Symbolic Consumption of Advertisements for Male Perfumes: Effects of Advertising Appeals and Product Involvement on Advertising Effectiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because of the trend of metrosexual men, numerous cosmetic brands that originally focused on female customers have extended their product lines to cover the male market, and symbolic consumption in advertisements for male perfumes has flooded society. This study adopted a 3 × 2 between-subjects experiment method to examine the effect of two independent variables, namely the appeal of various types of male perfume advertisement (vanity appeal, admiration appeal, and sexual appeal) and the product involvement of consumers (high and low), on attitudes toward the advertisement (Aad), attitudes toward the brand (Ab), and purchase intention (PI). This study revealed the following: (1) The types of advertising appeal do affect the Aad, Ab, and PI of consumers; (2) consumers’ product involvement also affects their Aad, Ab, and PI; (3) vanity appeal and admiration appeal both result in optimal Aad, Ab, and PI of consumers with high product involvement; and (4) sexual appeal results in optimal Aad and Ab for consumers with low product involvement but has no effect on their PI. In today’s advertising and marketing business, how a product is made to carry certain symbolic meanings has become particularly crucial; company owners must not overlook the influence of symbolic consumption. This study’s results can serve as a reference for company owners and advertisers when planning future advertising and marketing strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".