Examining the Influence of Nostalgic Versus Informative Advertising on Persuasion Process and Brand Attachment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nostalgia is actually a concept with great interest for researchers in different domains such as marketing. Several studies underlined the potential that nostalgia has for persuasive advertising. Despite theoretical relevance, little is known about the real impact of nostalgic advertising style on brand attachment. This research investigates the impact of the ad capacity to evoke nostalgia on persuasion process and brand attachment in the food industry. To test the relationship between variables, an experiment including two different advertisement style was conducted on 360 individuals in Tunisia. We used structural equation modelling to test the conceptual model. The results indicated that nostalgic ad has some more favorable responses of consumers than the informative ad. Also, it appears that past orientation has a positive impact on nostalgia proneness that can explain the positive reaction of the individuals to the nostalgic ad and brand attachment. This research provides empirical insight into the brand attachment literature and can be considered as a source of information for managers who wish to target consumers through nostalgic persuasive communication. Limitations and future research directions are stipulated.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".