The Puffery Plan: How Cosmetic Advertising Tricks Your Brain
We often use the phrase “puffery” to describe some of the claims made by cosmetic companies. To help understand what we mean by that term, we’ve found an excellent reference from the Journal of Consumer Research. (Via ScienceDaily)
Puffery claims explained
Authors Alison Jing Xu and Robert S. Wyer, Jr. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign define claims as puffery if they “purport to be of great importance but are actually inconsequential and often meaningless.”
By this definition, claims based on technical details that are only valid to experts in the field but that are not necessarily perceived by the consumer could be considered puffery. We see this all the time with ads that make statements like “makes your hair 5x stronger.” Yes, there is a way to measure the percentage increase in hair strength but how in the world would a consumer now how “5x” really means for them?
Interestingly, the researchers did an experiment which showed that when consumers think they have less relative knowledge than an average person, puffery claims can increase their positive assessment of the product, regardless of the source of the ad. But when the consumers thought they had more relative knowledge than the average person, puffery claims had a positive ONLY when they came from a more credible source, like a professional magazine. When consumers thought they were better informed and they read puffery claims from a “regular” source of information, like a popular magazine, then the puffery actually DECREASED their belief in the product.
It will be interesting to see how cosmetic companies integrate these findings into their advertising strategies.
What do YOU think? Do you pay attention to so called “puffery” claims? Leave a comment and share your thoughts with the rest of the Beauty Brains community.
Reference:
Alison Jing Xu and Robert S. Wyer, Jr. Puffery in Advertisements: The Effects of Media Context, Communication Norms and Consumer Knowledge
Journal of Consumer Research, August 2010
comments
Leave a Reply