Auxilio de Asuntos Generales

The effect of attitude towards the Ad on attitude towards the brand has been studied by many scholars (Goldsmith et al., 2000a; Gresham & Shimp, 1985; Ranjbarian et al., 2011; Sallam, 2011; Shimp, 1981; Wahid & Ahmed, 2011). According to Lutz et al. (1983), advertising will create a communication effect that lead to customers trying the brand or reinforcing existing brand attitudes. Positive brand attitudes may in turn predispose consumers to want specific brands and buy the products. The action basically reflects the chain of cognitive, affective and connotative dimensions of attitudes (Lutz et al., 1983; MacKenzie & Lutz, 1989). The relationship between the two variables can be explained through three perspectives: the affect transfer hypothesis (ATH), reciprocal mediation

160

hypothesis (RMH) and Dual mediation hypothesis (Edell & Burke, 1984; Najmi et al., 2012).

The affect transfer hypothesis posited a unidirectional effect of attitude towards the Ad to attitude towards the brand (Edell & Burke, 1984; Najmi et al., 2012). Edell and Burke (1984) offer three competing hypotheses for this unidirectional relationship. The first comes from the classical conditioning perspective (Shimp, 1981) that explains the mechanism that generates affective response towards the brand after the audiences are exposed to certain brands through advertising. His study reveals the positive effect of attitude towards the Ad to attitude towards the brand. According to Shimp (1981), advertising exposure will result in evaluative connotative responses (e.g. feeling of joy or nostalgia) and denotative responses (e.g. this is a brand of toothpaste I have never heard before). The connotative response represents unconditioned stimuli while the denotative responses represent the conditioned stimuli stored in the consumers‟ active memory. Another series of studies using similar classical conditioning showed a natural pattern that attitude towards the Ad affects the attitude towards the brand (Gresham & Shimp, 1985). The second hypothesis that can be used to explain the unidirectional effect of attitude towards the Ad on the attitude towards the brand is the salient attribute hypothesis. The hypothesis used the Fishbein attitude formation framework in which consumers develop the belief that the Ad is associated with the brand. That belief is coupled with evaluation of the Ad to influence attitude towards the brand in the same manner as any other brand attribute (Edell & Burke, 1984). The last hypothesis, the measurement artefact hypothesis, explained that the effect of attitude towards the Ad effect on attitude towards the brand may be due solely to the method of variance since both constructs usually are measured using similar semantic differential scales (Edell & Burke, 1984).

Another explanation for the relationship between attitude towards the Ad on attitude towards the brand is based on reciprocal mediation hypothesis (Najmi et al., 2012). The model is also called the balance theory model. The hypothesis supposes a mutual causal relationship between attitude towards the Ad and attitude towards the brand (Gresham & Shimp, 1985; Najmi et al., 2012). The basic rationale of the balance theory is that the person will strive to maintain balance among the components of any cognitive unit. In an advertising situation, a balanced state will exist only if consumers dislike both the Ad and the brand or like both of them (Edell & Burke, 1984).

The last explanation concerns the dual mediation hypothesis (DMH) which suggests that attitude towards the Ad influences attitude towards the brand directly and indirectly via its impact on brand cognition. Based on structural equation modelling, the dual mediation hypothesis is considered to be more effective in explaining the relationship between attitude towards the Ad and attitude towards the brand (Najmi et al., 2012). The Meta analysis also supports the finding that DMH is superior to any other hypotheses to explain the said relationship (Najmi et al., 2012). The DCM model that is used in the current study is developed based on the DMH which specifies the direct effect of attitude towards the Ad on attitude towards the brand and purchase intention (Lafferty et al., 2002; MacKenzie et al., 1986). Based on the above discussion, the study suggests the following hypothesis:

H3a: Attitude towards the Ad is positively and directly related to attitude towards the organization’s brand.

162

According to Goldsmith et al. (2000a) even though the direct relationship between attitudes towards the Ad on purchase intention is not commonly found in the literature, there is some precedence of the direct relationship between both variables. This is so especially in low involvement conditions when affective responses are evoked (Biehal et al., 1992; Mehta, 1994; Mehta & Purvis, 1997; Shimp, 1981). In his research, Shimp (1981) conducted experimental studies to test the role of attitude towards the Ad as the antecedent of purchasing behaviour, highlighting it is an important determinant for purchasing behaviour. According to Biehal et al. (1992), consumers may decide on the product or the brand that they want to buy based on the ad without completely processing all the brand information. They examined the direct and indirect effect of attitude towards the Ad to brand choice. The study found that the attitude towards the Ad may have a direct effect on brand choice when the consumers have isolated two or more similar brands to choose from, thus using the ads to tip the difference between the two isolated brands (Biehal et al., 1992).

Similar to the relationship between attitude towards the brand and intention, Mehta (1994) and Mehta and Purvis (1997) explained the direct link between attitudes towards the Ad on intention through the Advertising Response Modelling (ARM). According to ARM, an advertising exposure must break through the clutter and gain attention. If the advertising is successful in gaining attention, it will be processed along two routes: the central and peripheral routes. The central route will process the product or brand related information while the peripheral processes the advertising related information. The central route produces more permanent and resistant effects on attitudes rather than the peripheral routes which result in much more temporal effects that may be lost. Each route may simultaneously influence directly the ad attitude, brand attitude and purchase intentions.

However, advertising liking or ad attitude itself can serve as the mediating variable between the communication routes to the purchase intention which implies the direct relationship between attitude towards the Ad and purchase intention (Mehta, 1994).

There is still a dearth of study on the impact of ad on customers‟ attitude towards the brand and intention in the non-profit or social entrepreneurship context in Indonesia. However, several studies conducted locally in Indonesia on the impact of marketing communications in general and advertising in particular, showed a positive effect of advertising on organizations‟ revenue and donors‟ perceptions and attitudes. With strong belief on the significant influence of marketing communications on customers‟ attitudes and intentions, DD as the largest LAZNAS in Indonesia is continuously promoting zakah by reaching out to zakah payers through advertisements in the mass media (e.g. television, radio, newspaper, and billboards) (Erie Sudewo, 2011).

Several others studies on the impact of advertising costs on the LAZNAS revenue showed a significant influence of promotional expenditure on the organization‟s income (Arafat, 2011; Mujiyati et al., 2010). From the perspective of donors, it was illustrated that all the dimensions of marketing mix, including promotions, significantly influenced Muzaki or donors‟ perceptions on donors‟ support (Fakhryrozi, 2011). It is, therefore, proposed that:

164