The purpose of this study is to examine how a “paring” of a sponsoring brand with wellmatched products in a branded content (e.g., branded entertainment content and/or commercial) possibly leverages consumers’ attitude toward the sponsoring brand. For instance, to maximize the perceived benefit and desirability of their product, Guinness previously portrayed their product along with foods, such as oysters, steaks, and cheese, that would all be much better if consumers enjoyed it with a bottle of Guinness. We refer this type of practice as a “paring strategy,” another form of Leveraged Marketing Communications (LMC), and aim to explore how such paring practice successfully benefits the brand through association. In this context, this study shows a) a proportion of a sponsoring brand and a paring product portrayed in a content (e.g., 20/80 vs. 80/20), b), the attribute of the branded content (desirability vs. feasibility orientation), c) the demonstration natures of the paring strategy (integrated vs. sequential) creates association between a sponsoring brand and matching products, and amplify the perceived benefits of the sponsoring product. Finally, this study aims to explore the moderating role of consumer’s general tendency of processing style (holistic vs. analytic) in the effect of paring strategy.

This research examines how price discount, message assertiveness, and national culture interact to influence consumers’ response to the recycling messages on product packages. Results showed that American consumers respond more negatively to assertive (vs. nonassertive) recycling messages when paying a full price for the product, but they respond more positively to assertive (vs. nonassertive) messages when paying a discounted price for the product. For South Korean consumers, price discount and message assertiveness do not influence their responses to recycling advertising.

Corporations, governments, and non-profits across the world have implemented proenvironmental campaigns to promote sustainable practices. To better understand crosscultural differences in environmental persuasion, we draw on research on self-conscious emotion (Tangney & Dearing, 2002), construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010), and cultural psychology (Ratner, 2000). The current research examines how the emotions of guilt and shame cause people from Eastern and Western cultures to differently perceive green advertising messages that are framed concretely or abstractly. Two hundred fifty-five undergraduate students were randomly assigned to a 2 (emotion priming: guilt vs. shame) x 2 (construal message frame: abstract vs. concrete message) x 2 (nationality: Americans vs. Koreans) between-subjects design. The results indicate that message concreteness effect is present among guilt-primed Americans and shame-primed Koreans (culturally relevant), but absent among shame-primed Americans and guilt-primed Koreans (culturally irrelevant). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed for developing global green advertising message strategies.

The authors of this article compare American and Korean reactions to the persuasiveness of environmental advertising campaigns that include pledges. Findings indicate that environmental advertising effectiveness depends on how much effort recipients put into making environmental pledges prior to viewing the advertisements. Study 1 demonstrates that when environmental pledges requesting more effort precede ad messages, Americans are more persuaded but Koreans are less persuaded. Study 2 extends the findings and rules out an alternative explanation—mere-effort effect—by showing that the results are replicated only with an issue-relevant pledge, but not with an issue-irrelevant pledge.

We compare American and Korean reactions to the persuasiveness of environmental advertising campaigns. Findings indicate that the effectiveness of the message assertiveness varies depending on recipients’ cultural backgrounds. Study 1 demonstrates that among Americans an assertive recycling message that contains imperatives such as should, must and ought is less effective than a non-assertive message that contains terms such as could, might and worth, yet among Koreans such reactance-driven boomerang effect is not observed. Study 2 extends the findings by conceptually replicating this finding in a different context—energy saving campaign—and further shows that perceived threat to freedom mediates the effects