克魯門的三打理論

出自 MBA智库百科(https://wiki.mbalib.com/)

克魯門的三打理論（Krugman's Three Hit Theory）

　　三打理論是赫伯特·克魯門（Herbert E. Krugman）博士在1972年提出的。他在《為何刊播三次就夠》一文中曾提出以下主張：

　　先是刺激消費者試著瞭解信息，去問“這個廣告是什麼”；

　　第二次刺激消費者去評量，去問“廣告內容是什麼”、“我曾經看過這個廣告嗎”；

　　第三次接觸時，回憶並開始逃離廣告。三次，足以對消費者產生作用。

　　概括起來就是：消費者對廣告的反應有三個階段：

• 第一次看到廣告的反應是“這是什麼？”

• 第二次產生好奇，並對廣告消息產生熟悉感；

• 第三次產生確認感，並起到強化與提醒作用。甚至會促使其採取行動。

　　三次以上可能產生浪費，低於三次，則難以跨越門檻效應。三次必須是有效接觸。

　　他認為，人們普遍相信的“廣告需要不斷強化才能防止受眾忘卻”的觀點是片面的，廣告不斷暴露，還不如廣告發佈的最初的二至三次有效。對於產品是否符合自己的需求，三次廣告接觸就可以明確瞭解，以後看多少次，其效果都是一樣的。

　　這一觀點具有哪些方面的依據作為它的支撐呢？

　　（1）從心理學的學習理論來看，人們隨著語言和視覺的刺激，會逐漸增加學習反應，但是隨著頻率的增加，效果會達到一個飽和點，以後逐漸下降。三次，就是庫魯曼博士所認為已達到的“飽和點”。

　　（2）從註意的角度來看，一家公司利用一種測定儀器進行調查的結果表明，電視廣告在播出兩至四次時，消費者對它們註意與關心的程度最大，以後即使頻率增加，效果也會遞減。

　　（3）從消費者對不同商品的關註曲線來看，消費者對不同商品的廣告的接觸在兩至四次時都會達到註意的高峰，以後逐漸降低。

　　（4）從頻率高低的效果來看，無論廣告以密集式還是分散式播出，引起受眾註意的效果都以三次為最高。

　　（5）從消費者行為的改變來看，在一個購買周期中，消費者看到兩次廣告而更換品牌的頻率最高。

　　根據一般的記憶規律，大多數消費者確實需要有三次信息暴露，才能產生記憶。如果觀眾連續受到五次以上廣告信息的刺激，其記憶度可增加30%以上。回憶程度及建立的態度在廣告中斷期間有所衰退。廣告停止以後，廣告效果也不會立刻終止。

　　至於多少次廣告有效，其實這個問題並無定論，有的廣告重覆四次之後就出現了負效果，而有的重覆了七次，消費者的關註與接受曲線仍在上升。

　　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.