1 Exploring a New Measure for Reactive Guilt Appeals ... - ANZMAC

items were also removed to optimise the scale. Finally we were left with nine items relating to
reactive scale (α = .873) (KMO and Bartlett’s test = .874, Approx. Chi-Square = 997.425, Df =
36, Sig. = .000).
Study Two
The purpose of this study was to further fine-tune the initial reactive guilt scale. Scholars have
suggested using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) as a means of reducing the scale items to
confirm the scale’s final form. This study was designed to examine the unidimensionality of the
scale items developed in Study One. If it is necessary the study also aims to further purify the
scale items. To test for the scale’s unidimensionality, CFA analysis was conducted using AMOS
15 software.
A real broadcast ad from an unknown brand (Patek Philippe) lasting two minutes was used as the
stimulus. It has been suggested that prior brand knowledge may have an impact on emotional
response (Chattopadhyay and Basu 1990) thus a brand with limited knowledge was used for the
study. The choice of the ad was tested using an expert panel consisting of six members rated the
ad highly as evoking reactive guilt. The experts chose the advertisement from a pool of four
broadcast advertisements. The advertisement shows the relationship between the father and the
son, and how the father passed down his legacy by giving his watch to the son. The
advertisement highlighted the fact that the son did not value the watch at the time and sold it off.
However, when the son became a man and he himself became a father, he realises the value of
his father’s watch. The advertisement showed the son having a strong emotional attachment with
his father’s watch and felt reactive guilt for selling it. He searched and searched for his father’s
watch and finally found it at an auction. Respondents were asked to position themselves as the
son from the ad and how they will respond after seeing the ad. The respondents then recorded
their reactions to the ad based on a number of scales on a self-administered survey.
A survey instrument using the nine items from Study One and demographics was developed. A
total of one hundred and seventy seven useable responses were collected. CFA is commonly used
as the second step in scale development (Pedhazur and Schmelkin 1991) because it is considered
as a superior technique than EFA for assessing unidimensionality (O’Leary-Kelly and Vokurka
1998).
The results show a further reduction of the scale items. CFA refined the scales resulting in a total
of 7 items for reactive guilt with acceptable measures (Hu and Bentler 1999) (Chi-square =
20.085, Degrees of freedom = 14, Probability level = .127, AGFI = .940, RMSEA = .050, RMR =
.077, α = .891).
4