FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Framing theory in product placement:
A study of theoretical integration
Jonathan D. Herzberger
Cleveland State University
April 10, 2013
Abstract
Product placements are often studied in a stark, black and white fashion, where they are either
present and presumed effective, or they are absent, or ineffective enough that the distinction is
irrelevant. Building on prior research, however, it is clear that many differences exist in how a given
product is placed, and to what degree. Rather than using an ad-hoc model to explain the type of
placement, framing theory was employed to provide a greater richness of understanding. The effects of
positively, negatively, and unframed contexts, as well as incidental appearance of products within said
frames were studied, and the implications of the findings and potential impact on future research was
discussed.
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Introduction
We live in a world very different from the one we inherited. Long gone are the days where
advertisements were relegated to a few short, fact-laden blurbs in newspapers, the odd billboard or side
of a barn adorned with some brisk slogan. In the modern era, advertisements permeate just about every
corner of modern society – and while this effect can seem most pronounced in the kinetic glow of
digital displays and neon light of cities such as New York and Hong Kong, in a world of smartphones,
tablets, and wireless connectivity, consumers don't need to live in a metropolis to find themselves
besieged by persuasive advertising; the messages will come to them. (Williams et al., 2011)
One of the factors signaling the ascent of this new era is the new found prevalence of product
placement. While hardly a new phenomenon, the pervasiveness of the method throughout media – from
film and television to sporting events, video games, blogs, Broadway musicals and plays, mobile
phones, and numerous other outlets (Stephen and Coote, 2005) – makes it a worthy object of study.
While much research has been done on both the effectiveness of product placements (Yang &
Roskos-Ewoldsen, 2007; Panda, 2004; Pokrywczynski, 2005), and the interaction of message framing
on advertising (Dardis and Fuyuan, 2008; Orth et al., 2008; Duhachek et al., 2012; Shimp et al.,1988),
very little has been said regarding potential interactions or synergies between the two. Doubtless, this is
at least partially due to the knotty nature of distinguishing between how a message is framed, and the
basic underlying structure of product placement research, which emphasizes positive association.
This study attempts to close in on that distinction, and refine its focus upon the true differences
between these two phenomena; differentiating between what it means to be the beneficiary of positive
association, mere exposure, and other standbys of product placement, and what it means to be the focus
of a positive frame.
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
In the extant research, many different models are employed to study the impact and efficacy of
product placements (Yang and Roskos-Ewoldsen, 2007; Balasubramanian et al., 2006), yet there is
little to no research that applies the robust theoretical trappings of framing theory to the matter at hand.
By viewing this phenomena through the lens of framing theory, we can hopefully glean additional
understanding, and gain a richness of detail that has not yet been expressed in current research. As
such, this study is designed to combine the study of framing theory with the extant body of work on
product placement; and in doing so, hopes to expand the practical and theoretical knowledge of the
subject.
Literature Review
Framing theory
Standing in stark contrast to the relative dearth of research into product placements through the
lens of framing theory, numerous studies have examined the relationship between message framing and
advertising. Dardis and Fuyuan (2008), building on prior research into the persuasive effects of gainversus-loss framed messages, found that loss-framed messages were effective in high-involvement
contexts, but only when paired with sound logical arguments; what Petty & Cacioppopo (1986) would
call centrally-processed appeals.
In lower-involvement contexts, however, they failed to find support for their hypothesis. This
perhaps suggests that loss-framed messages may not be reliably linked with evidence type, as other
research (Gleicher and Petty, 1992; Block and Keller, 1995) suggests. Still, the study illustrates how
evidence type and product involvement can influence the effects of message framing within
advertising.
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
As it turns out, the use of framing theory in the field of advertising – both as way to understand
advertisements, and indeed, to craft them is hardly uncommon (Duhachek et al., 2012). Indeed, in a
content analysis of 1,415 magazine advertisements by Shimp et al. (1988), it was hypothesized that
magazine advertisements would be disproportionately more likely to employ framed than unframed
messages, which turned out to be the case roughly 92% of the time. Additionally, in regards to search
goods – that is, goods whose qualities can be confirmed prior to purchase (Nelson, 1970) – framing
was used in 99.7% of occurrences.
To truly attempt to summarize the extant research on framing in advertising would be a colossal
undertaking beyond the scope of this paper; nevertheless, there is a treasure trove of richly detailed
research on the topic.
Product placement
The extant literature regarding product placement is likewise both prolific and diverse;
unsurprisingly so, considering the billions of dollars spent on product placement every year (McDonnel
and Drennan, 2010). Williams et al. (2011) estimate that global product placements were valued at
roughly $3.07 Billion in 2006, with another $6 Billion worth of unpaid product placements – a number
that grew to $7.45 Billion in 2006. And the market is growing, not slowing. According to market
research company PQ Media (2012), product placement spending rose 10.2% to $4.26 billion in 2011
in the United States alone, even as spending on product placement worldwide likewise increased 9.8%
to a grand total of $7.39 billion in 2011. To that effect, there is a treasure trove of studies detailing
product placement.
Product placement has been shown to be effective in increasing brand memory and brand
choice (Yang & Roskos-Ewoldsen, 2007; Panda, 2004; Pokrywczynski, 2005), as well as increasing
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
the stock value of companies that employ product placement techniques (Wiles & Danielova, 2009),
Yang & Roskos-Ewoldson (2007) studied product placement in cinema, utilizing a 3-level
model designed specifically for the study. Focused on the depth, or levels of placement, the model
distinguishes between placements occurring in the background, placements utilized by the main
character, and finally, placements that featured a connection to the story and were used to further the
plot in some fashion. The study found that placements at all three levels enhanced implicit product
memory and recall, measured via word-fragment completion tests, and explicit memory as measured
via product preference tests. As hypothesized, recognition rates for featured products were highest in
the “story-connection” condition, followed by the “used-by-character” condition, and lastly by the
“background” condition.
Yet, despite the similarity between several of the models used to test product placement
efficacy and framing theory, we essentially see no attempt to couple the two concepts, with researchers
instead relying on atheoretical models, essentially reinventing the wheel for each new study. This study
proposes that there exists an elegant solution to be had by wedding the two concepts, and that the
richness of detail, and robust body of research regarding framing theory would provide hithertountapped insight into product placement research.
Explication of Relevant Theories
Framing
Framing theory assembles a narrative connecting disparate elements to promote a given
interpretation (Entman, 2004), and can be highly effective in shaping how a given element is perceived
(Entman, 2007). Product placements are occurring at an all-time high rate, and while their efficacy
varies, their overall influence is impossible to ignore (Williams et al., 2011). The way that a given
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
advertising message is framed can have a powerful impact on its efficacy (Dardis et al., 2008), and by
studying the interaction between advertising and mass media, new insights as to how these messages
affect us can be gleaned (Hisrshman et al., 1997).
A frame can be defined as a central organizing idea or story line that provides meaning to an
unfolding strip of events, weaving a thread of connection between them (Gamson & Modiglini, 1987).
Framing theory can then be defined as selecting and highlighting certain facets of events or issues, and
making connections among them so as to promote a particular interpretation, evaluation, and/or
solution. Fully developed frames typically perform four functions: defining and/or introducing a
problem, providing a causal analysis, or implying causality, levying a moral judgment, and introducing,
suggesting and/or promoting a remedy to said problem (Entman, 2004).
Using this definition as a guide, we can better measure the placement of a given product, while
retaining the detailed structure inherent to a strong theoretical foundation. This leads to the study's first
hypothesis:
H1: Product placements will be viewed more positively when occurring within a positively framed
context than in negative or unframed contexts.
By utilizing framing theory to develop a more robust understanding of how products are placed, we can
delve deeper into our description of how, precisely, a given product is placed. Any object that is the
subject of a complete frame, that is, a situation wherein:
 A problem is introduced and/or defined
 Causal analysis is provided and/or causality implied
 A moral judgment is levied, and
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
 A remedy is introduced/suggested/promoted.
In the extant literature, distinctions between an object that is the focus of a given frame, and one that
simply reaps association benefits due to its inclusion in a positive frame is difficult to determine. Based
on this, our second hypothesis takes a closer look at product placement, with framing theory at the
forefront:
H2: Product placements will be viewed more positively when the product itself is the beneficiary of a
positive frame, as opposed to simply being featured in one.
Method
Participants
One hundred and twenty undergraduate students will be recruited from communication classes
at a mid-western, urban university for course credit, as well as extra credit.
Materials
This study requires a media lab in which to conduct the experiment, a television, DVD player,
selected video clips of different frames for participants to view, a computer with access to Survey
Monkey to conduct pre and post-test surveys, and word fragment completion tests.
Media
To illustrate the different framing scenarios, a custom series of clips will be created in
conjunction with the organization :FR:AMES (Film Research: Advanced Methods for Empirical
Study). The conceit used for the clips will be that of a detective story; this structure will allow for the
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
inclusion of several different frames, while keeping the tone, pacing and genre of clips as consistent as
possible between the different conditions. Additionally, this should allow for a plausible obfuscation of
the study's purpose, lending additional robustness to the findings.
Procedure
Participants would engage in a brief pre-test, gathering basic demographic data, after which
they would view one of three different video clips, dependent upon which group they had been
randomly assigned to. After viewing the clip, participants would then proceed to a different room to
engage in a word-completion test, followed by a brief presence measure (to obfuscate the study's
purpose, and finally, a brand attitude assessment survey. The order in which these occur has been
carefully selected, so as not to bias the word-completion/implicit memory test toward higher levels of
recollection.
The study would consist of a modified 3x2 experimental pre-test/post-test design, with two
positive frames – one where the product is the focus, the other where it is merely featured, a negative
frame and a universal control group, as shown in table #1. This will require 4 different clips; where
products are placed both incidentally and the focus of the frame for the positive conditions, and the
product appears in a negative frame, but is not the focus of a complete frame. Additionally, a control
group will view a video clip that is similar in pacing, narrative and genre, but features no product
placements of any sort.
Featured in Frame
Positive
Negative
Focus of Frame
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Neutral
Table 1.1
For the purposes of this experiment, soft drinks will be used as the object of study. The body of
literature on soft drinks in product placement is robust (Yang & Roskos-Ewoldson, 2007) and as such,
is well suited to our experiment. Since many product placement studies have focused on popular colas
such as Pepsi and Coca-Cola, one or both would seem a natural fit; however, consumers can hold very
strong opinions on their brand of choice (Moraru, 2010; Yang & Roskos-Ewoldson, 2007), which
could muddy results. As such, this experiment will use Mountain Dew as the placed product; as a wellknown brand without a clear direct competitor, it would seem to introduce the fewest confounding
variables.
For the first condition, the clips will depict a scene in which the product is merely the
beneficiary of a positive association, such as a detective hero enjoying the taste of a Mountain Dew
during a long investigation, in which they come to an epiphany regarding the nature of the case.
Likewise, for the negative condition, we set essentially the same scene, except when the detective
reaches for a can of soda on his desk and takes a drink, he realizes that it is stale and flat, and spits it
back out again before continuing with the scene as normal.
For the fully framed positive condition, the clips feature the product as the beneficiary of a
complete and positive frame, such as a detective hero on a stakeout needing to stay awake, realizing
that a Mountain Dew might do the trick, recognizing that the villain might do terrible things if he can't
stay awake, and finally, managing to make it through the stakeout, thanks to the sugary, caffeinated
soda.
The control group would also simply view a similarly themed and paced clip sans product
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
placement of any sort.
Discussion
The proposed study aims to bridge the gap between the study of product placement, and the
embarrassment of riches that is the body of work on framing theory. It hopes to add additional layers of
richness to the understanding of a complex field, and in doing so, expand the overall understanding and
increase the capacity to better describe this phenomenon.
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
References
Balasubramanian, S.K.; Karrh, J.A. & Patwardhan, H.(2006). Audience Response to Product
Placements: An Integrative Framework and Future Research Agenda. Journal of Advertising, Provo,
35(3), 115-142
Block, LG, Keller, PA. 1995.When to accentuate the negative: the effects of perceived efficacy
and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior. Journal of Marketing
Research 32(2):192-203.
Dardis, F. E., & Fuyuan, S. (2008). The influence of evidence type and product involvement on
message-framing effects in advertising. Journal Of Consumer Behaviour, 7(3), 222-238.
Duhachek, A., Agrawal, N., & Han, D. (2012). Guilt Versus Shame: Coping, Fluency, and Framing in
the Effectiveness of Responsible Drinking Messages. Journal Of Marketing Research (JMR), 49(6),
928-941
Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. Foreign
policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power. Journal Of
Communication, 57(1), 163-173.
Gleicher F, Petty RE, 1992. Expectations of reassurance influence the nature of fear-stimulated
attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 28(1):86-100.
Hirschman, E. C., & Thompson, C. J. (1997). Why Media Matter: Toward a Richer
Understanding of Consumers' Relationships with Advertising and Mass Media. Journal Of Advertising,
26(1), 43-60
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
McDonnell, J. & Drennan, J. (2010). Virtual Product Placement as a New Approach to Measure
Effectiveness of Placements. Journal of Promotion Management, 16(1/2), 25.
Moraru, M. (2010). The "positioning" concept and the fight between two well known brands CocaCola and Pepsi. Journal Of Media Research,3(2), 47-62.
Nelson, Phillip (1970), Information and Consumer Behavior, Journal of Political
Economy,78(March/April),311-329.
Orth, U. R., Koenig, H. F., , & Firbasova, Z. (2007). Cross-national differences in consumer
response to the framing of advertising messages. European Journal of Marketing, 41(3-4), 327-348.
Panda, T.K. (2004). Consumer Response to Brand Placements in Films, Role of Brand
Congruity and Modality of Presentation in Bringing Attitudinal Change Among Consumers, with
Special Reference to Brand Placements in Hindi Films. South Asian Journal of Management, New
Delhi, 11(4), October-December, 7-26.
Pokrywczynski, J. (2005). Product Placement in Movies: A Preliminary Test of an Argument
for Involvement. American Academy of Advertising Conference Proceedings, Lubbock, 40-48
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The Elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L.
Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). San Diego:
Academic Press.
PQ Media (2012, December 4). PQ Media :: Press Releases. Retrieved from
http://www.pqmedia.com/about-press-201212.html
Shimp, T. A., Urbany, J. E., & Camlin, S. E. (1988). The Use of Framing and Characterization
for Magazine Advertising of Mass-Marketed Products. Journal Of Advertising, 17(1), 23-30.
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Stephen, A.T. & Coote, L.V. (2005). Brands in Action: The Role of Brand Placements in
Building Consumer-Brand Identification. American Marketing Association Conference Proceedings,
Chicago, 16, 28
Wiles, M., & Danielova, A. (2009). The worth of product placement in successful films: An
event study analysis. Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 44-63.
Williams, K., Petrosky, A., Hernandez, E., & Page, J. R. (2011). Product placement
effectiveness: revisited and renewed. Journal of Management & Marketing Research, 7.
Yang, M., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. (2007). The effectiveness of brand placements in movies.
Journal of Communication, 57, 469-489.
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Appendix A: Survey Instruments
Word-fragment completion test
Fill in each blank space with one letter . If you cannot think of a way to complete a word, skip it and
move on.
_ _ _ _ _tive
(Detective)
h _ _ st
(Heist)
Mo _ _ _ _ _ _ D _ _ (Mountain Dew)
_ _ rk
(Park)
c___e
(Chase)
f__d
(Ford)
Sample questionnaire
Please rate the following brands by circling a number on a scale from 0-10. A score of “1” indicates
you very strongly dislike that brand, and a score of “10” indicates you very strongly like that brand.
Coca-Cola
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Pepsi
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Dr. Pepper
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
FRAMING THEORY IN PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Mountain Dew
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Sprite
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Burger King
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
McDonald's
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Google
Apple
0
10