["itemContainer",{"xmlns:xsi":"http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance","xsi:schemaLocation":"http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5 http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5/omeka-xml-5-0.xsd","uri":"https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/items/browse?collection=4&output=omeka-json","accessDate":"2026-05-22T22:12:22+00:00"},["miscellaneousContainer",["pagination",["pageNumber","1"],["perPage","10"],["totalResults","7"]]],["item",{"itemId":"97","public":"1","featured":"0"},["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2221"},["text","The Construction of Female Sexual Agency in Contemporary Advertising: Empowerment or Objectification?"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2222"},["text","Irina Teodora Marculescu"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2223"},["text","2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2224"},["text","Building on the work of Gill (2008) on postfeminist female gender representation in advertising, more specifically the shift from representing women as sexual objects to representing women as active sexual subjects, this work presents an exploration of young adults’ constructions and depictions of contemporary sexualised representations of women; of whether the new construction of female sexual agency is seen as empowering as opposed to objectifying. Furthermore, this analysis is concerned with the susceptibility of young audiences to advertising’s attempts to integrate neoliberal/postfeminist ideas in their communication strategies. A tangent question to this research is an exploration of contemporary audiences’ awareness of recent movements against sexual harassment (MeToo); of potential implications these may have in the construction of the new femininity. The study consisted of both same-sex (male, female) focus groups and mixed-gender focus groups in order to ensure complementarity of insights. Findings suggest thatthere is no simple negotiation between empowerment and objectification. Female sexual agency cannot be denied, nor can women be understood as completely free agents, living independent of any external influence or constraint. Female empowerment in \r\nadvertising must not limit female gender representation/empowerment to women’s sexuality and should distance itself from its constant rapport with the male as female empowerment, also femininity, must be understood and represented much more broadly. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2225"},["text","media, advertising, psychology, sociology, psycho-social, sexualisation, objectification, empowerment, sexual empowerment\r\ngender, me too, feminism, post feminism, neoliberalism"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2226"},["text","advertising must not limit female gender representation/empowerment to women’s sexuality and should distance itself from its constant rapport with the male as female empowerment, also femininity, must be understood and represented much more broadly. Methods Section:This study investigates the construction of female sexual agency in advertising. More specifically, it contributes to existing feminist post-structuralist literature, critique and debates around representations of gender in media culture as it explores young adults’ perceptions of female gender representations in advertisements that depict women sexually.                                Research DesignA phenomenological approach was adopted in this research as participants were invited to express their views on specific advertising stimuli, to discover and ascribe meaning to cultural depictions of female sexuality. Focus groups were conducted with five (male), six (mixed) and seven (female) participants who engaged in a semi-structured discussion. Participants expressed their thoughts in relation to the topic of research as consisting of various pre-established themes. SamplingThe sample consisted of 18 participants of which nine were females and nine were males. All participants identify as undergraduate or postgraduate students at Lancaster University, aged 20-27 years old. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling. Despite being current residents of Lancaster, they originate from different countries (England, Bulgaria, Lithuania, U.S., China, France, Andorra, and Greece). \r\nResearch ProceduresMaterialsParticipants were provided with an information sheet and consent form before the focus group. The information sheet provided participants with information about the study, the scope of research, their confidentiality and anonymity, and also the opportunityto further enquire about the study. Focus groups discussion were recorded via Iphone Voice Memo recorder. The recordings were removed from the researcher’s Iphone and stored on the researcher’s password protected laptop. Participants were given a debrief sheet as soon as the focus group and recording ended.   AdvertisementsA wide range of contemporary advertisements (See Appendix E) were spontaneously selected from targeted advertising in the UK, used as stimuli and shown chronologically to participants during the focus groups so they could discuss their opinions of how female sexual agency has been depicted for the past decade. Specific advertisements were selected based on the way they depict women sexually –as a means of empowerment of women as independent sexual agents. 1.Coco Mademoiselle (2011)was selected for this discussion as it depicts a new form of female sexual agency where the woman is presented as playful and sensual and not overtly sexual. During the focus groups, I sought to understandwhether the protagonist wasperceivedas strong and independent; as playful and sensual as opposed to overtly sexual. Advertisement URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRV-2_Un-kk2.Dior Poison Girl (2016) was selected as discussion stimuli becauseit received numerous complaints for being misogynist, objectifying and denigrating of women as the protagonist is seen as a sexual object of male gaze and desire. The brand \r\ndefended themselves by stating that instead of acting promiscuously, the girl rejected the man which can be viewed as empowering to women. In the focus group discussion, I sought to establish whether this ‘midriff’ discourse of sexuality is seen as empowering or objectifying.Advertisement URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re4icu2NXO83.Dior J’adore (2016) presents Charlize Theron as the ‘absolute femininity icon’ as she is celebrating her union with the water, the earth, the sun, and herself; basking in water and sunlight while posing sensually. This ‘absolute femininity’ is ultimately promised through the divine Dior fragrance which elevates the female to the status of goddess. In my focus groups, I soughtto understand whether this wasperceived as a relevant depiction of the sexually empowered woman; whether the absolute femininity wascaptured by the brand in their advertisement or it takes more than a sparkly dress and shots of an actress caressing herself in anoasis.Advertisement URL:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaJ-TE1xZVA4.The Calvin Klein Fall campaign (2016)-edgy, sexual, youth and celebrity charged–was also selected. Many expressed their outrage as they considered it offensive, exploitative, objectifying and sexist while highly targeting young audiences. While objectors may look at it as another case of women being sexualised against their will, internet generations could embrace the hashtag language, therawstyleofthe photos and videos, the celebrities featured and their non-conformist styles. In the focus groups, I explored participants’ perceptions of this sexually charged campaign, its construction of female sexuality, and whether it is authentic and empowering. Advertisement URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMRbSI6QAWs\r\n5.Another short advertisement from the same campaign was shown in order to explore participants’ perceptions of the way model Kate Moss was depicted in the Calvin Klein Campaign (2016) -through highly explicit, vulgar, yet censored, claims she makes aboutmen and romantic love.Advertisement URL:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C-ea6J9YdY6.After discussing recent international movements against sexual harassment, the last and most recent adverts were shown with the scope of exploring participants’ understanding of ‘the new femininity’ as depicted in advertising. Shimmer in the Dark by Jimmy Choo (2017) was selected as it showed model Cara Delevingne, walking the streets at night, scantily clad, being catcalled. Unlike usual catcalling, consisting of offensive sexual remarks, the protagonist received compliments on her shoes. While this was considered highly idealistic by many, it was primarily considered ‘tone-deaf’ to the uncomfortable reality of sexual harassment experienced by many. I sought to ask participants whether they see this as empowering, whether they consider it idealistic or rather insensitive to the women’s general sentiment; whether a woman can dress herself that way and feel safe and empowered.Advertisement URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPrRRgagQg87.The focus groups ended with a discussion of the most recent Coco Mademoiselle (2018)advert, another potential example of the new femininity. After previously watching Coco Mademoiselle (2011), it was worth looking at their most recent portrayal of the same female —Kiera Knightley —as playfully seductive but even more youthful, enigmatic and unapologetic. She parties, flirts and despite a lot being left to the imagination, she eventually leaves the man. In focus group \r\ndiscussions, I sought to explore whether this carefree, adventurous persona wasperceived as the new femininity; asempowering or not. Advertisement URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkKROkzYdXsInterview ScheduleA discussion guide (See Appendix D) was created in order to guide and time the focus group discussions. The discussion guide consisted of several pre-established themes and related questions so that the discussion, despite being informal, maintained its intended focus. Additional questions were asked by both the researcher and the participants in order to clarify or lead the discussion. Snacks and refreshments were used as incentives and provided to all groups. There were three focus groups: a male group with five males, a mixed one with four males and two females, and a female group with 7 females. Each focus group, lasting approximately 120-minute-long, was conducted at Lancaster University. Due to the influence of gender composition of a group on the nature of participants'interaction and thequality of the data, this study has incorporated both same-sex (male, female) groups and onemixed-gender group(male and female) in order to obtaincomplementaryinsights (Stewart, Shamdasani & Rook, 2007).Ethical ConsiderationsThis research was designed to align with by the Lancaster University Ethics Committee/departmental ethical standards. Participants gave informed consent and were reassured confidentiality and anonymity. Their data was anonymised by replacing their names with initials representative of their gender and orderly numeration. They were informed of their permanent right to withdraw from the study and provided with all the necessary documents (information sheet, consent form, \r\ndebrief). Research data and findings were only be accessed by the researcher and the supervisor. Data Analysis ProcedureA six-stage thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was used to identify, analyse, and report reoccurring patterns (themes) within the data. The analysis can be described as an orderly process consisting of the following stages: familiarisation with the data, generating initial codes, discovering themes within the codes, reviewing and defining them, and the eventual writing of the analysis and study findings (Braun & Clarke, 2006). "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2227"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2228"},["text","No data provided"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2229"},["text","Marculescu2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2230"},["text","Rebecca James"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2231"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2232"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2233"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2234"},["text","No data provided"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2235"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2236"},["text","Leslie Hallam "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2237"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2238"},["text","Psycho-social"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2239"},["text","18 participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2240"},["text","Qualitative, thematic analysis"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"88","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"49"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/f5a8c7f2b9110b1f583b9bf21cf2c204.doc"],["authentication","8a28b328858001d9d2bb429dcc9e7bb8"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2013"},["text","Sexualised Advertising through Instagram: An exploration into the effects this has on female appearance satisfaction"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2014"},["text","Chrystal Champion"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2015"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2016"},["text","This study explored the beliefs and opinions held by females aged 20-23 years on Instagram. It aimed to uncover possible effects that exposure to sexualised content and beauty standards could have on young female’s appearance satisfaction. Previous literature has addressed extensively how social comparisons and internalisation of beauty ideals can negatively affect females, increasing body dissatisfaction. This research aimed to expand these findings, exploring how body and facial attractiveness seen online can affect appearance satisfaction as a whole. Previous studies have determined that internalisation and social comparison are prevalent in women that compare themselves to others on Instagram. These theories along with objectification and cultivation theory are utilized to comprehend female’s perceptions of beauty and how it could be implicating them to act in a sexualised way online. The study consisted of two focus groups, each lasting approximately one hour. A convenience sample was used recruiting university students. A semi-structured interview schedule was utilised to allow for rich data to be produced. The data was categorised by using thematic analysis strategies of coding, mapping and deducing themes. The research conclusion found that women did report decreased appearance satisfaction when viewing ‘beautiful’ girls on Instagram, social comparisons was identified as more salient with peers, yet they did also report comparing themselves with reality television stars. Findings also reported that internalisation of beauty ideals was strong, they remark television and the social media for ‘normalising’ beauty standards. Lastly, participants were found to self-objectify themselves in a sexual manner more for Instagram than other social media sites. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2017"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2018"},["text","This study explores the possible effects social networking site Instagram has on young females, in relation to their appearance satisfaction. Overall, it aims to add to existing literature within this field and other domains such as sociology and women’s studies, whilst also extending previous literature, as this research looks beyond body satisfaction and addresses appearance satisfaction completely. It also provides scope into understanding Instagram and the magnitude of its effects on the user, as the majority of previous literature focuses on Facebook. \r\n\r\n3.1 Research Design\r\nTwo focus groups were conducted, each lasting approximately one hour. The focus group was held in a small lecture theatre at Lancaster University in the Management School (Lecture Theatre 12). A phenomenological approach was applied as the research aims to explore a group of participant’s experiences and aims to further make sense of these experiences (Creswell, 2013). Application of focus groups was applied as it allowed for a semi-structured narrative of findings. The participants were able to express their thoughts, feelings and opinions in relation to this topic of research. A semi-structured interview type was applied as it allows for more flexibility, allows for more rapport building and these aspects can lead to richer data which enters more novel spheres (Smith & Osborn, 2003).\r\n\r\n3.2 Sampling \r\nThe overall sample consisted of 13 female students studying at Lancaster University between the ages of 20-23 years. This age was used as research has suggested that young females within these age brackets tend to be heavy Instagram users. These participants were recruited through convenience sampling, no specific recruitment criteria concerning use of social media was applied, in order to allow this variable to fall out naturally in the sample.  \r\n\r\n3.3 Research Procedures \r\n3.3.1 Materials \r\nThe participants were given an information sheet and a consent sheet at the beginning of the focus groups. These detailed the purpose of the study, outlined the potential risks/benefits, and provided the participants with information regarding their anonymity and confidentiality as well as making them aware of their right to withdraw. During the focus group participants were asked to discuss images which included advertisements of brands and celebrities and well as images showcasing cosmetic enhancements (See appendix E). The focus groups were recorded using a MacBook Pro, the recordings were stored in a file on the laptop, which was password protected. \r\n\r\n3.3.2 Interview Schedule \r\nA discussion guide was created for the focus groups which outlined a schedule for conversation and was used to informally guide the discussion. Guides are used to be suggestive, not prescriptive (Smith and Osborn, 2003). The discussion guide contained open-ended questions which were used to detect Instagram usage, opinions, beliefs and perceptions. However, it must be noted that some additional questions were asked during the focus group, coherent with its semi-structured nature to gather richer data where applicable. Lastly, the discussion guide was created to address the research aim.  \r\n\r\n3.3.3 Ethical Considerations\r\nThe research design adhered to Lancaster’s Universities ethics committee which is in line with the British Psychological Society’s Code of Ethics and Conduct (BPS, 2009). Each participant gave informed consent, they were informed of the confidentiality agreement, which was to anonymise their identity when using the data by given each of the individuals a pseudonym (Forrester, 2010). Participants were ascribed a pseudonym from the letters A-L to protect their identities. They were informed of their right to withdraw and were given a debrief sheet at the end of the focus groups. Data recorded was discussed only between the researcher and the supervisor.     \r\n\r\n3.3.4 Data Analysis Procedure \r\nData analysis from the research findings are used in a way which helps to manifest the respondent’s discussion, to examine possible beliefs or constructs as portrayed by the participants (Smith and Osborn, 2003). This aims to understand the complexity of the content, rather than depicting general frequency. The transcript is used to interpret meanings beyond the literal meaning, including context and deducing themes from the data. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcribed data. This method was utilised due to its flexible nature, which helps to produce rich descriptions and accounts of the topic being studied (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The research followed the 6-stage account as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006). Stage one of their model involves familiarity of content, which is done by re-reading the transcripts. Stage two involves identifying key features and giving them a relating initial code. Thirdly, themes are deduced from the features by combining relevant codes, some create sub-themes and others are able to be subordinate themes. Fourthly, the themes are broken down and refined into separate themes, in the fifth stage these themes are used to create a thematic map. Lastly, each theme is written up and analysed to the fullest extent. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2019"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2020"},["text","Text/.docx"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2021"},["text","Champion2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2022"},["text","Rebecca James"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2023"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2024"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2025"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2026"},["text","Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2027"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2028"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2029"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2030"},["text","Social, Marketing"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2031"},["text","13 female students "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2032"},["text","Qualitative (Thematic Analysis), Qualitative "]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"87","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"48"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/45545dfd8470a68ec670a3f57154c126.doc"],["authentication","40410c80ef34bc41f0b1784cd5ffca00"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1993"},["text","Exploring Guilt Appeals "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1994"},["text","Mridhula Ravi"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1995"},["text","2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1996"},["text","Guilt appeals are commonly used in charity advertising as a means of persuading a consumer to donate. This qualitative study uses an Indian sample to understand if there exists any differences in how they are perceived by individuals in a society that is not guilt based. Participants were exposed to 5 advertising campaigns in a focus group interview. The research also seeks to understand other factors that persuade a consumer to donate. It was found that guilt was only a supplementary factor in persuasion and factors of personal relevance and focus of action played a larger role in persuading with the sample used in this research. Guilt was effective in changing the attitude and beliefs of a consumer, but it was the factors of personal relevance and ease and convenience that were influential in changing donation intention into charitable behaviour. However, the small sample is also a limitation in generalising the responses to an entire culture.  "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1997"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1998"},["text","The purpose of this research was to understand the effectiveness of charity advertisements using guilt appeals in an Indian sample. Content analysis was then used to find patterns and themes in the responses of the participants. \r\n\r\nResearch Design\r\n\r\nFocus Group Interviews\r\n\r\nSince the research aimed to create a narrative of the participants opinions and views, focus groups were employed. Focus groups also enable for understanding and exploring a topic in depth and understanding the nuances of the thoughts and opinions of the participants and thus understand how they respond to guilt appeals.\r\n\r\nInterviewer\r\n\r\nThe primary researcher was used as the interviewer on the basis of being well versed with the material and thus the quality of establishing rapport and guiding the focus group discussion. \r\n\r\nDiscussion Guide\r\n\r\nThe primary aim of this research was to understand the perception of guilt appeals in charity adverts and the factors used in the adverts that contribute to donation intention. A discussion guide was formulated in line with the aim of the research and to provide a structure to the direction of the interview. Some of the questions included: ‘How do you feel when you look at this advertisement’, ‘The advertisements intend to use guilt. Do you think that was effective’ and ‘Did you feel guilty when you were exposed to the advertisements?’  (See Appendix A). However the questions were not asked in order and were chosen based on the responses chosen by the participants.  \r\n\r\nParticipants\r\n\r\nA focus group with 7 participants was organised. All the participants were Indian by nationality and graduate students of Lancaster University. Of the 7 participants. There were 5 males and 2 females. The only criteria for choosing the sample was that they had to have lived in India for at least 10 years or identify as an Indian national The age of the participants ranged from 20 to 25 years old. There was no difference by gender and gender was not considered as a variable in this research. \r\n\r\nMaterials\r\n\r\nFive advertisements were used in this research to understand guilt appeals. \r\n\r\nThe advertisements chosen for this study were for causes ranging from child labour, poverty and housing for the poor. To bring some diversity into the advertisements, both online and billboard poster advertisements were used. The people in the advertisements also belonged to different race and age groups to understand if these factors played a role in the effectiveness of the advertisements to both groups. The last advertisement (Shelter) also alluded to shame and I was interested in understanding how this added variable would influence the participants evaluation. \r\n\r\nThe advertisements were chosen from the internet and have been used as part of ad campaigns. The basis for choosing the advertisements was the framework used by Huhmann and Brotherton (1997): \r\n•\tThe presence of comparison between the well-being of the consumer and the other\r\n•\tPlacement of responsibility in the consumer\r\n•\tA call to action to the consumer which will aid the cause, failing which the affected group’s misfortune will prolong \r\n•\tExistence of violation of personal moral standards of the consumer\r\nThe five advertisements below were used in the research can be found in Appendix A, B, C, D and E. \r\n\r\n\r\nProcedure\r\n\r\nParticipants were recruited for the interviews through messages on Social Networking Sites such as Facebook and WhatsApp. A remuneration of 7 pounds was promised for participation and the interview was conducted in the library of Lancaster University. Participants then signed consent forms and were shown the adverts. \r\n\r\nThe advertisements were shown consecutively, with participants providing their opinion on each advertisement before proceeding to the next. Questions were then asked regarding the advertisements and discussed. Finally, participants were debriefed about the nature of the research and paid. \r\n\r\nEthical Standards\r\n\r\nThe research conformed to the Market Research Society’s guidelines. Participation was voluntary and participants were asked to sign consent forms prior the interview. Participants were made aware that their voice would be recorded prior to the start of the interviews. However, for the purpose of anonymity, their names were not used in the study. The participants were also provided with the choice to opt out of the interviews at any given point should they wish to.  \r\n\r\nResults Section:\r\n\r\nThis research sought to understand the effectiveness of guilt appeal adverts in Indians and to understand their perceptions of the advertisements and campaigns. The factors in guilt appeals that contribute to a successful advert was also studied. The following results section has been organised in order of the five adverts shown in the interviews to participants and the responses are accounted. Some common themes found in the responses are also discussed following the responses. \r\n\r\nResponses to the first advert by People in Need (Appendix A) ranged from a participant feeling that the advert was a “sarcastic attempt” and trying to “make a parody of the poor living situation” of the model and his surroundings to claiming that “They are trying to sell the aftershave” “They are trying to show that the product is efficient and works well”. A participant also said that the advert was trying to “enter larger markets” and thus make the product more approachable. Most participants except two misinterpreted the advert into viewing it as an advert for the aftershave and not as a charity advertisement. Even after explanation for the advert was provided, the participants maintained that they felt no sense of guilt. \r\n\r\nOnly one participant understood the mechanism of the guilt appeal used in the advertisement, identifying the underlying message of disparity the advertisement was trying to highlight, saying that the advert showed that “You are spending so much on yourself, (but) with a very little amount, you can help improve the lives of others and make an impact for those people” and said that the advert was simply asking the consumer to care about others. Participants also mentioned that the sparse and bare background “shows poverty and amplifies the situation of the person”. \r\n\r\nHowever, the themes the participants identified related to the efficiency of the product as the opinion was that the product worked well because it could be used by different people and the brand’s intention to show people across different nationalities and income levels. Participants were also provided the background of the campaign and a participant then said that she felt a deeper sense of guilt with this knowledge as she was not using her purchasing power to help others and instead for her own self. The impact of the advert on the participants was also varied with one claiming it had no impact and having a great impact on another. \r\n\r\nWhen presented with the second advert by Unicef against child labour (Appendix B), participants pointed out that the advert targeted Nike, saying that “It mocks Nike by making a direct comparison” and also that “Use of Nike makes it easy to understand to target the industry as a whole”.  A participant also claimed that the obvious dig at Nike left him unable to focus on the intention of the advert that many brands are contributing to child labour because “All I am seeing is Nike and child labour”. Participants who had knowledge about the background about the advert said that they were able to understand the advert better since they could understand why the advert used Nike. The boy in the picture seemed to evoke some emotion, as participants said that the advertisement was basically the fight by “A small boy against a big corporation” and that he is “Helpless and poor” because he cannot fight the situation. They also maintained that the advert sends the message of “restriction and no freedom” as well as “children forced to do it” and children who need money being misused”. The participants also claimed that while they did feel bad for the child, their attention is drawn more towards Nike than cause of child labour. The participants also felt that the campaign should use more brands as the advertisement sends the message of targeting only Nike and not the overall problem with a participant even saying that “Maybe it would have been better not to mention Nike at all”\r\n\r\nWith regard to the third advert by Feed SA (Appendix C), participants felt that the “language is strong”, “message is crisp and clear” and that it was “powerful because it shows an African child”. Conversation centred around the race of the child with participants saying that the advertisement would not have been as effective had the child not been Black and that “I would not have taken the advert seriously if it was an Asian kid”. The participants also said that had the advert emphasised on the race of the child and not the cause, they would have felt offended.  Participants however said that they would donate if they saw this advert because the ad, which was stuck on shopping trolleys explicitly shows he process thereby making the job easier for the consumers. The participants said that the advert is effective in “making people aware of the ease of helping people” as it targets the ease of donation. The advert was seen as “direct, easy, fast, convenient”. \r\n\r\nOn showing the fourth advert by Shelter (Appendix D), participants said that they would most likely not pause to read the entire advert due to it being word heavy. “That’s a big ad” said a participant, continuing that the advert “could have funnelled it down”. However, other participants disagreed saying that one could just read the highlighted text and understand the ad and that it does not demand too much attention. Some participants claimed that despite the size of the advertisement, the process of helping the cause was unclear and ambiguous. Others said that the advert would be effective should they want to donate because the problem is clearly highlighted, and the crux is conveyed with details of what they can do to help and the opinions on the effectiveness of the advert seemed divided. There appeared to be consensus with regard to the child in the picture as participants said that “emotion is instant when you see the girl” and the child would make them pause and read the advert. \r\n\r\nFor the last advert by Amnesty (Appendix E), participants said that the advert makes a strong and powerful statement, immediately catching one’s eyes but felt directionless. A participant said that the advert “hits the emotions but I do not know what to do about it”. Another participant commented that their eyes were immediately drawn towards the word “deserve”. The advert, while impactful, was stated to be vague because it does not inform the viewer what they might be able to do except go on a website, which the participants said was forgettable. A participant said that “Other ads are more about the action; this ad asks for interest and energy” and that one would not bother to do so unless they had time or was personally invested in the cause. Discussion of race again came to the forefront as participants said that the advert resonated more with them given the ethnic unambiguity of the child in that the child could have belonged to an Indian or even Latino background just as easily as American and that “crying face, torn clothes, messy hair make an impact to which race is second”. Not clearly defining the child’s ethnicity was seen as a clever marketing strategy but participants said that they had difficulty relating to a cause from a developed nation. A participant also said that “I would rather pick an Indian child and help that child” in response to helping a cause in America.  \r\n\r\nParticipants were then told that all the adverts worked by using guilt appeals and were asked if they did feel guilty when they viewed the adverts. Some participants identified the Shelter and Amnesty advertisements to evoke emotion in them, whereas others maintained that\r\nwhile they did feel bad and also sad when they viewed the adverts, they could not identify their emotions specifically to say that it was guilt and a couple also admitted that the adverts did not evoke much feelings of guilt.  \r\n\r\n \t“Unless I feel strongly about a cause, I would not donate to the cause regardless of how much the ad tries to guilt me or how powerful an ad is” maintained a participant who said that he would donate to the advert for poverty not only because the advert caught his attention, but also because he was more sensitive towards poverty, having grown up in a poor household. Another participant was of the opinion that he was more likely to donate to causes with adverts with a call for action. Participants also viewed adverts as a “reminder” or “trigger” to take action and that they were most likely to participate in a cause that is the easiest or most convenient to them. A different view was provided by another participant who said that unless he was personally invested to a cause, he would not feel guilt towards an advert for other causes due to the neutral perspective he maintained. Thus, there would be no response in any form towards the advert. \r\n\r\nA participant was also of the view that she would rather help other developing nations than a developed nation. She maintained that because she had seen so much poverty on the streets of India and that because of frequent donations to beggars, the child poverty advert did not evoke any guilt. Another participant revealed that his support only for causes that provided individuals with skills, regardless of the guilt the advert evoked, saying that “I will participate if I think the ad could solve the problem.”\r\n\r\nThe participants were also asked if pictures or words had a greater impact on them and while the consensus was that pictures evoked more emotion, having only pictures could be detrimental and lead to not understanding the purpose of the advert and the greater risk of misinterpretation.\r\n\r\nParticipants were finally asked if them being Indian or their culture had an effect on how they viewed the adverts. Growing up in a country with lots of poverty seemed to have had a great impact on the participants who said that they were more likely to help children in poverty. Religion also played a role for a participant who practised Islam who was of the opinion that he would have donated to any of the causes in the adverts had he seen them in the month of Ramzan. \r\n\r\nThere were several themes that were identified through the analysis of the responses from the interviews. Firstly, while the adverts did elicit negative emotions in participants that persuaded donation intention and to undertake advocated behaviour, that emotion was not immediately identified as guilt by the participants. The general responses to the adverts were that they made one feel “bad” or that they were “hard hitting” and “powerful”. Verbal enunciation of guilty feelings was difficult and indirect. Additionally, while some advertisements did elicit feelings of guilt, the factors that persuaded an individual to support were different from those discussed below.  \r\n\r\n“Unless I feel strongly about a cause, I would not donate to the cause regardless of how much the ad tries to guilt me or how powerful an ad is”\r\n\r\nAn important factor that persuaded charitable behaviour was the personal relevance of the cause for the individual. Personal relevance is largely influenced by life experiences of an individual. Prior knowledge and circumstances had a significant impact on the perception of adverts. The Unicef campaign appealing against child poverty through Nike had a greater impact on individuals who were aware of the case against Nike in reinforcing their perception of the brand than it did on those who were unaware. In such cases where a brand is targeted, the inclusion of facts and background might have resulted in an increase of interest. \r\n\r\nIndividuals who did not have an opinion on a particular cause or had a neutral perspective did experience negative emotions upon exposure to an advertisement, however, the strength of the emotions were not enough for them to consider acting on them. \r\n\r\nReligion also seemed to play a role in charity behaviour. Religions practises such as ‘zakat’ in Islam which requires one to donate a small share of their wealth to the poor and needy with the belief that such donation frees one from excessive greed and desires influenced those who practised the religion to donate during the time of Ramzan. \r\n\r\n\r\n“An advertisement to me is only a reminder”\r\n\r\nThe role of an advertisement was seen as a trigger or a reminder of the cause an individual supports and did not create a new belief or attitude towards a cause. Rather, they seemed to reinforce prevailing ideas and strengthened them. For instance, a participant felt more strongly about the Unicef child labour advertisement because he was informed about the cause and aware of the controversy Nike found itself embroiled it. The advert remined the participant about the cause and his interest in the advert was more a product of personal research than because of the guilt appeal used. However, advertisements time and again seem to be very persuasive in shaping attitudes as well as changing behaviour and it is to be further researched if the opinions in this research are because of the advertisements used or due to individual differences in beliefs of participants. \r\n\r\n“I would rather support an African child than an American child”\r\n\r\nThe willingness to help a cause also depended on the country the cause was addressed towards. There was a greater hesitancy and reluctance in supporting a cause from a “developed” country such America in comparison to developing countries or countries that had the same or lower level of economic growth as India. However, this seemed to be a key factor only when the country the advertisement originated from was explicitly stated. The Shelter advert was an advertising campaign from the United Kingdom, however, it was very persuasive and one of the most effective advertisements according to the participants. The advertisement made no mention of any location. There is a strong commitment in Indians to help extended family and friends or members of the same community, owing to the collectivistic nature of the society (Cantegreil, Chanana, & Kattumuri, 2013) and this is reflected in the responses from participants. This is an important factor to account for with an Indian population, where consumers might be reluctant to support causes from another state of India that is not their own. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1999"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2000"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2001"},["text","Ravi2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2002"},["text","Rebecca James"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2003"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2004"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2005"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2006"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2007"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2008"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2009"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2010"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2011"},["text","7 participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2012"},["text","None"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"80","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"38"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/cdeccb8763d386dc1f1f9f5c6d7e1f84.pdf"],["authentication","82841499e425774f7414de8d9c851ef6"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1853"},["text","An exploration of how young adults engage with charities"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1854"},["text","Saday Lakhani"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1855"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1856"},["text","Research exploring how individuals choose to engage with charities has been limited to studies and interpretations from the 20th Century. In addition to this, research into how young adults choose to interact with charities has not been explored frequently. The present study aims to tackle both of these issues by exploring how young adults choose to interact with charities. Using Sargeant’s (1990) donor decision model as a base, this investigation explores what motivates and deters potential donors from engaging with charity and exploring how they choose to engage. It was found that income was a major barrier towards donation and that the role of others was an important motivator. Lastly participants registered that social media is a prevalent part of how people choose to interact with charities, however donation and volunteering are more valued. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1857"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1858"},["text","Participants \r\nThis investigation consisted of 15 participants based in Lancaster between the ages of 19-25 years, all of which studied at Lancaster University. The sample consisted of eight male participants with an age range of 19-25 and seven female participants with an age range of 19-22. Participants were recruited via opportunistic methods on social media. Advertisement for participation was published on various social media platforms relevant to the University. Each recruited participant was asked to invite a friend to their focus group discussion. Participants were provided with refreshments as an incentive for participation. Due to the method of online recruitment, it was assumed that all of the participants were frequent users of social media and therefore understood its utility. Participants were not filtered for their donation history as it was assumed that individuals would have donated at some point in the past. \r\nProcedure \r\nEach focus group consisted of up to four participants which, as a result of the recruitment method, ensured that each group would be consist of two pairs who were not familiar with each other. The intention of this conflicting paired discussion was to encourage \r\na more open and honest discussion. As well as this, the design of having a paired discussion ensures that statements made by an individual can be verified or rejected by the paired member as they are familiar with the activities of the speaker. As such, the paired member can act as a moderator for the contributions. The focus groups were segmented by gender. One group consisted of all male participants, another consisted of all female participants. The remaining two groups were mixed gender groups. The purpose behind this segmentation was to explore if there was a difference in responses between male and female participants. \r\nThe focus group discussions took place in a quiet and comfortable room within Lancaster University to encourage a free-flowing discussion without interruption. Upon arrival, each participant was provided with a participant information sheet to read, and a consent form to complete outlining the nature of the study and the confidentiality of the data recorded. After any questions were addressed the discussions began and were audio recorded. \r\nThe topics for discussion centred on the areas of exploration mentioned above. The discussion was structured (see Appendix C for Discussion Guide) but was open allowing the discussion to migrate to a number of areas that were pertinent to the participants. The researcher terminated the discussion upon satisfaction that participants had nothing further to add. Participants were then provided with debrief sheets outlining the purpose of the study and its aims. \r\nEach focus group discussion was transcribed onto a word document and subsequently added to NVivo 12 for qualitative analysis. \r\nAnalysis \r\nThe transcripts from each group were exported for analysis to NVivo 12 qualitative analysis software (QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 12, 2018). These were then analysed using the framework for thematic analysis derived from Braun and Clarke (2006). Transcripts \r\nwere read multiple times to ensure familiarity with the content of the discussions. Areas of the discussion that were deemed interesting were subsequently coded within the software according to both the semantic and latent quality. These codes were informed by pre-existing psychological literature in addition to code generation in vivo. This data was then organised into several themes from which conclusions could be generated. These themes were re- analysed to ensure that they were an accurate and valid representation of the content of the discussions. The final themes were then solidified. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1859"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1860"},["text","Text/Word.docx"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1861"},["text","Lakhani2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1862"},["text","Rebecca James"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1863"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1864"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1865"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1866"},["text","Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1867"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1868"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1869"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1870"},["text","Marketing, Social"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1871"},["text","15 participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1872"},["text","Qualitative (Thematic Analysis)"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"74","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"28"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/817c41573a9c56ee11930d194feca1ef.pdf"],["authentication","fec8027de6e092210eb31aa35a2d4d85"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1736"},["text","The Shock Impact: An investigation of attitudes towards the use of shock tactics in charity advertisements."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1737"},["text","Victoria Meadows"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1738"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1739"},["text","While the use of shock has been praised for increasing attention, it has also been shown to cause distress and negatively affect the perception of the organization or brand. The use of shock advertising is increasingly popular in the non-profit sector, with organizations using shocking visual imagery to encourage viewers to take action against a cause or increase donations. This study aimed to deepen our understanding of attitudes held towards the effectiveness of this, and uncover attributes that contribute to this. Based on previous research into the effects of gender on advertisement preferences, we also analysed the opinions of male and female participants to unearth preferences for shocking or non-shocking advertisements. Three focus groups were conducted to collect attitudes towards charity advertisements. Participants were presented with six advertisements, split into three categories of health, animal, and child-based charities, each with one shocking and one non-shocking campaign. To compare genders, one focus group contained only males, one only female, and one mixed. It was found that the effectiveness of shock was perceived as higher for health related causes, lower for children’s charities, and mixed for animal causes. There was a difference between males and females in attitudes towards the use of shock in animal based charities, with females engaging more with the non-shocking advertisement, and males with the shocking. Results from this research improve our knowledge of when and why shock should be used in charity advertisements, how it can be used to target certain audiences.  "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1740"},["text","Shock\r\nAdvertising\r\nGender\r\nCharity"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1741"},["text","Participants\r\nSixteen participants were used in this study, consisting of students attending Lancaster University, with an age range from 20 to 28 years old. The sample had a majority of native speakers (13), with two Romanian and one Panamanian native speaker (English as second language). Participants were collected through opportunity sampling and took part in the study voluntarily. \r\nThis study received departmental approval before data collection commenced.\r\nDesign\r\n\tThe study consisted of three focus groups: one containing only females (FGF), and one of only males (FGM) to examine any differences in attitudes between genders, and one of mixed gender (FG1) in order to assess possible conflicting attitudes within the group. Five students participated in the mixed focus group (three males, two females), five students in the female focus group, and six in the male focus group.\r\n\tFocus groups were conducted in a private room and lasted 40-50 minutes.\r\nMaterials \r\n\tThe stimuli presented to participants were of existing advertising campaigns released by non-profit organizations in the United Kingdom and United Sates of America. Three ‘non-shocking’ advertisements and three ‘shocking’ advertisements were chosen, with one centered around health, animal cruelty, and child abuse in both categories (Appendix A).\r\n\t‘Shocking’ advertising has been defined by Dahl and colleagues (2003) as something that violates the social norm, including content that is seen as disgusting, obscene, vulgar, morally offensive, or containing sexual references. Using this definition as a guide, the ‘non-shocking’ advertisements were chosen dependent on the lack of these traits and did not include, for example, references to blood or death, obscene gestures, or violence. Adverts released by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), the National Health Service (NHS), and Battersea Dogs and Cats Home were chosen.\r\nAgain, using this definition, we selected ‘shocking’ advertisements for their inclusion of the following shocking traits outlined by Dahl and colleagues (2003). Barnardo’s children’s charity was chosen for it’s obscene image of a distressed newborn baby with a Methylated Spirit bottle in its mouth. The Public Health Service’s Smoke Free advertisement featuring a cigarette that morphs into bloodied guts and tissue was chosen for its disgusting imagery. Lastly, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ (PETA) ad featuring a dead, skinned animal was chosen due to its use of offensive images of harmed animals. \r\nThese were printed out and presented to the participants on paper so they could have a closer look at the advertisements.\r\nA discussion guide was created to direct the conversation in the focus groups (Appendix B). The guide was designed so to ensure continuity between the groups as advised by Malhotra (2008), helping to tailor the discussion to the topics of the research aims, while also giving participants the opportunity to express their thoughts freely. Following Goulding’s (1998) guidelines, this discussion guide was flexible, enabling the facilitator to ask further questions in relation to what was brought up in conversation.\r\nProcedure\r\n\tParticipants were seated around a table and had access to refreshments throughout the focus group. They were given time at the beginning to get comfortable and talk with fellow participants. Each participant was given an information sheet (Appendix C) that detailed the aims of the research and what they were expected to do. They were informed that they could ask any questions they wish and had the right to withdraw at any point during or after the focus group. Once they had read the information sheet and understood what they were talking part in, participants signed the consent form (Appendix D) to agree to take part in the study. \r\n\tAt this point they were informed that the recording would commence. The discussion guide was followed throughout, firstly introducing the topic area that was being covered by the focus group, and encouraging participants to consider advertising in general. Following this they were asked about specifically charity advertisements and any overall feelings they had towards any they have seen. Participants then discussed the advertisements presented to them. Starting with the non-shocking advertisements, participants had time to view and discuss each advert one at a time, where they were asked about its effectiveness and anything they liked or disliked about them. The definition of ‘shocking’ advertisements was then introduced and the procedure was then repeated with presenting one advertisement at a time. Participants were then asked to compare their thoughts on which advertising tactic they thought was more effective and if there was a difference in this between the types of causes that were being advertised and the action that was being asked of the audience, for example a donation or change in behavior. This was done in the same order throughout the groups to ensure consistency across the groups. Lastly any final thoughts from the group were collected and participants were informed that they could email the investigator with any further thoughts they had if they wished. They were thanked for their participation and given a debrief sheet (Appendix E) containing more information of this research into the topic area as well as the contact details of the researcher and supervisor. \r\n\tThe recording was then transcribed, and analysed thematically through the use of NVivo qualitative data analysis software, to highlight common themes throughout all three focus groups. This enabled us to compare attitudes held towards the varying types of advertising campaigns, their causes, and any differences between genders.\r\nAnalysis \r\n\tThe transcript for each focus group was entered into NVivo (QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 12, 2017) in preparation for thematic analysis. This was designed to uncover themes throughout the focus groups in a systematic way, identifying patterns found in the opinions of the participants. In order to accurately analyse the data, the thematic guidelines proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006) were followed. The transcripts were firstly read thoroughly to ensure a level of familiarity with the conversations. They were then coded in NVivo according to their content through an inductive approach, forming codes from the data at present as opposed to attempting to fit pre-existing framework by past theories, therefore allowing us to broaden our inclusion of the attitudes recorded. The data collected in these codes were sorted into potential themes, ensuring consistency within and variation between the themes. These themes were then re-analysed, making sure they were reflective of the data collected. The final themes were then decided upon.\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1742"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1743"},["text","Text/nvivo"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1744"},["text","Meadows2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1745"},["text","Ellie Ball"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1746"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1747"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1748"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1749"},["text","Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1750"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1751"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1752"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1753"},["text","Marketing"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1754"},["text","16 Participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1755"},["text","Qualitative (Thematic Analysis)"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"61","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"57"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/ee6c9a9fb70a964519577d2b8a098680.doc"],["authentication","dd2a4ec39b75345858daecc1f5050a4f"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1521"},["text","Use This or You’ll Lose That: Investigating Appropriate Psychological Theories to Market the Bogallme Tracking System."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1522"},["text","Elizabeth Wardman"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1523"},["text","2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1524"},["text","The Bogallme Tracking System is an anonymous ‘Lost and Found’ system which uses stickers with QR codes printed on them to facilitate the return of lost items. It is thought that the main motivations behind the purchasing of these stickers are fear appeal and loss aversion, as people fear losing their possessions and will do whatever they can to prevent this from occurring. This study aimed to investigate whether this is the case using focus groups consisting of primarily students - the target audience for this specific product. The research also explored Rogers’ (1962; 1976) Diffusion of Innovations Theory (DOI) in relation to this product as well as opinions regarding the product and brand. Findings suggested that all three of the above theories are relevant and useful in the development of this product and can be used to create an efficient marketing campaign whilst creating scope for further research which would benefit the development of the brand and product. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1525"},["text","Marketing/Advertising\r\nQualitative (Thematic Analysis)"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1526"},["text","Methodology\r\nParticipants.\r\nSixteen participants took part in this study. Participants were recruited via opportunity sampling through various social media platforms and word of mouth. The age of participants ranged between 20 and 23. This age range was selected due to a market segmentation suggesting that over 50% of QR code users were aged between 18 and 34 and that 18 to 24 year olds were 36% more likely to scan them (14 Million Americans Scanned QR Codes on their Mobile Phones in June 2011., n.d.)\r\nMaterials. \r\nThe focus groups loosely followed a discussion guide (See Appendix D) which asked general questions corresponding to the product, brand and incentives as well as questions related to Fear, Loss Aversion and Diffusion of Innovations theory. The majority of questions within the Discussion Guide were open-ended as they encourage participants to express their views and opinions in full (Turner, 2010) and allow for any further elaboration. During the focus group participants were shown three potential names for the brand (Scannit, GlobalQR and the brand name Bogallme) and an example of the Diffusion of Innovations Model (Figure 1). Participants were each given prototypes of the product that they tested during the group and were allowed to keep these at the end of the study. \r\nProcedure.\r\nFocus Groups\r\nFocus groups were used as the method of data collection for this study. Although focus groups cannot provide data as rich as that of individual interviews, they can allow for group discussions. These group discussions and interactions allow for comparisons between participant experiences and opinions which could otherwise only be inferred after proceedings with individual interviews (Morgan, 1997). \r\nThis study consisted of two focus groups which lasted approximately 60 minutes each. Within each focus group, eight participants sat facing one another around a circular table. After reading the information sheet and signing the consent forms, the focus group started with introductory questions to make participants feel more comfortable and able to voice their opinions. After this brief period, participants were asked questions which followed the discussion guide (See Appendix D), however elaboration was allowed and encouraged. Each participant was encouraged to answer all questions and to contribute to discussions as much as possible. Participants were also made aware that they did not have to answer anything that made them feel uncomfortable. Debrief sheets were handed out to participants at the end of each group and any further questions were answered.\r\nAnalysis\r\nBoth of the focus groups were audio recorded on an Edirol R-09HR recorder and then transferred to a computer so that they could be deleted from the device. Recordings were then transcribed verbatim using the app Audacity, with each participant being given an anonymous ID in case of withdrawal. From these transcriptions, thematic analysis was conducted using the software NVivo, which identified and inferred themes and opinions in order to draw conclusions regarding the discussed theories of Fear, Loss Aversion and Diffusion of Innovations. Other themes and inferences also came to light which will be outlined in the Results section. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1527"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1528"},["text","Results\r\nThere were several overarching themes present in both focus groups which relate to the three discussed theories (Fear, Loss Aversion and DOI Theory) and the proposed areas for exploration, along with new themes which were not previously considered. In response to the second objective relating to participant motivations to buy and use the product, the main theme of ‘motivations’ was created to investigate motivations to buy and use the product. Under this theme came the categories ‘fear’, ‘loss aversion’ and ‘adoption’. Following this, further sub-categories were created for each category which each included ‘effective’ and ‘ineffective’. The ‘adoption’ category under this main theme also included the further sub-categories ‘explicit’ and ‘implicit’. The category ‘explicit’ was based on what participants said outright whereas the ‘implicit’ category was based on inferences and implications from the discussion. The next main theme was created in relation to the first objective which aimed to explore brand and product opinions and was named ‘brand ideas’ and contained the categories ‘name’, ‘product idea’, ‘incentives’ and ‘other opinions’. For the final and arguably most significant objective, the main theme of ‘development’ was created which contained the categories ‘audience’, ‘barriers’ and ‘ideas’ which aimed to assist in making informed suggestions as to how to proceed with product development. \r\nBrand Name\r\nThe opinions relating to the brand name were very clear: participants did not like it. After being presented with three options of a possible brand name with no previous knowledge not one participant deemed ‘Bogallme’ appropriate for the product. Not one participant worked out that the word ‘Bogall’ was an anagram of the word ‘Global’ and the majority of participants chose the name ‘Scannit’ as the most appropriate for both the product and the brand. Many participants also had trouble in pronouncing the brand name correctly and it was pointed out in the first group that some individuals may have trouble reading it.\r\n“It’s not compatible with my dyslexia that one! Not at all.” (PL: Age 22)\r\n“The other two also worked like internationally, you’d have to think about that as even as people who speak English we didn’t get that.” (SD: Age 22)\r\nParticipants in both groups suggested that the name seemed quite childish and was trying too hard to be ‘down with the kids’ instead of being marketed at their age range. Another general consensus regarding the brand name was that it sounded similar to ‘Boggle’, the famous children’s board game, which again gave it a childish theme. \r\n“It’s like the game Boggle you used to play when you were a kid.” (GP: Age 22)\r\nOverall, it seems apparent that the brand name could have detrimental effects for the future development of the product.\r\nProduct Idea\r\nDespite the brand name, after reading the product description, participants liked the concept of the product and agreed that it was something that they would use. \r\n“I need this in my life (laughs)” (EG: Age 22)\r\nThe suggested uses for the stickers included: phones, keys, laptops, passports, luggage and notebooks. Participants said they were more likely to use the service in its current state (using Safari or another web browser) as opposed to downloading an app. However, some participants did have concerns surrounding the legitimacy of the product and would be wary when asked to fill in their details on the website. In terms of pricing, ideas of how much participants would pay for one sticker ranged from £1 to £10 with some participants suggesting that they would prefer to pay for a subscription service. The suggested subscription service consisted of paying a yearly fee for a certain number of stickers.\r\n“Yeah you could subscribe for like a year and you get five stickers and you could use it on whatever you want” (RD: Age 22)\r\nDespite this suggestion, many participants still disliked the idea of a subscription service and compared it to services such as Amazon Prime which continues to charge you if you forget to cancel it. As participants were all students or graduates, most liked the idea of paying per sticker best as it was affordable and not tying. However, another subscription idea came to light when participants were discussing potential problems with people forging the stickers. It was suggested that a subscription would include unlimited stickers and you would instead be paying to use the service as a whole. This would stop people from forging stickers because it would not be necessary once payment had already been made.\r\n“Unless, if you do have a subscription then surely you’d be paying the same amount anyway no matter how many… so why would anyone copy theirs.” (GP: Age 22)\r\nThe issue of forging was quite a prominent topic within the second focus group. They suggested a variety of ways to overcome this: customisable stickers, laminated stickers and the creation of a unique QR code similar to that of Snapchat or Messenger. The idea of customisation was also popular in the first group. Several participants from this group said that they wouldn’t put the sticker on their mobile phone as it is currently for aesthetic reasons. They did however state that if the stickers came in different colours or were customizable, that they would be much more likely to purchase the product. \r\n“I’d say make them customisable. If you could design your own stickers that would be… To match your phone case you could be like ‘ooh I’ll have it black with rose gold’ and then it would match and look cute” (GP: Age 22)\r\nThese participants did still agree that they would put the stickers on items other than phones, such as keys and passports, as it is not as important to participants for these items to be aesthetically pleasing. Stemming from this, the use of the stickers for travelling purposes was discussed in detail. Participants in the first group all agreed that it would be a useful addition to travelling supplies as the stickers could be placed on passports and luggage items. This was a very popular idea with the group for a number of reasons. Firstly, a passport doesn’t have the same sell-on value as a mobile phone, so you’d be much more likely to have it returned to you. Another suggested reason was the speed of having the item returned to you. If you are travelling across several different countries and using many different transportation methods, it may be difficult to continue without documents such as your passport and so a speedy return is very important. The final reason was that people often buy new products and innovations for when they travel due to excitement.\r\n“You’re just looking for stuff to buy when you’re going travelling as well,  like ‘what do I need, what do I need’ so yeah I think that would work quite well.” (KR: Age 23)\r\n\r\nFear and Loss Aversion\r\nWhen asked how they would feel if they lost an item, most participants described feelings of stress and anxiety along with anger. Not all participants had the experience of losing an important item, but all at least had a friend or family member who had had this experience. Participants suggested that the feelings they experience when losing something would make them want to return an item and that they would be more likely to return an item of personal over financial value. \r\nOne of the main advantages of the product was discussed when participants compared the product to insurance. It was suggested that the product was a cheaper alternative that, although return is not guaranteed, is better than no back-up at all. In terms of product development, these findings suggest that there is potential to work with an insurance company to effectively market the Tracking System.\r\n“It’s kind of like an insurance isn’t it? Like for your phone so… I’d pay like a tenner if it was a one off because people pay, I don’t know, I think mine…well I don’t pay insurance lol but I think it’s like sixty pounds” (AB: Age 22)\r\nThe time-saving of the product compared to insurance also produced positive comments about the product as it was explained how long it takes for an item to be replaced through insurance and how much effort this can be.\r\n“Also, insurance is like an effort, like you have to file a claim and then it takes ages for them to get it back but if you could just like message someone you like might get it today. It’s easier” (TM: Age 20)\r\nAnother comparison to insurance was made in terms of the personal value of possessions. When discussing phones, participants pointed out that they’d prefer their original phone returned over a new phone of the same model as their original phone has all their photos, music and original settings on it which can often be difficult to retrieve if lost. \r\n“(Be)cause you’ve got your photos and everything…like everything is set up on your phone in the way you like it. I hate setting up a phone when you first get it and you have to download everything and set it back up again.” (GP: Age 22)\r\nParticipants in the first group felt so strongly about the insurance aspect of the product that one attendee suggested that the brand partner up with a phone company and sell the product as an add-on for phone contracts. \r\n“You need to have a partnership with like a phone company or something so when people start getting new phones and upgrades, say you partnership with O2 and you have it as part of your package on your phone or something.” (DF: Age 22)\r\n\r\nIncentives\r\nThe majority of participants stated that they would not require an incentive to use the service and to return an item and that empathy alone would be enough. Participants also suggested that the gratitude of the person who had lost the item could contribute towards them returning it. Some suggested that an incentive could add extra persuasion however it was quickly pointed out that there would be issues with monitoring any incentives. Examples of incentives discussed included: a lottery, money, and a points system whereby points could be collected to go towards a discount or a cash reward. Participants admitted that some of them would be likely to abuse the incentive as there would be no way to monitor whether people are actually finding items or are just working together with friends to make some money or have more chance in a lottery. Overall it was decided that any incentive would either be abused or would not encourage someone who was unlikely to return the item to return it. \r\n“Yeah it would’ve been such a good idea saying five returns gets you a free sticker but people literally will just get each other’s items and be like oh” (BC: Age 22)\r\nHowever, it is quite naïve of participants to expect all individuals to return items via the service with no incentive. They made good points surrounding the potential abuse of incentives, yet the use of incentives is not something that should simply be ignored because of this potential hurdle. It would be best to suggest plausible alternatives, such as the individual who lost the item having to pay an incentive to the returner in order to retrieve their item. \r\nAdoption\r\nWhen presented with the Diffusion of Innovations Model, all participants initially suggested that they would personally be in the centre of the model between Early and Late Majority or in the Late Majority. However, after asking what stage they thought they were at across different innovations such as iPhones and Apps this altered somewhat. From broader discussion it could be inferred that most participants would fit in the ‘Early Majority’ stage of the model as they would be more likely to buy the product if they could see it used successfully by someone else, but they also usually try new innovations earlier than the majority. \r\n“I was probably an early majority. I’d say I’m between early and late majority.” (GP: Age 22)\r\n“Yeah, I’d have to hear people like using it well, like see people all around using it” (RH: Age 22)\r\nWhen questioned as to the type of person that would be situated in the first two stages of the model, there was a variety of answers. In the first group the most popular answer was people in an older age group, with many participants describing the habits and behaviours of their fathers. \r\n“I actually feel like older people like my dad or someone, he’d totally buy into this” (EG: Age 22)\r\nThey suggested that due to the simplicity of the product and its purpose, this would be the first market to espouse. Many were surprised by their own responses to this question as they initially assumed that the product would be more popular with a younger audience. The second group also agreed on an older audience, with suggestions of ‘overprotective mothers’ buying the product to protect their children’s’ possessions. The second group also indicated that, whilst they didn’t think that students would be the Innovators or Early Adopters, businesses targeting students would still be very interested in the product. \r\n“I think anyone who’s in the student-y industry. I reckon you could quite easily do this with like nightclubs. Anything to do with students people would want to get involved with.” (BC: Age 22)"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1529"},["text","Bogallmetrackingsystem2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1530"},["text","Frances Jackson "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1531"},["text","There is no license suggested for this work as far as the research is aware."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1532"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1533"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1534"},["text","Qualitative interview data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1535"},["text","LA1 4YQ"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2216"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2217"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2218"},["text","Marketing/Advertising"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2219"},["text","16 participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2220"},["text","Qualitative (Thematic Analysis)"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"49","public":"1","featured":"0"},["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1394"},["text","An Exploration of the Use and Effectiveness of Nature Imagery, Metaphor, and Symbolism in Advertising. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1395"},["text","Konstantinos Perimenis"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1396"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1397"},["text","Core participation of nature imagery, indoor scenery, visual metaphor, and literal image in the construction of commercials and advertising industry has been established through repeated research. The current study aims to deeper investigate regarding the role of two specific components of aesthetic communication (nature imagery, poetry) in advertising. Results suggested that between nature imagery and indoor scenery there was a significant preference to nature imagery. However, results from the comparison between visual metaphor and literal image indicated a more divided outcome with participants suggesting that both presented as equally appealing. Overall, our results suggest that nature imagery was established to be the \r\nmost significant component towards forming an appealing advertisement. We indicated that further research could investigate and highlight the effectiveness of other mediator components of aesthetics (verbal language, humour, music, etc) in advertising."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1398"},["text","Nature imagery in advertising, symbolism in advertising, metaphors in advertising"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1399"},["text","<p>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; In all focus groups, a digital voice recorder was used for further analysis. The first selected pair of ads, with indoor and outdoor imageries, was about Coca-Cola brand. At the first Coca Cola’s ad film, which was broadcasted for the first time in 2010, participants had the chance to watch two young people inside an overcrowded bus. Even if these two passengers were completely strangers, they finally broke the ice between them, thanks to an invisible Coca-Cola bottle. At the second Coca-Cola’s commercial, diversity in terms of gender, religion and race, within the United States of America, was presented. At the same time, the viewers were given the opportunity of admiring some of the most breathtaking landscapes in USA.</p>\r\n<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The second selected pair of ads, in terms of connotative and denotative imageries, was about Smirnoff brand. At the Smirnoff’s connotative commercial, there were clear signs that its creators intended to show temptation and seduction.&nbsp; From the beginning it was clear that the starring couple was meant to represent a modern day Adam and Eve. As the music picked up, snakes appeared from the bartender’s sleeves to help make an Apple Bite and the customers got up to dance in a fast-paced song. The bartender was leading ‘Adam and Eve’ to the apple flavour cocktail and the fast-paced music suggested that something big would happen if the drink was taken.&nbsp; This also insinuated that the drink was so desirable that they would not be able to resist the apple drink. At the denotative one, there was a stylish, classy man that was just listing the values of Smirnoff vodka. The initial 40 advertisements were selected randomly from Coloribus.com (See Appendix H for full links) an online databases for commercials and advertisements.</p>\r\n<p></p>\r\n<p><b>Data analysis </b></p>\r\n<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Responses to the focus groups’ questions were thematically analyzed. &nbsp;The current research followed the six step thematic analysis approach as described by Braun and Clarke (2006). Notes of detailed observation were used to generate and apply codes to the qualitative data and to identify potential themes, as the small sample gave us that opportunity.</p>"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1400"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1401"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1402"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1403"},["text","WAV"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1404"},["text","Perimenis2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1405"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1406"},["text","LA2 0PF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1407"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1408"},["text","MSC"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1409"},["text","Psychology of Advertising"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1410"},["text","For the purpose of advertisement selection a pilot group was conducted consisted of 3 participants. Following the advertisement selection, two focus groups were formed, 6 participants were included in the first focus group, and 7 in the second focus group. Participants recruited in the pilot group and both focus groups (N= 16) were students from Lancaster University (age range 22-28). Inclusion criteria required participants to be above the age of 18 and be able to physically attend the focus group. Participants of both focus groups were 5 males, 8 females, and participants consisted the pilot group 2 males, and 1 female.  "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1411"},["text","Qualitative"]]]]]]]]]