptance, but fails to explain the
specific factors leading to message rejection. The ‘Extended Parallel Processing Model’^100 defines two reactions to
threat appeals: a mainly cognitive one (danger control), where people think about the threat and ways to avert it;
and a mainly emotional one (fear control) in which people react to their fear and engage in strategies (reactance,
defensive avoidance) to control their fear. Threat appeals may evoke fear that leads to fear control, or they may lead
to higher perceived threat that leads to fear and, in turn, again to increased perceived threat (feedback loop) and
danger control. Too high levels of evoked fear may immediately lead to fear control and thus to ineffective messages.
High levels of threat (caused by or inducing fear), combined with high levels of coping efficacy perception (‘I can
do something about it’), lead to danger control and message acceptance: people feel threatened, but have the
impression they can do something about it. On the other hand, high levels of threat combined with low levels of
perceived coping efficacy lead to fear control and message rejection. People feel threatened and get the impression
they cannot do anything about it, hence ignore or reject the message.
Recent empirical work on threat appeals^101 leads to the conclusion that perceived threat and coping efficacy, and
evoked fear, each have a separate and independent effect on message processing (involvement, credibility), and
hence on adaptive attitudes and behaviour. Scaring people seems to be particularly effective in grabbing their attention,
involving them in the message and having them perceive the message as credible. The defensive avoidance or
reactance phenomenon, as claimed by some of the above-mentioned models, has seldom been found in empirical
research. But also an increased perception of threat (even without evoking fear) can do the same thing, as well as
an improved impression of coping efficacy. Fear can be evoked by different types or stimuli: a higher social or
physical threat in the message, a negatively framed message, a fear-evoking or negative emotional or threatening
context.^102Music
Who has not caught themselves singing an ad jingle: ‘whenever there is fun, there is always
Coca-Cola’, ‘I feel Cointreau tonight’, etc., or thinking about one of the songs used in a com-
mercial? For example, Celine Dion’s ‘I Drove All Night’ for DaimlerChrysler, Steppenwolf ’s
‘Born to Be Wild’ in the Ford Cougar ad, ‘L’air du Temps’ for the champagne brand Bernard
Massard, Marvin Gaye’s ‘I Heard it through the Grapevine’ in the California Raisin ad, etc.
Music is extensively used in TV and radio commercials. For example, a study found that 84.5%
of US commercials and 94.3% of the ads in the Dominican Republic contained music.^103
Th e major reasons why advertisers make use of music is because they believe that it can
gain attention, create a mood, a sense of relaxation, or it can set an emotional tone that
enhances product evaluations and facilitates message acceptance, send a brand message and
convey a unique selling point, signal a certain lifestyle and build a brand personality, and
communicate cultural values.^104
Although there seems to be general agreement that the right music may have a signifi cant
impact on an ad’s eff ectiveness, not much empirical evidence exists to support this claim. Th e
only point of agreement seems to be that music induces more positive feelings.^105 As far asM07_PELS3221_05_SE_C07.indd 226M07_PELS3221_05_SE_C07.indd 226 6/5/13 3:01 PM6/5/13 3:01 PM