Abstract
We compare six taxonomies (including some not previously tested) that systematically categorize visual rhetorical figures (RFs) on their domain coverage, reliability, parsimony, and predictive validity to determine which is best for advertisers and researchers. All taxonomies showed increased effectiveness with RFs than without RFs in a sample of 952 copy-tested advertisements. However, one taxonomy—that of McQuarrie and Mick —demonstrated the best balance of the criteria for a useful taxonomy including predictive validity. Ads containing RFs from each of their visual RF categories improved ad effectiveness measures related to Starch Noted, Associated, and Read Most scores as predicted by theory.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
