"You can trust me": An examination of trust -in -the -brand advertising appeals

Using trust-in-the-brand appeals in advertising has been a very common practice However, research has yet to examine the effectiveness of such appeals. Can the use of trust appeals in advertising enhance a product's trustworthiness and help the advertiser gain consumers' trust? Might such appeals lead to more favorable attitudes toward the advertised brand? Given the absence of research that speaks to these questions, this dissertation attempts to fill this void by exploring persuasion outcomes of using trust appeals. Specifically, this research aims to assess whether the use of trust appeals affects persuasion; explicate how such appeals may work; anticipate when an ad containing trust appeals may be more or less effective; and finally conduct and report the results of preliminary empirical tests. ^ A conceptual model is offered in the dissertation describing how trust appeals may affect persuasion outcomes. It is proposed that using trust advertising appeals will result in more trust-related thinking, enhance the perceived trustworthiness of the advertised brand, and finally lead to more favorable brand attitudes and trial intentions. This dissertation also examines the differential effectiveness of alternative trust appeals. Elaborate trust appeals that provide substantiation for trust are expected to perform better than simple trust appeals. An implicit elaborate trust appeal is anticipated to outperform an explicit elaborate appeal. ^ Two experiments were conducted. Including a trust appeal in an ad enhanced the perceived trustworthiness of the advertised brand which, in turn, led to more favorable brand attitudes and greater trial intentions compared to a similar ad without the trust appeal. The results also support the proposed mediating role of perceived trust. The empirical test speaking to the hypothesized differential effect of alternative trust appeals provides support for marketing practitioners' efforts in seeking the most effective use of such appeals. Evidence was obtained in the second study demonstrating that an elaborate trust appeal worked more effectively than a simple trust appeal. Contrary to the expectation, this persuasion advantage held regardless of whether the elaborate appeal was in an explicit form or an implicit form. ^

The effects of the outdoor experiential ropes course on perceived team performance

The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to explore the perceived effects of the Ropes Course on the performance of intact work teams. The dependent variable, team performance, was measured by the Team Performance Assessment, a 20 question inventory. The Ropes Course, the independent variable, was an outdoor experiential training program presently marketed as a highly effective team building training program. Issues the team addressed in the highly emotional and physical environment were purported to transfer back to the work environment and act as a catalyst for change The Ropes Course in this study consisted of a day long series of outdoor mental, emotional and physical exercises addressing the issues of goal-setting, role expectations, accountability, trust, respect, communication, problem-solving and decision-making. The 68 subjects, 37 in the treatment group and 31 in the control were employees of a large international financial institution. They were not chosen by random selection. The work teams' managers recognized a need to improve team morale, performance and functioning due to corporate reengineering and downsizing resulting in team members' job losses. Control teams were partially matched to the treatment teams on the basis of professional composition and similar job descriptions. The pretest of the Team Performance Assessment was given the morning of the Ropes Course treatment and the posttest was given three to five weeks later. The control teams received the pretests and posttests at about the same time intervals at their work location but received no Ropes Course treatment. The treatment teams' scores and the control teams' scores were statistically compared using the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and the Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) at the .05 level of significance. The statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the control and experimental teams after the team building Ropes Course training as measured by the Team Performance Assessment (Gilbert, 1996). ^