10.06.2019 Views

Thesis

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

100 Results<br />

Tab. 33 Mann-Whitney test: ranks (purchase intention brands)<br />

Brand Group N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks<br />

Activia Control group 26 18.40 478.50<br />

Experiment group 11 20.41 224.50<br />

Total 37<br />

Coca Cola Control group 26 27.96 727.00<br />

Experiment group 26 24.04 651.00<br />

Total 52<br />

Apple Control group 26 20.48 532.50<br />

Experiment group 17 24.32 413.50<br />

Total 43<br />

Heineken Control group 26 23.00 598.00<br />

Experiment group 17 20.47 348.00<br />

Total 43<br />

Red Bull Control group 26 25.37 659.50<br />

Experiment group 19 19.76 375.50<br />

Total<br />

Starbucks Control group 26 21.77 566.00<br />

Experiment group 15 19.67 295.00<br />

Total 41<br />

Source: experiment 2, 2015, n = 55<br />

Tab. 34 Mann-Whitney test: test statistics (purchase intention brands)<br />

Brand Mann-Whitney U Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)<br />

Activia 127.500 -0.535 0.593<br />

Coca Cola 300.000 0.718 0.473<br />

Apple 181.500 -1.020 0.308<br />

Heineken 195.000 -0.671 0.502<br />

Red Bull 185.500 -1.464 0.143<br />

Starbucks 175.000 -0.563 0.574<br />

Source: experiment 2, 2015, n = 55<br />

5.4 Practical implications<br />

5.4.1 Cognitive responses<br />

Attention<br />

Attention to product placement seems a fairly good predictor of brand recall. However,<br />

this relation is not absolute: paying attention to a product placed does not always result<br />

in recalling the brand. Contrarily, not paying attention to a product placed does not always<br />

result in failure to recall the brand: the context in which a product is placed can also lead

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!