Department of Advertising

Humor in Advertising

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

As this web site develops, in the space below we will provide a bibliography of articles and books relevant to this topic. To the extent practical, bibliographic references will be annotated.

Anyone interested in submitting additional bibliographic material for this reference page, or for any of the others at this site, is welcome to send such material via e-mail to jef@mail.utexas.edu. Please type the references in the same format as is used here, and keep the annotations to a few sentences.

  1. John C. Sutherland and Sudha Sethu (1987). The Effect of Humor on Television Advertising Credibility and Recall. Proceedings of the 1987 Convention of the American Academy of Advertising, Florence G. Feasley (ed.): R3-R8.

    The effect of nonsensical humor on recall and perceived message credibility is investigated in an experiment conducted with 219 college students. The study uses actual television commercials employing humorous appeals for familiar as well as unfamiliar products with the straight versions created by removing the humorous components of the commercials. Results indicate that humor is no more effective than a straight commercial in generating recall and message credibility.

  2. Betsy D. Gelb and George M. Zinkhan (1986). Humor and Advertising Effectiveness After Repeated Exposures to a Radio Commercial. Journal of Advertising, 15 (2): 15-20, 34.

    A hypothetical model regarding the impact of humor is developed and tested on such response variables as recall, attitudes, purchase intention and actual behavior. Results show the humor is negatively related to recall and positively related to brand attitudes. No consistent relationship of humor is found with purchase probability or choice behavior.

  3. Calvin P. Duncan and James E. Nelson (1985). Effects of Humor in a Radio Advertising Experiment. Journal of Advertising, 14 (2): 33-40, 64.
    Distinguishing perceived humor from manipulated humor, this study finds significant effects of perceived humor on attention to the ad, liking the ad, liking the product, and irritation experienced from the ad. The perceived humor is found to have little impact on counterarguments, product-related beliefs, buying intention, experience of distraction, or recall of selling points.

  4. Calvin P. Duncan, James E. Nelson, and Nancy T. Frontczak (1983). The Effect of Humor on Advertising Comprehension. Advances in Consumer Research, 11: 432-37.

    This research examines the impact of humor on message comprehension by focusing on type of humor measurement (manipulate vs. perceived) and humor location in the ad. The study is conducted with 157 male undergraduates who are exposed to 60-second radio commercials for a hypothetical brand of men's hair care product. Results of the study indicate that the perceived humor promotes message comprehension and offer support for information processing and operant conditioning views of the humor influence process. Findings also argue for the importance of distinguishing between the perceived and manipulated humor.

  5. Betsy D. Gelb and Charles M. Pickett (1983). Attitude-toward-the-Ad: Links to Humor and to Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 12 (2): 34-42.

    Using an ad for a smoking cessation kit, relationships among attitude toward the ad, perceived humor in the ad, and four measures of advertising effectiveness (attitude toward the sponsor/brand, credibility, persuasiveness, and purchase intention) are examined in a mail survey to a random sample of licenced drivers, smokers or non-smokers. Results indicate that if an ad is perceived as humorous, all others being equal, it is more likely to be associated with a favorable Aad. While the study finds a significant association of Aad with all the effectiveness measures, perceived humor is found to be significantly associated only with the sponsor's image.

  6. George E. Belch and Michael A. Belch (1983). An Investigation of the Effects of Repetition on Cognitive and Affective Reactions to Humorous and Serious Television Commercials. Advances in Consumer Research, 11: 4-10.
    A laboratory experiment involving184 undergraduates is conducted with type of message (humorous vs. serious) and exposure level (one, three, or five). Two additional five-exposure conditions are used whereby the stimulus commercial (humorous or serious) is seen three times and another commercial (serious or humorous) is shown twice. 30-second "Federal Express" television commercials that had not been aired for at least six months prior to the experiment are used. The dependent measures include cognitive responses, message recall, advertiser credibility, attitude toward the ad as well as the service, and usage intention. The results indicate differences in the pattern of effects due to repetition for the two types of messages. Findings also indicate that wearout due to high levels of exposure can be reduced by the use of varied message execution, particularly for a humorous commercial.

  7. John C. Sutherland and Lisa A. Middleton (1983). The Effect of Humor on Advertising Credibility and Recall. Proceedings of the 1983 Convention of the American Academy of Advertising, Donald W. Jugenheimer (ed.): 17-21.

    The effects of pun and nonsensical humor on advertising recall and message credibility as measured by two major dimensions - authoritativeness and charactor - are examined among a sample of undergraduate students. Actual print ads for two different products are used as experimental stimuli. Results indicate that subjects perceive the "nonsensical" ad less credible than its serious version, while the "pun" and its serious counterpart do not differ in perceived credibility. In terms of recall, no difference is found between humorous and nonhumorous ads.

© 1995, 1996, 1997 Jef I. Richards
Some material here may be subject to copyrights of other contributors.