A Comprehensive Theory of Advertising <br>by Bill Harvey

Editor’s note: We resume In Terms of ROIwith a condensed adaptation of Bill Harvey’sA Comprehensive Theory of Advertising, written before his passing and edited for length by theRMTLabsteam. It brings together questions that animated his work for decades: why people choose, how advertising influences those choices, and why understanding human motivation matters.

We can know that something works without understanding why it works. But without knowing why, every use of it is a shot in the dark, guided by the latest persuasive result or by intuition.

Before we had today’s understanding of electromagnetism and the atom, we could already light up cities. Understanding why they behave as they do brought us MRI scans, television, computers, the internet and AI.

Advertising needs that kind of understanding.

We have accumulated knowledge about reach, frequency, memory, emotion, persuasion and context. We have models describing the stages between an opportunity to encounter an advertisement and a purchase. We have increasingly sophisticated ways to observe what people do.

But what connects these observations? Why does a particular message change one person’s predisposition toward a brand while leaving another person unmoved?

The theory presented here begins with motivation, and it stands or falls on one test: whether motivation predicts advertising outcomes beyond what relevance, congruence, attention, emotion, and persuasion already explain.

What makes a brand matter?
People do not come to advertising as empty vessels waiting to receive a message. They arrive with their own, deep-seated motivations, most of which operate below conscious awareness. These motivations help determine what seems relevant, what feels rewarding, and what is worth choosing.

“Motivation” is used loosely in our field to cover needs, goals, desires, values, and emotional states. This theory uses it in one precise sense, described below: a set of psychological dimensions derived from real choices and measured independently of any advertising outcome.

The question is not simply whether someone understands what a product does. It is whether the person perceives that the brand could help satisfy something that matters to them.

When an advertisement conveys that possibility, the brand acquires additional meaning. Its perceived value changes. A predisposition to try it can increase, possibly from zero.

This is the essential idea of motivational resonance: a connection between the motivations carried by a message and those already present in the person receiving it.

“Comprehensive” does not mean that motivation is the only thing that matters. It means looking for a mechanism that connects the parts of advertising we have often studied separately.

Exposure, emotion, memory, persuasion, context, and frequency all have roles. Motivational resonance helps explain why those elements produce different effects for different people.

A common human language
Human beings share a pool of motivations, but their priorities and combinations make each of us distinctive. The same message can therefore resonate with many people without having the same significance for everyone.

This is one reason reach works. A motivationally resonant advertisement can travel well across a broad audience. Understanding motivation need not mean abandoning scale. It can mean understanding what gives a message its power at scale.

In the work that became RMTLabs, we approached these questions through observed choices. We began with more than 13,000 psychological dimensions drawn from the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary, then used machine learning against set-top box viewing data and a program recommender to identify which dimensions were implicated in what people actually chose.

That process distilled 265 psychological descriptors, now called Value Signals. The important point is that they were derived from choices, not from asking people to explain themselves. They were also measured independently of any advertising outcome, which is what allows motivational resonance to be tested against outcomes rather than defined by them.

Neuroeconomics approaches the same territory from another direction. It studies how the brain computes value when making choices. As Michael Platt of Wharton Neuroscience has observed, the underlying computation applies across very different decisions: cookies, spouses and stocks.

That is the basis for expecting a taxonomy derived from program choice to generalize to brands.

What persuasion means
In this theory, persuasion occurs when someone consciously or subconsciously perceives that a brand might increase the satisfaction of a motivation. Positive feeling and memory can become part of that process. The brand is no longer represented in quite the same way in the person’s mind.

That does not make purchase inevitable. Category need, price, availability, existing preferences, competition, and product experience still matter. Advertising changes a probability within that larger world.

This theory also suggests an extension to the Advertising Research Foundation’s model of how advertising works, a model I helped author. It walks from vehicle exposure and ad exposure through attention, communication, persuasion, and ad interaction to sales. What it does not explain is why one ad gets through, and another does not. Between advertising exposure and attention, this theory adds a stage called Subconscious Resonance: the process through which a message connects with motivations already present in the individual, helping determine whether it enters conscious awareness. That is the missing link.

Why context belongs in the theory
An advertisement is not experienced in isolation. The surrounding content has already helped establish a mood, a set of associations and a psychological orientation.

When an ad and its context resonate, the context can amplify the advertising experience rather than interrupt it.

There are many kinds of similarity: settings, characters, language, colors, tempo, or emotion. These can make a transition feel easier and less dissonant. Motivational alignment goes further because it connects to what makes something worth choosing.

Similarity of the non-motivational kind still helps ad recall and brand awareness. Byron Sharp has been interpreted, probably unfairly, as saying that the job of advertising is merely to get the brand onto the mental map. It is more efficient for advertising to achieve much more than a foot in the door.

This suggests three connected considerations: what motivations the creative expresses, how those motivations relate to the audience, and how the surrounding content supports them.

Creative, audience, and context are not separate experiences for the person receiving the advertising. They become one experience.

Frequency belongs in this picture too. Repeated messages carrying a consistent motivational meaning can reinforce a changing perception of the brand. When the creative, the audience and the context all carry the same motivations, less frequency should be needed to achieve trial or repeat purchase of the brand.

Proven in market
This is not just a theory. It has been tested against the measures the industry already trusts, and against sales.

In 2017, MRI Simmons found that adding the motivational taxonomy improved its ability to explain brand adoption by 83% across 3,830 brands in hundreds of product categories. An ARF Cognition Council analysis, using an earlier 15-cluster version of the taxonomy, found that motivation clusters explained 59% of the variance in six years of IRI sales data.

In a FOX-sponsored Wharton Neuroscience study, context-ad motivational resonance was the only statistically significant predictor of EEG synchrony, the brain response associated with effective advertising. It outperformed the other EEG measures of attention, memory, and approach/avoidance, eye-tracking, and conventional pretest measures of ad recall and persuasion. Separately, RMTLabs in-market tests found that campaigns using motivational methods performed better at every stage of the funnel, and especially in sales.

The sales results have been stronger than moveable-middle targeting or any other advanced audience I have tested in the past half-century.

Practitioners who have run it see the same thing. As Scott Sutton, Director of Media, CKE Restaurants, put it after testing: “We’ve tested it, and it works.”

Three different measures—brand adoption, brain response, and sales—all point the same way: when motivations align, advertising works harder. The invitation to every advertiser is simple: test motivational resonance against your best-performing audience.

The larger opportunity is not simply to improve a targeting technique. It is to understand advertising as a relationship between what a brand communicates and what a person values.

Applied ethically and wisely, that understanding can reduce waste, build trust where it is deserved, help neutralize manipulative uses of mass media, make advertising more enjoyable, and help businesses grow.

We can also ask a better question. Not merely, “How do we get our message in front of people?” but “How do we make sure our message resonates with the people it reaches, in the moment it reaches them?” That is the difference between knowing that advertising works and knowing why.

Posted at MediaVillage through the Thought Leadership self-publishing platform.

Click the social buttons to share this story with colleagues and friends.
The opinions expressed here are the author's views and do not necessarily represent the views of MediaVillage.org/MyersBizNet.