Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Submit your manuscript through SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Communication Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BURGOON, M.
Right arrow Articles by BIRK, T. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An Inoculation Theory Explanation for the Effects of Corporate Issue/Advocacy Advertising Campaigns

MICHAEL BURGOON

MICHAEL PFAU

THOMAS S. BIRK

Despite the popularity of issue / advocacy advertising campaigns, there has been limited empirical study of their overall impact. This investigation posits that issue / advocacy advertising should be viewed as a vehicle for inoculating against attitude slippage and for enhancing the sponsor's credibility among people who already favor a corporation's position, rather than as a tool to change attitudes. An experimental test of attitudinal and image effects of issue / advocacy advertising confirmed this theoretical view. The results indicated that issue / advocacy advertising inoculates against attitude change, while simultaneously protecting sponsors against slippage in ratings of source credibility, after exposure to a persuasive attack on behalf of an opposing position. These results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and policy implications.

Communication Research, Vol. 22, No. 4, 485-505 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/009365095022004006
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
B. Ivanov, M. Pfau, and K. A. Parker
Can Inoculation Withstand Multiple Attacks?: An Examination of the Effectiveness of the Inoculation Strategy Compared to the Supportive and Restoration Strategies
Communication Research, October 1, 2009; 36(5): 655 - 676.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
M. Pfau, M. M. Haigh, J. Sims, and S. Wigley
The Influence of Corporate Front-Group Stealth Campaigns
Communication Research, February 1, 2007; 34(1): 73 - 99.
[Abstract] [PDF]