Article published In:
Information Design JournalVol. 16:1 (2008) ► pp.35–45
Rhetoric in advertising: Attitudes towards verbo-pictorial rhetorical figures
A rhetorical figure (for instance the antithesis in “Come in and find out” in a Dutch perfume ad) communicates an advertising message in an artfully divergent way. Two types of rhetorical figures are frequently distinguished, namely schemes (superficial decorations such as rhyme and alliteration) and tropes (meaningful deviations such as metaphors and puns). However, until now little attention has been paid to rhetorical figures that can be found in combinations of text and image (i.e., verbo-pictorial rhetorical figures). In this article, an experiment and interviews are presented on the effects of non-rhetorical figures, verbo-pictorial schemes and verbo-pictorial tropes on attitudes towards advertisements. In the experiment, twelve real-life advertisements (4 per category: non-rhetorical figure, scheme, and trope) were presented to 92 participants. The results show that attitudes towards ads with verbo-pictorial tropes (and advertisements without rhetorical figures) are less favourable than those towards advertisements with verbo-pictorial schemes. This could be explained by the fact that relatively more participants failed to come up with successful interpretations of the ads with these tropes and that attitudes were less favourable towards advertisements that were unsuccessfully interpreted than towards advertisements that were successfully interpreted.
Cited by (20)
Cited by 20 other publications
Bünzli, Fabienne & Martin J Eppler
2024. How verbal text guides the interpretation of advertisement images: a predictive typology of verbal anchoring. Communication Theory 
van Enschot, Renske, Charlotte van Hooijdonk & Ewald Bronkhorst
2023. Refining replacements. Validating a revised typology of visual metaphor using perceived processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure. International Journal of Advertising 42:2 ► pp. 344 ff.
Van Der Lee, Chris & Renske Van Enschot
2022. Understanding emotional responses to visual aesthetic artefacts: the SECMEA mechanisms. Visual Communication ► pp. 147035722210905 ff.
Wildfeuer, Janina & Joseph Adika Coffie
2022. #socialiseresponsibly. Analyzing the Rhetorical Structure of Heineken TV Commercials During the Pandemic. Frontiers in Communication 7
Tseronis, Assimakis
2021. From visual rhetoric to multimodal argumentation: exploring the rhetorical and argumentative relevance of multimodal figures on the covers of The Economist. Visual Communication 20:3 ► pp. 374 ff.
Hodiamont, Didier, Hans Hoeken & Margot van Mulken
2018. Chapter 7. Conventionality in visual metaphor. In Visual Metaphor [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 18], ► pp. 163 ff.
Huhmann, Bruce A.
2018. Rhetorical Figures. In The Handbook of Organizational Rhetoric and Communication, ► pp. 229 ff.
Ketelaar, Paul E., Stefan F. Bernritter, Thabo J. van Woudenberg, Esther Rozendaal, Ruben P. Konig, Arief Ernst Hühn, Marnix S. Van Gisbergen & Loes Janssen
2018. “Opening” location-based mobile ads: How openness and location congruency of location-based ads weaken negative effects of intrusiveness on brand choice. Journal of Business Research 91 ► pp. 277 ff.
van Grinsven, Bo & Enny Das
2016. I Love You Just The Way You Are: When Large Degrees of Logo Change Hurt Information Processing and Brand Evaluation. In Advances in Advertising Research (Vol. VI), ► pp. 379 ff.
van Enschot, Renske & Hans Hoeken
2015. The Occurrence and Effects of Verbal and Visual Anchoring of Tropes on the Perceived Comprehensibility and Liking of TV Commercials. Journal of Advertising 44:1 ► pp. 25 ff.
Bateman, John A.
2014. Multimodal coherence research and its applications. In The Pragmatics of Discourse Coherence [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 254], ► pp. 145 ff.
Lubinga, Elizabeth, Carel Jansen & Alfons Maes
2014. ‘If you care, do not share’. Exploring the effects of using rhetorical figures to stimulate young South Africans to discuss HIV and AIDS messages. Communicatio 40:1 ► pp. 49 ff.
Burgers, Christian, Margot van Mulken & Peter Jan Schellens
2012. Type of evaluation and marking of irony: The role of perceived complexity and comprehension. Journal of Pragmatics 44:3 ► pp. 231 ff.
Huhmann, Bruce A. & Pia A. Albinsson
2012. Does rhetoric impact advertising effectiveness with liking controlled?. European Journal of Marketing 46:11/12 ► pp. 1476 ff.
Lagerwerf, Luuk, Charlotte M.J. van Hooijdonk & Ayalies Korenberg
2012. Processing visual rhetoric in advertisements: Interpretations determined by verbal anchoring and visual structure. Journal of Pragmatics 44:13 ► pp. 1836 ff.
Rossolatos, George
2012. Rhetorical Transformations in Multimodal Advertising Texts: From General to Local Degree Zero. SSRN Electronic Journal
Toncar, Mark & Marc Fetscherin
2012. A study of visual puffery in fragrance advertising. European Journal of Marketing 46:1/2 ► pp. 52 ff.
Jansen, Carel & Ilse Janssen
2010. Talk about it: The effects of cryptic HIV/AIDS billboards. Communicatio 36:1 ► pp. 130 ff.
van Mulken, Margot, Christian Burgers & Bram van der Plas
2010. Wolves, Confederates, and the Happy Few: The Influence of Comprehension, Agreement, and Group Membership on the Attitude Toward Irony. Discourse Processes 48:1 ► pp. 50 ff.
Hoeken, Hans, Piet Swanepoel, Elvis Saal & Carel Jansen
2009. Using Message Form to Stimulate Conversations: The Case of Tropes. Communication Theory 19:1 ► pp. 49 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.