The Effect of Marketing Materials and Visual Stimuli on Perceptions of Users of Annual Reports: A Persuasion Perspective

This study examined factors hypothesized to affect the influence of color photographs and other marketing devices, as part of an annual report, on users’ perceptions of a business. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion (ELM) was used to measure the affect marketing stimuli have on users of annual reports. Hypotheses derived from the ELM were partially supported. Experimental subjects with less motivation to complete the task were influenced more by the marketing stimuli. The influence of color photographs and other marketing materials in an annual report may affect some user’s opinions about the business being evaluated. PROJECT DESCRIPTION An examination of the 2010 annual report of Target Corporation reveals a document for which the first 20 pages consist of bright, color photographs of products, smiling people in stores, maps, etc. This is followed by what one may consider the “hard” financial information, such as financial statements and descriptions of financial strategies. Target’s annual report is carefully crafted to project as positive an image as possible. This is not an isolated event, as an examination of other annual reports would reveal. The purpose of this research is to investigate the degree to which nonfinancial stimuli in an annual report acts as a peripheral cue in the financial reporting context. That is, can such McCartney, Clark et al. Marketing Materials in Annual Reports 80802 “window dressing” influence one’s perception of the business being evaluated? Petty and Cacioppo’s Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion (ELM) (1986) is the cognitive model from which this study’s research hypotheses are derived. The ELM deals explicitly with exposure to persuasive communications, and its basic principles can be applied to other attitude change situations. The model’s basic tenant is that the cause of attitude change (resulting from a persuasive communication) ranges from one’s thoughtful consideration of the merits of the advocacy (central route) to no consideration of the advocacy’s merits at all. In the latter case, attitude change is likely to be induced by affective cues in the persuasion context, referred to as peripheral cues (peripheral route). Peripheral cues induce attitude change without necessitating scrutiny of the central merits of the information presented in the communication. One’s ability and/or motivation to process the central merits of the advocacy guides the route to persuasion. An individual high in ability and motivation will have a high “elaboration likelihood” and follow the central route to persuasion. Conversely, a person low in ability and motivation will follow the peripheral route. The selection of decision criteria is a continuum ranging from completely central processing to reliance upon only peripheral stimuli. This project views the annual report as a form of persuasive communication, defined as a communication capable of influencing the attitudes of recipients. The purpose of an annual report is to communicate financial the health of a business. The visual stimuli contained in the annual report (i.e., color photographs and glossy paper) is hypothesized to serve as a peripheral cue in the persuasion context, which becomes more potent as one’s ability or motivation to evaluate the annual report decreases. BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES The elaboration likelihood model deals explicitly with exposure to persuasive communications, and its basic principles can be applied to other attitude change situations. The authors of the ELM have determined that the many different empirical findings and theories in the field of persuasion might profitably be viewed as emphasizing one of just two relatively distinct “routes to persuasion”: the central route and the peripheral route. A person’s careful and thoughtful consideration of the true merits of the information presented (referred to as message arguments) in a persuasive communication characterizes the central route. The peripheral route is that which occurs because of some simple cue in the persuasion context (i.e., a peripheral cue). This cue induces attitude change without necessitating scrutiny of the central merits of the information presented in the communication. One’s ability and/or motivation to process the central merits of the advocacy guides the route to persuasion. An individual high in ability and motivation will have a high “elaboration likelihood” and follow the central route to persuasion. Conversely, a person low in ability and motivation will follow the peripheral route. The selection of decision criteria is a continuum ranging from completely central processing to reliance upon only peripheral stimuli. Either route can produce similar amounts of attitude change. However, changes induced via the central route require more cognition and are postulated to be more persistent, resistant to counterpersuasion, and predictive of behavior. Figure 1 schematically presents these routes to persuasion. McCartney, Clark et al. Marketing Materials in Annual Reports 80803 FIGURE 1 Elaboration Likelihood Model Schematic Depiction of the Two Routes to Persuasion Petty, Cacioppo, and Goldman (1981), Cacioppo, Petty, and Morris (1983), and Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann (1983) demonstrated the association of motivation with the route to persuasion. Petty et al. (1981) had university undergraduate students hear a message advocating that college seniors pass a comprehensive exam in their major area as a requirement for graduation. Factors manipulated included the personal involvement of students receiving the message, the quality of yes yes no yes