|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
01610 am a22002413u 4500 |
| 001 |
6273 |
| 042 |
|
|
|a dc
|
| 100 |
1 |
0 |
|a Terlutter, R
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Diehl, S
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Koinig, I
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Waiguny, M
|e author
|
| 245 |
0 |
0 |
|a Who gains, who loses? Recall and recognition of brand placements in 2D, 3D and 4D movies
|
| 260 |
|
|
|b İstanbul Technical University, Faculty of Management,
|c 2013-12-16T22:35:03Z.
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a EMAC 2013 held at İstanbul Technical University, Turkey, 2013-06-04 to 2013-06-08
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a Brand placements in movies are common throughout the world. During the last 5 years, 3D movie technology has experienced a boost in cinemas and home entertainment. Furthermore advanced cinemas also offer "4"D experiences by adding scent, airflow or tactile stimuli to the 3D film. Based on the limited cognitive capacity model of information processing and the levels-of-processing effect theory, we investigate how the delivery modes of classic 2D compared to 3D or 4D (3D+scent) influence recall and recognition of brands placed in a prominent or in a subtle way. Results suggest that subtle brand placements are negatively affected by the enhancement of 3D or 4D as compared to 2D movies, whereas a prominent brand placement in the movie benefits from 3D technology. Some implications and directions for further research are addressed.
|
| 540 |
|
|
|a OpenAccess
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Product Placement
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a 3D
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a 4D
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Recall
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Recognition
|
| 655 |
7 |
|
|a Conference Contribution
|
| 856 |
|
|
|z Get fulltext
|u http://hdl.handle.net/10292/6273
|
