Abstract
The present study investigated the effect of rhetorical figures on the attitude towards print ads. It was thought that rhetorical figures would yield a favourable attitude towards the ad, which in turn would influence attitude towards the product or brand, buying intention and buying behaviour. A rhetorical figure can be defined as an artfully divergent way of presenting an advertising message. Two types of rhetorical figures were distinguished, namely schemes and tropes. Schemes are superficial deviations (e.g., rhyme, alliteration). Tropes are meaningful deviations (e.g., metaphors, puns). Tropes are assumed to be perceived as more complex than schemes. Schemes (and non-rhetorical figures) are explicit and perceptible for everyone. Tropes are implicit and offer a cognitive challenge. The receiver needs specific prior knowledge to understand tropes. Receivers may find it more satisfying to retrieve the message themselves than to be told what the message is. From the results it can be concluded that two conditions have to be met if rhetorical figures are to yield a favourable attitude towards the ad: 1) receivers have to understand the ad, and 2) receivers have to perceive the rhetorical figure as an artful deviation from their expectations. Both conditions play a role with respect to tropes. Only the second condition plays a role with respect to schemes, because of the fact that schemes cannot be not understood. The use of tropes is more risky than the use of schemes because the condition of perceived understanding applies only to tropes, and because attitude towards ads that were not understood is less favourable than towards ads that were understood.
