When comparative ads are more effective: Fit with audience’s regulatory mode

According to regulatory fit theory (Higgins, 2000 and Higgins, 2005), people experience regulatory fit when the manner in which they pursue a goal sustains (vs. disrupts) their regulatory orientation, and this fit strengthens their engagement in what they are doing. We tested whether the relative effectiveness of comparative and noncomparative ads varied as a function of their fit with the audience’s regulatory mode concerns, either assessment concerns with making critical evaluations or locomotion concerns with maintaining movement, with these concerns being situationally induced (Studies 1a and 1b) or chronic predispositions (Study 2). As predicted, three studies found that for participants with assessment concerns comparative ads were more effective than noncomparative ads, whereas for participants with locomotion concerns noncomparative ads were more effective than comparative ads. Supporting the mechanism predicted by regulatory fit theory, the studies also found that these fit effects on purchase intentions were mediated by strength of engagement with the message.

► We tested whether comparative are more effective when audience is characterized by assessment rather than locomotion concerns.
► Hypotheses were tested in three studies.
► We found that for assessors comparative ads were more effective than noncomparative ads.
► We also found that for locomotors noncomparative ads were more effective than comparative ads.
► The effect of regulatory fit was mediated by strength of engagement.