Does advertising actually work?

[Terxpahseyton]

I think it works, but I also think that it leads to a wasteful "arms race" between advertisers.

Agreed.
Current advertisement business is one of the prime examples of the free market being horribly wasteful.
You have to invest money not because it actually improves your product or improves the situation of the consumer but because others are doing it in a way to exploit the psychological weakness of humans.
So you got terrible waist and exploitation! Got to love it.

(I am obviously simplifying, advertising can potentially improve the situation of the consumer, but this pales in contrast to the other negative effects)

 

[Disgustipated]

Of course when his woman sends him out to grab some, what box does he reach for?

Real men don't buy tampons for their girlfriend.

 

[Disgustipated]

I think that trust mainly comes from the fact they are a recognized big company and they will put out a quality product to protect their reputation. This isn't always the case, however. GM has put out many bad cars for example. Presumably you are less likely to find a dead rat in a container from a well known, big company than some guy selling junk at the corner store.

 

[NetGear]

thats alright because you cant possibly make rational decision based on timely research and fact gathering every single time you decide on a product. That would be exhausting and would be difficult to make timely decisions.

brand names are popular. popular products advertise better. Its not always right, but its a pretty damn good shortcut than researching everything yourself.

 

[azzaman333]

Of course it does. Without advertising, how are you meant to let people know that your product exists?

 

[berkut]

I think it works, when an add is realy, realy cool, the product itself starts to look a little bit cooler

 

[chegel]

I found the abstract to this study: Woolfolk, M.E./Castellan, W./Brooks, C.I. (1983), Pepsi versus Coke: Labels, not tastes, prevail, Psychological Reports 52, pp. 185–186.

Spoiler http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&uid=1983-31786-001 :

In Exp 1, 60 college students tasted cola from 2 cups, one marked L, the other marked S. The same product (either Pepsi or Coke) was placed in both cups. Whether both cups contained Pepsi or Coke, Ss overwhelmingly reported that S contained the better-tasting product. In Exp II, 30 Ss were asked their preference for either Pepsi or Coke. Then they drank from a Pepsi bottle (which contained Coke) and from a Coke bottle (which contained Pepsi). Ss were significantly influenced by the label of the product they preferred and not by taste differences between these products. It is concluded that a taste comparison of colas should avoid using any labels, even presumably neutral ones like letters of the alphabet, since such labels may have more powerful influences on product comparisons than taste differences. (1 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

So outside factors can apparently influence what you think tastes better to you.

Spoiler :

And S is better at marketing than L.

 

[Kozmos]

I like both Coke and Pepsi. Hell I like Pepsi more and it gets absolutely zero air-time in my country. For a while I liked a knock-off version more than both.