Total views : 217

Role of Message Appeal and Regulatory Focus in the Effects of Visual Perspective on Reactions toward Advertisements


  • Department of Industrial and Advertising Psychology, Daejeon University, 62 Daehak-ro, Dong-gu, Daejeon, 34520, Korea, Republic of
  • Department of Counseling Psychology and Social Welfare, Sun Moon University, 70 Sunmoon-ro 221Beong-gil, Tangjeong-myeon, Asan-si, Chungcheongnam-do, 31460, Korea, Republic of


Objectives: This research is designed to extend our understanding of the effects of visual perspective on advertising by incorporating verbal element in an ad and consumer characteristic. Methods/Statistical Analysis: Visual perspective, message appeal, and regulatory focus were employed as independent variables. As an experimental material four black and white print ads which were differed in visual perspective of images in an ad (first-person, third-person) x message appeal (private use, public use) were created. Regulatory focus was manipulated by making participants complete life survey. Findings: Extant research has suggested that visual perspective plays a prominent role in consumer persuasion. However, not much research efforts have been given to the role of the perspective of visual image in an advertising context. Firstly, this research demonstrates that perspective of visual image interacts with message appeal. Results showed that when visual image in ad was shown from the third-person (vs. first-person) perspective, the verbal message appeal of public use (vs. private use) revealed more favorable attitudes toward ad and product evaluations. Further, it was found that the participants’ regulatory orientation significantly moderated the interaction effects of visual perspective and message appeal. Hence, the interaction effects of third-person (vs. first-person) perspective and message appeal of public use (vs. private use) were eliminated when the participants’ regulatory focus was promotion-focus (vs. prevention-focus). Improvements/Applications: Practitioners should be cautious when determining the camera angles of ad images and consider the type of message appeal of an ad and the target audiences’ regulatory focus.


Attitude toward Ad, Message Appeal, Regulatory Focus, Stylistic Properties, Visual Perspective.

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 182)


  • Phillips B, McQuarrie E. Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of visual rhetoric in advertising. Marketing Theory. 2004 Jun; 4(1-2):113–36.
  • The information processing of pictures in print advertisements. Available from:
  • McQuarrie E, Mick D. On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research. 1992 Sep; 19(2):180–97.
  • Messaris P. Visual Persuasion: The Role of images in advertising. CA: Thousand Oaks, Sage; 1997.
  • Mitchell A, Olson J. Are product beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitudes? Journal of Marketing Research. 1981 Aug; 18(3):318–32.
  • Scott L. Images in advertising: The need for a visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research. 1994 Sep; 21(2):252–73.
  • Persuasive imagery. Available from:
  • Using stylistic properties of ad pictures to communicate with consumers. Available from:
  • Nigro G, Neisser U. Point of view in personal memories. Cognitive Psychology. 1983 Oct; 15(4):467–82.
  • Galinsky A, Ku G, Wang C. Perspective-taking and self-other overlap: Fostering social bonds and facilitating social coordination. Group Process and Intergroup Relations. 2005 Apr; 8(2):109–24.
  • Hung I, Mukhopadhyay A. Lenses of the heart: How actors' and observers' perspectives influence emotional experiences. Journal of Consumer Research. 2012 Apr; 38(6):1103–15.
  • Valenti G, Libby L, Eibach R. Looking back with regret: Visual perspective in memory images differentially affects regret for actions and inactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2011 Jul; 47(4):730–7.
  • Libby L, Eibach R. Looking back in time: Self-concept change affects visual perspective in autobiographical memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002 Feb; 82(2):167–79.
  • Libby L, Shaeffer E, Eibach R. Seeing meaning in action: A bidirectional link between visual perspective and action identification level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2009 Nov; 138(4):503–16.
  • McIssac H, Eich E. Vantage point in traumatic memory. Psychological Science. 2004 Apr; 15(4):248–53.
  • Libby L, Eibach R, Valenti G, Hines K. Seeing failure in your life: Imagery perspective determines whether self-esteem shapes reactions to recalled and imagined failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2011 Dec; 101(6):1157–73.
  • Uskul A, Kikutani M. Concerns about losing face moderate the effect of visual perspective on health-related intentions and behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2014 Nov; 55:201–9.
  • Stafford E, Walker B, Blasko V. Headline-visual consistency in print advertisements: Effects on processing and evaluation. Advances in Consumer Research. 1996; 23(1):56–62.
  • Avnet T, Higgins E. How regulatory fit affects value in consumer choices and opinions. Journal of Marketing Research. 2006 Feb; 43(1):1–10.
  • Pham M, Avnet T. Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research. 2004; 30(4):503–18.
  • Robinson J, Swanson K. Field and observer modes of remembering. Memory. 1993 Sep; 1(3):169–84.
  • Libby L, Eibach R, Shaeffer E, Slemmer J. Picture yourself at the Polls. Psychological Science. 2007 Mar; 18 (3):199–203.
  • Vasquez N, Buehler R. Seeing future success: Does imagery perspective influence achievement motivation? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2007 Oct; 33(10):1392–405.
  • Yu Y, Kim E. Effective strategies to utilize cross-sexual advertising models: Focus on the types of advertising appeal and characteristics of models. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 Apr; 8(S8):267–74.
  • Higgins E. Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist. 1997 Dec; 52(12):1280–300.
  • Cesario J, Higgins E, Scholer A. Regulatory fit and persuasion: Basic principles and remaining questions. Social and Personality Compass. 2008; 2(1):444–63.
  • Higgins E. Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 1998; 30:1–46.
  • Crowe E, Higgins E. Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1997 Feb; 69 (2):117–32.
  • Levine J, Higgins E, Choi H. Development of strategic norms in groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2000 May; 82(1):88–101.
  • Herzenstein M, Posavac S, Brakus J. Adoption of new and really new products: The effects of self-regulation systems and risk salience. Journal of Marketing Research. 2007 May; 44(2):251–60.
  • Yeo J, Park J. Effects of parent-extension similarity and self-regulatory focus on evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2006; 16(3):272–82.
  • Han K. A study on differences in attitudes and memory effects according to the regulatory focus tendencies of facebook users and the types of message appeals. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Jul; 9(26):1–7.
  • Zhang J, Yang X. Stylistic properties and regulatory fit: Examining the role of self-regulatory focus in the effectiveness of an actor's vs observer's visual perspective. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2015 Jul; 25(3):449–58.
  • Lee A, Aaker J. Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004 Feb; 86(2):205–18.
  • Bhat S, Reddy S. Symbolic and functional positioning of brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 1998; 15(1):32–43.
  • Markus H, Kitayama S. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review. 1991 Apr; 98(2):224–53.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.