Most previous studies exploring the relative effectiveness of superiority and parity claims in comparative advertising were based on the regulatory focus theory. However, the findings of these studies provided limited implications for practice. The current research attempts to examine the relative effectiveness of superiority versus parity claims in comparative advertising from the perspective of construal level theory. Recent research has found that the fitness between message framing and construal level can enhance processing fluency of information. Specifically, loss-framed messages are more impactful when paired with low-level construals, whereas gain-framed messages are more effective when paired with high-level construals. Accordingly, the current study predicts that a superiority claim, which states sponsor brand is better than the competitors, is more effective in enhancing brand attitude than parity claim when the construal level is high. Conversely, a parity claim, which argues sponsor brand asserts parity with the comparison target, lead to more favorable brand attitude than superiority claims in the condition of low-level construal. This study conducted a (superiority claim vs. parity claim) × 2 (high-level construal vs. low-level construal) experimental designs to examine proposed hypotheses. The manipulation of construal level either highlighted a concrete “how” message or an abstract “why” message. The results showed that the superiority (parity) claim leads to more positive brand attitude and purchase intention than the parity (superiority) claim when customers are presented with message highlights an abstract “why” (concrete “how”) construal. Based on the findings, this study suggests that superiority claims combine with the “why”-oriented thoughts can enhance the effectiveness of the comparative advertising. In contrast, when parity claims are used, “how” -oriented, thoughts should be integrated in comparative advertising.

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.

The main purpose of this paper is to find the etic dimensions of beliefs towards comparative advertising (CA) and to test their relationship with global attitude and acceptance of CA in a cross-cultural setting. Samples from four linguistic and cultural different countries were used: Austria, Canada, China and Peru. The research instrument was an online questionnaire. Results uncovered three main etic belief dimensions: truthfulness and deceitfulness as societal (micro) variables, and product information as personal (micro) variable. Invariance tests indicate that the items comprising the scales proposed to measure CA beliefs, global attitude and acceptance of CA possess equivalence across the four countries. Our model shows that beliefs indirectly affect acceptance of CA, which is mediated by global attitude toward CA. Results reveal similarities and differences across countries on the magnitude and importance of the beliefs and global attitude total effects upon acceptance. Finally, results are analyzed vis-à-vis the Hofstede’s national cultural dimensions, which indicate that uncertainty avoidance and individualism/collectivism help to explain the main differences across the countries.