Comparative advertising: Effects of concreteness and claim substantiation through reactance and activation on purchase intentions

In this paper, we examine positive (activation) and negative (reactance) effects of concrete versus non-concrete comparative advertising and the impact of claim substantiation in such comparative advertising on purchase intentions. We also analyze the moderating role of consumers' predisposition to show reactance. The results indicate that without claim substantiation, quality comparisons (less concrete) produce higher activation but also more reactance than comparisons based on intrinsic attributes (more concrete). With claim substantiation, quality comparisons still trigger higher activation, but they only trigger more reactance in consumers who have a high predisposition to show reactance. For consumers with a low predisposition to show reactance, quality comparisons trigger even less reactance than intrinsic attribute comparisons. This research enhances the theoretical understanding of processes underlying consumer reactions to comparative advertising and provides marketers with knowledge about the appropriate use of claim substantiation as well as of the comparative basis for addressing different consumer types.