克鲁门的三打理论

出自 MBA智库百科(https://wiki.mbalib.com/)

克鲁门的三打理论（Krugman's Three Hit Theory）

　　三打理论是赫伯特·克鲁门（Herbert E. Krugman）博士在1972年提出的。他在《为何刊播三次就够》一文中曾提出以下主张：

　　先是刺激消费者试着了解信息，去问“这个广告是什么”；

　　第二次刺激消费者去评量，去问“广告内容是什么”、“我曾经看过这个广告吗”；

　　第三次接触时，回忆并开始逃离广告。三次，足以对消费者产生作用。

　　概括起来就是：消费者对广告的反应有三个阶段：

• 第一次看到广告的反应是“这是什么？”

• 第二次产生好奇，并对广告消息产生熟悉感；

• 第三次产生确认感，并起到强化与提醒作用。甚至会促使其采取行动。

　　三次以上可能产生浪费，低于三次，则难以跨越门槛效应。三次必须是有效接触。

　　他认为，人们普遍相信的“广告需要不断强化才能防止受众忘却”的观点是片面的，广告不断暴露，还不如广告发布的最初的二至三次有效。对于产品是否符合自己的需求，三次广告接触就可以明确了解，以后看多少次，其效果都是一样的。

　　这一观点具有哪些方面的依据作为它的支撑呢？

　　（1）从心理学的学习理论来看，人们随着语言和视觉的刺激，会逐渐增加学习反应，但是随着频率的增加，效果会达到一个饱和点，以后逐渐下降。三次，就是库鲁曼博士所认为已达到的“饱和点”。

　　（2）从注意的角度来看，一家公司利用一种测定仪器进行调查的结果表明，电视广告在播出两至四次时，消费者对它们注意与关心的程度最大，以后即使频率增加，效果也会递减。

　　（3）从消费者对不同商品的关注曲线来看，消费者对不同商品的广告的接触在两至四次时都会达到注意的高峰，以后逐渐降低。

　　（4）从频率高低的效果来看，无论广告以密集式还是分散式播出，引起受众注意的效果都以三次为最高。

　　（5）从消费者行为的改变来看，在一个购买周期中，消费者看到两次广告而更换品牌的频率最高。

　　根据一般的记忆规律，大多数消费者确实需要有三次信息暴露，才能产生记忆。如果观众连续受到五次以上广告信息的刺激，其记忆度可增加30%以上。回忆程度及建立的态度在广告中断期间有所衰退。广告停止以后，广告效果也不会立刻终止。

　　至于多少次广告有效，其实这个问题并无定论，有的广告重复四次之后就出现了负效果，而有的重复了七次，消费者的关注与接受曲线仍在上升。

　　Herbert E. Krugman was the manager of corporate public opinion research at General Electric. He was both a practitioner and an academic. He received his Ph.D from Columbia University.

　　According to Krugman's low-involvement theory, when people view advertising without thinking about it, they do not fully consider or process the message of the ad. There is no significant attitude change. However, advertising can influence consumer decision-making without conscious awareness. Repeated exposure to advertising can lead to changes in the perceptions of what is important about a brand without the conscious or verbal recognition on the consumer's part. This can also be considered in terms of top-of-mind awareness. Repeated exposure to advertising creates top-of-mind awareness. The consumer holds no opinion of the brand until he or she recognizes it in the store and decides to buy it. Only after trial is an attitude formed.

　　According to Krugman (1977), "low-involvement theory seemed to challenge the rule of reason and to confirm the idiocy of the so-called 'boob tube' and perhaps even advertising".

　　No doubt Krugman's concept went against the conventional wisdom of the day. It was believed that consumers sought out information that concerned them, and screened out messages that were not relevant. Krugman suggested that the message was neither screened out nor actively processed, but shifted to long-term memory where an unconscious brand image was formed (Harris, 1987)

　　According to Krugman, there are special qualities of one, two and three exposures. He stops at three because there is no such thing as a fourth exposure psychologically; rather fours, fives, etc., are repeats of the third exposure effect.

　　"Exposure No. 1 is...a "What is it?" type of... response. Anything new or novel no matter how uninteresting on second exposure has to elicit some response the first time...if only to discard the object as of no further interest...

　　The second exposure...response...is "What of it?"...whether or not the message has personal relevance...

　　"By the third exposure the viewer knows he's been through his "What is it's?" and "What of it's?," and the third, then, becomes the true reminder . . . The importance of this view . . . is that it positions advertising as powerful only when the viewer...is interested in the [product message]...Secondly, it positions the viewer as...reacting to the commercial--very quickly...when the proper time comes round."

　　Many in the media world interpreted what Krugman wrote as three media (vehicle) exposures. What Krugman calls "frequency" is not what media planners would call "frequency". Krugman doesn't discuss media frequency at all.

　　Krugman's three exposures theory is all about psychological exposures.