1

Knowing Me, Knowing You. Aha (Or Not): The Impact of Personality Type

on Response to Advertising Image

Abstract

We investigate potential congruence between image types in print advertisements and consumers’

perceiving preferences. These orientations are classified as sensing (S) or intuiting (N) by the

well-established Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), underpinned by Jungian philosophy.

Earlier results (LaBarbera et al., 1998) indicated congruence between consumers grouped by S

and N perceiving preference and corresponding images classified across 4 product categories,

implying use by practitioners of this matching concept to strengthen impact and predict consumer

responses to advertising

Our study replicates and extends this original study, differing in time frame, geography and

sample. The original research was carried out in 1998 in New York, with an unintended bias

towards intuitive types. This study used a UK sample recruited with a greater balance between

the two preference groups, a decade later.

This study found no congruence between image type and the corresponding consumer perceiving

preference groups against any of the measures of image appeal, overall advertisement appeal or

intention to purchase.

This study implies that advertising and marketing professionals should not rely on this matching

concept to strengthen impact or to predict consumer response. Practitioners are exhorted to ignore

findings which remain unreplicated.

Key words: MBTI, processing styles, advertising images, print advertising, generalisations,

replication

2

Introduction Despite numerous proposed models, understanding of the communication process remains

elusive (Wilmshurst and MacKay, 1999). Attempts to explore the relationship between consumer

personality and response to advertising messages have resulted in inconclusive findings

(Holbrook, 1986; Wright, 1975; Aaker ,1997; LaBarbera et al., 1998; McBride et al., 1987). One

explanation offered for the inconsistent findings is that studies have been based on exercises

profiling consumers across accepted personality traits, rather than on a personality theory rooted

in cognitive style (LaBarbera et al. 1998).

One instrument based on cognitive personality theory is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI),

the most widely used personality assessment tool in business (Leonard and Straus, 1997)

describing individual preferences for acquiring, processing and using information (Myers and

McCaulley,1985). It assesses individuals across 4 dimensions: extroversion/introversion,

sensing/intuiting, thinking/feeling, judging/perceiving – and identifies 4 preferences (see

Appendix 1) categorising16 personality types (Myers, 1992).

We are concerned here with the perceiving function - how an individual prefers to take in

information (Myers,1992). The options here are sensing or intuitive (S/N) styles. Sensing types

are interested in the concrete, focus on the immediate, and are realistic having a memory for

detail dependent on their senses (Myers,1992: Myers and McCaulley,1985). Intuitives are

interested in patterns and relationship focusing on possibilities, the abstract dependent on

intuitions that emerge subconsciously (Myers, 1992, Myers and McCaulley, 1985). ‘Sensors’

tend to concentrate on the detail of an image and stay within the limits of its context whereas

‘intuitives’ make more assumptions that may not be evidenced in the image, and consider future

possibilities (Russell, 2001).

This distinction suggests that personality may offer insights into responses to advertising images,

offering significant commercial benefits. However these potential rewards can only be realised if

this congruence is proven.

Previous Research

Previous work in this area has focused on the link between perceiving types and advertising

appeal, advertising imagery, and the effect on intention to purchase. McBride (1987) proposed a

congruence model suggesting a receiver would find an object more appealing when consistent

with their personality. Implicit in this model is that objects, such as products and/or advertising

messages, intrinsically possess a personality type or can be positioned to represent a type.

This study provided the foundation for LaBarbera et al.’s (1998) later more focused research,

which specifically investigated the potential congruence between the imagery in print advertising

and subjects’ preferred perceiving preference (sensing/intuiting). The reported results indicated

support for hypotheses on three measures of image appeal, advertising appeal and purchase

intention, suggesting that respondents classified images as either sensing or intuiting in type and

responded as such. The implication was that advertisements containing images tailored to match

the dominant perception preference style of a target group would have greater appeal to this type

(LaBarbera et al.1998).

Several researchers have studied the effect of attitude towards an advertisement on the attitude

towards a product/brand and, importantly, its indirect effect on future predicted behaviour (see

Mitchell, 1986). Individuals can draw inferences about the advertised brand based on the visual

imagery and these may result in the formation or change of beliefs about the advertised brand. A

positive or negative evaluation of the visual element affects brand attitudes that are a function of

attitude towards the advertisement. Mitchell’s (1986) study did, however, not explore the effects

3

of the visual and copy components of advertisements separately, nor the potential congruence

between an individual’s perceiving preference and attitude towards an advertising image.

Further psychological insight is offered by the idea that a consumer’s cognitive activity can be

altered by the presence of a dominant picture in a print advertisement, while an individual is

viewing the advertisement (Edell and Staelin,1983). In their study, lack of brand evaluation was

exhibited by subjects viewing unframed pictorial advertisements. The differences in processing

of advertisements were shown to have a mediating effect on the individual’s brand attitudes and

purchase intentions.

Adding to this, Russell (2001) showed a link between an individual’s MBTI personality type,

preferred processing style and interpretations of photographs. This suggests that an individual’s

response to imagery in print advertising should show congruence with a consumer’s preferred

processing style has been shown, a proposition supported by LaBarbera et al.(1998).

In addition, attitudes towards advertisements have been shown to have a partial mediating effect

on attitudes towards a brand/product and intention to purchase (Mitchell and Olson 1981,

Mitchell 1986, MacKenzie et al. 1986). Compounding this, in research with primarily pictorial

print advertisement, framing of the picture has been shown to have a positive effect on

brand/product evaluations and recall (Edell and Staelin 1983).

Since the LaBarbera et al.(1998) study, there has been no further research in the public domain

specifically testing congruence between image type and an individual’s preferred processing

style in print advertisements. In view of the limited research evidence supporting congruence

between Jung’s perceiving dimension and image type in advertising, the need for further research

was indicated. As Evanschitzy et al. (2007) suggest, practitioners should “put little stock in the

outcomes of one-shot studies”. There is a concern that “hardly any” of results reported in

marketing journals have been successfully replicated. This study offers a representation with

extension consistent with Hubbard and Armstrong’s (1994) definition ie it is a “duplication of a

previously published empirical research project that serves to investigate the generalisability of

earlier research findings”.

This study was conducted a decade on, in the UK and using a convenience sampling technique to

deliver a sample representative of the UK population in terms of perceiving preference split.

Three categories were chosen to represent a range of products – orange juice, mattresses and

retirement savings plans, consistent with the original study but omitting the fourth category as

preliminary research showed a gender bias.

Hypotheses

The aim is to investigate the extent to which congruence between consumer personality-type

perceiving preference and image type in print advertisements is supported. For robustness, the

LaBarbera et al. (1998) hypotheses were reversed:

H1 – Individuals show no preference for images and advertisements consistent with their

information processing styles.

Images and advertisements perceived as realistic, concrete and informative will not be evaluated

more (less) favourably by individuals with sensor (intuitive) typologies compared to

advertisements perceived as imaginative, conceptual and abstract.

H2 – Individuals show no preference to purchase products consistent with their information

processing styles.

Advertisements perceived as realistic, concrete and informative will not elicit higher (lower)

purchase intentions by individuals with sensor (intuitive) typologies compared to advertisements

that are perceived as imaginative, conceptual and abstract.

4

Methodology

This study was conducted in three phases: an expert panel, a pre-test study and a main study over

an 8-week period. The data collection methods, instruments and objectives for each phase are

summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of data collection methods, instruments and objectives

Phase Objective Stimulus Material

and Instruments

Outline

Expert panel • To select 18 images for

the pre-test

• Mixed selection of

images for three

product categories –

both product, and

conceptual

3 panel members (trained to

level B psychometrics)

selected 3 ‘sensing’ and 3

‘intuitive’ images for each of

the 3 product categories

giving 18 images (3+3 X 3)

Pre-test • To filter out the

strongest S and N

image for each product

category, 6 in total

• To determine

respondent’s

perceiving preferences

• 18 images selected

by the expert panel -

6 per product

category

• Pre-test vocabulary

and short MBTI

questionnaire

30 respondents selected

word associations for the

images from the pre-test

vocabulary

(see Appendix 2).

S/N perceiving preference

for pre-test sample assessed

Main study • To test the hypotheses

by rating image appeal,

overall advertisement

appeal and intention to

purchase

• To determine each

subject’s S/N

perceiving preference

• A total of 6 images –

2 per product

category – with 3

shown to each

subject

• Questionnaire to rate

image appeal,

overall advert appeal

and intention to

purchase

• Pre-test key words

• Short MBTI

questionnaire

104 adults allocated

perceiving preference based

on key words and

then rated image appeal,

overall advert appeal and

intention to purchase on a

Likert scale 1 = strongly

disagree, 7 = strongly agree

Analysis and findings

Results of the pre test

The results of the pre test to classify the images confirmed the judgment of the expert panel (see

Table 2), validating the visual stimulus material.

Table 2: Summary of image classification results

Product category Ad Type Image description1 Mean

Value2

No. of

subject

scores

Standard

deviation

Orange juice

Sensor (S) Glass with oranges 0.30 47 2.39

Intuitive (N) Sunburst -1.26 57 1.92

Retirement Plan Sensor (S) Piggy bank 2.00 57 2.24

Intuitive (N) Crystal ball -0.91 47 1.99

Mattress Sensor(S) Bedroom 0.57 51 2.34

Intuitive(N) Moonlight scene -2.38 53 1.69 1 See appendix 3 for images

2Sensing minus intuitive key word score

There was no statistically significant interaction effect between perceiving type (sensor/intuitive)

on image classification F(1, 308) = 0.367, p=0.55.

5

Main Study

The sample of 104 respondents comprised 63% sensors and 37% intuitives, categorised by the

number of sensing and intuitive words selected (see Appendix 2). The sample was asked to rate

the images on the items shown in Appendix 4 using a Likert scale.

To check reliability and internal consistency in the three items of the intention to purchase scale

and the two items of the advertising appeal scale, Cronbach alpha tests were run with results of

0.85 and 0.9 respectively. No statistically significant effects were found for overall advertisement

appeal, image appeal and purchase intentions between sensing and intuitive subject groups at

aggregate image level. To assess the potential for congruence between image type and subject

type, more detailed analysis with 6 two-way between group ANOVAs conducted on the 6

individual measures of image appeal, advertisement appeal (x2) and purchase intention (x3) for

each of the 6 advertising images. These results of are summarised in tables 3-5. Throughout all

Levene’s homogeneity of variance was not violated. No significant interaction effects were seen

between the independent variables of subject groups and images and no significant main effects

were seen for the subject groups.

Table 3: Image appeal ratings

Advertisement type

(S/N)

Mean rating by

sensor subjects

Mean rating by

intuitive subjects

F-value Significance

(p-value)

Orange juice (S)

Orange juice (N)

3.52

3.94

3.44

4.17

0.18 0.68 **

Retirement plan (S)

Retirement plan (N)

3.00

4.87

3.25

4.88

0.17 0.70**

Mattress (S)

Mattress (N)

3.48

3.10

4.00

3.00

0.42 0.34**

**p >0.01

Table 4: Advertisement appeal ratings

Advertisement type Mean rating by

sensor subjects

Mean rating by

intuitive subjects

F-value Significance

(p-value)

Orange juice (S)

Orange juice (N)

3.99

4.45

3.66

4.96

0.07 0.21***

Retirement plan (S)

Retirement plan (N)

3.14

9.16

3.04

5.00

0.41 0.32***

Mattress (S)

Mattress (N)

3.35

3.15

3.67

3.16

0.31 0.61***

*** p>0.01

The reported means and low F values indicate no significant difference between group and within

group differences in the mean scores providing support for H1.

Table 5: Intention to purchase ratings

Advertisement type Mean rating by

sensor subjects

Mean rating by

intuitive subjects

F-value Significance

(p-value)

Orange juice (S)

Orange juice (N)

4.56

4.74

4.29

5.26

0.21 0.17***

Retirement plan (S)

Retirement plan (N)

4.21

5.39

4.43

5.48

0.40 0.80***

Mattress (S)

Mattress (N)

4.29

4.17

4.66

4.42

0.42 0.82***

*** p>0.01

6

The reported means and low F values indicate insignificant between group and within group

differences in the mean scores providing support for H2. There was no significant difference in

intention to purchase behaviour between sensor and intuitive subject groups across all images and

product categories.

No significant differences were found between the sensor and intuitive subject groups for any

image on the individual measures of image appeal, overall advertisement appeal and

intention to purchase supporting both H1 and H2. Both hypotheses were supported with

individuals showing no preference for images and advertisements nor to purchase products

presented in a form consistent with the information processing styles that characterise their

personality types.

Discussion and Implications

The findings of this study do not support a congruency theory between perceiving-type

preference and visual image type in advertising. No significant differences were found between

the sensor and intuitive subject groups for any image on the individual measures of image appeal,

overall advertisement appeal and intention to purchase. No cause and effect relationship was

shown.

Subjects were shown to reliably categorise visual images displayed alone and in advertisements

as either sensor or intuitive in type, suggesting the sensor/intuitive classification system may

reliably offer a method for evaluation of visual images displayed alone and in advertisements.

This categorisation was not affected by individuals’ perceiving preference as no significant

differences were found on evaluation of images between the sensor and intuitive groups.

From the findings of this study, the principal implication is that perceiving type preference

information cannot reliably be used to understand and predict how consumers will interpret and

respond to imagery in advertisements. Using visual images that are consistent with perceiving-

type preference has no effect on advertising evaluations. However this study does not take

account of the interaction effects between the different dimensions and to some extent seeks

parsimony where complexity might be helpful.

The results of this study and the limited previous support for a congruence theory between

Jungian perceiving preference and visual image type indicate that practical application of this

partially supported theory is not recommended.

This study emphasises the importance of replication research as this close application of the

original delivers diametrically opposing results. Geography and time scale do not provide an

explanation for this since the MBTI is stable over time and differences in the frequency of the

S/N perceiving types are accounted for in the research design. The credibility of academic

research is brought into question by this lack of generalisability and should reasonably create

scepticism in the minds of practitioners.

7

References

Aaker J L (1997). “Dimensions of Brand Personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 3 347-

56

Briggs K C and Briggs Myers I (1998). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Step 1 Question Book,

Oxford, UK: Seacourt Press, distributed by OPP Limited

Bruner G C, James K E and Hensel P J (2001). Marketing scales handbook: a compilation of

multi-item measures. Vol 3. Chicago, III: American Marketing Association.

Edell J A and Staelin R (1983), “The Information Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements”,

Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 45-61

Evanschitzky H, Baumgarth C, Hubbard R. and Armstrong J.S (2007). “Replication Research in

Marketing Revisited: A Note on A Disturbing Trend”, Journal of Business Research, 60, 4, 411-

415

Holbrook Morris (1986). “Aims, Concepts and Methods for the Representation of Individual

Differences in Esthetic Responses to Advertising”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 3 337-47.

Hubbard R and Armstrong J S (1994). “Replications and Extensions in Marketing: Rarely

Published but Quite Contrary”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11, 233-248

LaBarbera P A, Weingard P and Yorkston E A (1998),”Matching the Message to the Mind:

Advertising Imagery and Consumer Processing Styles”, Journal of Advertising Research,

September-October 1998 29-43

Leonard D and Straus S (1997), “Putting your Company’s Whole Brain to Work”, Harvard

Business Review 75, 4 110-22

MacKenzie S B, Lutz R J and Belch G E (1986), “The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a

Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Evaluations”, Journal of Marketing

Research, XXIII, 130-43

McBride M H (1987). “Toward a Theory of Psychological Type Congruence for

Advertisers”,Conference Proceedings: Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in

Journalism and Mass Communication (70th

, San Antonio, 1987)

Mitchell A A and Olsen J C (1981), “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of

Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?”, Journal of Marketing Research, XVIII, 318-32

Mitchell A A (1986),”The Effect of Verbal and Visual Components of Advertisements on Brand

Attitudes and Attitude toward the Advertisement”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 12-24

Myers, I. B and McCaulley M. H (1985). A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-

Briggs Type Indicator, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc

Myers, Isabel Briggs, Myers B Peter (1992). Gifts Differing, 16th

edition, Palo Alto, CA:

Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc

Russell A L (2001). A Personal Odyssey: Myers Briggs Type Indicator Preferences and Personal

Responses to Photographs, Published in the proceedings (2002) 33rd

Annual Conference of the

International Visual Literacy Association, Eskilstuna, Sweden, November, 165-170

Wilmshurst J and MacKay A (1999). The Fundamentals of Advertising, 2nd

edition. Butterworth

Heinemann, Oxford

Wright P (1975),”Factors affecting cognitive resistance to advertising”, Journal of Consumer

Research, 2, 1-9

8

Appendix 1: The four preferences of the MBTI (Source: Myers and McCaulley 1985)

Index preferences between Affects choices as to

EI

E Extraversion or

I Introversion

Whether to direct perception

judgment mainly on the outer

world (E) or mainly on the

world of ideas (I)

SN

S Sensing perception

N Intuitive perception

Which kind of perception is

preferred when one needs or

wishes to perceive

TF

T Thinking judgment

F Feeling judgment

Which kind of judgment to

trust when one needs or

wishes to make a decision

JP J Judgment

P Perception

Whether to deal with the outer

world in the judging (J)

attitude (using T or F) or in

the perceptive (P) attitude

(using S or N)

9

Appendix 2: Sensor/ Intuitive Key Words

Source: adapted by author from LaBarbera 1998 (Briggs and Briggs-Myers 1998, Myers 1992,

Myers and MacCaulley 1985)

Sensor vocabulary Intuitive vocabulary

• Realistic

• Useful

• Practical

• Down-to-earth

• Actual

• Factual

• Concrete

• Here and now

• Informative

• Speculative

• Fantasy

• Imaginative

• Head-in-the-clouds

• Possible

• Innovative

• Abstract

• Future

• Inspirational

10

Appendix 3: Advertising Images

Sensing Intuitive

11

Appendix 4

Variables and Related Items (Bruner et al. 2001)

Variable Item

Advertisement appeal I like this advert

I imagined what it would be like to use the product

advertised

Image appeal The image of this product appealed to me.

Intention to purchase I would like to try this product.

I would buy this product if I happened to see it

I would actively seek out this product to buy it