Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Bridging advertising practitioner theories and academic theories on how to communicate effectively with men and women

Bridging advertising practitioner theories and academic theories on how to communicate... PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to understand advertising practitioners’ theories on how to communicate effectively with men and women via advertising. Further, comparisons are made between practitioners’ theories and academic research.Design/methodology/approachQualitative interviews were conducted with 39 US advertising practitioners.FindingsMany professionals believed women preferred other-oriented messages, while men preferred self-oriented messages. They believed women were comprehensive processors, while men were less engaged with advertising messages. They believe men preferred slapstick humor and factual messages, while women preferred emotional appeals.Research limitations/implicationsComparisons between practitioners’ perspectives and the academic research reveal that practitioners’ theories often correspond to academic theories and empirical data. Relationships with the selectivity hypothesis are explored in depth. Suggestions are made to extend existing theory to test practitioners’ theories.Practical implicationsThis study helps to bridge the academician-practitioner gap, which helps academics understand practitioners, communicate with them and develop shared knowledge.Originality/valueThis study fills a research gap in understanding practitioners’ theories of how to communicate with men and women. A key contribution of the research is a comparison of practitioner theories with academic research to note points of agreement and disagreement, bridge the gap and offer suggestions for future research. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Qualitative Market Research An International Journal Emerald Publishing

Bridging advertising practitioner theories and academic theories on how to communicate effectively with men and women

Download PDF
19 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/bridging-advertising-practitioner-theories-and-academic-theories-on-8GZjha3T0H

References (51)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
1352-2752
DOI
10.1108/QMR-07-2017-0117
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to understand advertising practitioners’ theories on how to communicate effectively with men and women via advertising. Further, comparisons are made between practitioners’ theories and academic research.Design/methodology/approachQualitative interviews were conducted with 39 US advertising practitioners.FindingsMany professionals believed women preferred other-oriented messages, while men preferred self-oriented messages. They believed women were comprehensive processors, while men were less engaged with advertising messages. They believe men preferred slapstick humor and factual messages, while women preferred emotional appeals.Research limitations/implicationsComparisons between practitioners’ perspectives and the academic research reveal that practitioners’ theories often correspond to academic theories and empirical data. Relationships with the selectivity hypothesis are explored in depth. Suggestions are made to extend existing theory to test practitioners’ theories.Practical implicationsThis study helps to bridge the academician-practitioner gap, which helps academics understand practitioners, communicate with them and develop shared knowledge.Originality/valueThis study fills a research gap in understanding practitioners’ theories of how to communicate with men and women. A key contribution of the research is a comparison of practitioner theories with academic research to note points of agreement and disagreement, bridge the gap and offer suggestions for future research.

Journal

Qualitative Market Research An International Journal – Emerald Publishing

Published: Jun 10, 2019

There are no references for this article.