최근 광고에서 눈에 띄는 현상 중 하나가 한 제품광고에 두 명의 광고모델을 동시에 기용하는 듀얼모델(dual model)의 활용이다. 제품이나 브랜드 인지도를 가장 쉽고 빠르게 높일 수 있는 방법이 유명인을 광고에 등장시키는 것인데, 기존 연구에 따르면 한 제품광고에 둘 이상의 모델을 활용 시, 한 명의 모델이 등장하는 광고보다 부정적인 측면을 희석시킴으로서 소비자의 지각에 더 긍정적인 영향을 미친다고 제안한다. 그러나 단지 광고모델의 수에 따라 소비자의 태도에 항상 긍정적인 영향을 미치지는 않으며 요즘 듀얼모델의 관심은 증대하고 있으나 실제로 그 효과에 대한 연구는 미흡한 것이 사실이다. 따라서 본 연구는 두 명의 광고모델을 어떻게 활용해야 광고효과가 증대되는지, 그 광고모델 활용과 소비자의 태도에 중점을 두었다. 그리고 소비자의 태도에 영향을 미치는 듀얼모델의 긍정적인 효과를 위해, 두 명의 모델 유형과 메시지 간의 조화를 조절초점 이론을 통해 살펴보았다. 가설의 검증을 위해 본 연구에서는 2(광고모델의 조절초점: 향상초점 모델 vs. 예방초점 모델) × 2(메시지의 조절초점: 향상초점 메시지 vs. 예방초점 메시지), 집단 간 실험설계(between-subjects factorial design)를 적용하였다. 연구결과 듀얼모델 상황에서, 모델과 메시지와의 조절초점이 일치하는 경우 광고태도에 더 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다. 즉, 향상초점 모델과 향상초점 메시지와 일치하는 경우 광고태도에 더 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다. 다만 예방초점 모델의 경우 통계적으로 유의한 결과를 보이지는 않았으나, 예방초점 모델과 예방초점 메시지와 일치하는 경우 광고태도에 미치는 긍정적인 영향에 대한 방향성은 가설과 일치하였다. 본 연구결과는 듀얼모델의 유형을 향상초점 모델과 예방초점 모델로 구분 비교하여 메시지와의 적합성을 토대로 광고효과를 살펴보았다는 점에 기존 연구들과는 차별점이며, 이와 같은 결과를 토대로 시사점과 향후 연구방향을 제시하였다.
Recent advertisements have been exhibiting more than one model. According to previous researches, it is effective to use more than one model in advertisements as a way of increasing product or brand awareness and diluting with the negative aspects of consumer attitude. Nevertheless, the number of models does not always have a positive impact on the attitude of consumers. Even though the interest in using multiple models in advertising is growing, actual studies for testing its effects are insufficient. The present study investigates how dual model in advertising improve advertising effectiveness. It is specifically focused on the use of the dual model in advertisements and how consumers process information when they are exposed to dual model in ads. To measure the advertising effectiveness of the dual model, the effectiveness through the levels of congruence between the message and type of dual model based on regulatory focus is examined. Based on regulatory focused theory(promotion focused vs. prevention focused), this study argues that dual model impact on attitude toward advertisement in ads is moderated by congruent with message, with following hypotheses. H 1: For dual model situation in ads, those with promotion-focused models will impact more positively on the attitude toward advertisement when it is congruent with promotion-focused message than incongruent with promotion-focused message. H 2: For dual model situation in ads, those with prevention-focused models will impact more positively on the attitude toward advertisement when it is congruent with prevention-focused message than incongruent with prevention-focused message. The hypotheses were tested in an experiment for 101 of 120 students, with the exception of 19 students who were unfamiliar with brand used. It was conducted 2*2 between-subject factorial design(dual model: promotion-focused(n = 50) vs. prevention-focused(n = 51) and regulatory focused message; promotion-focused(n = 52) vs. prevention-focused(n = 49)). For testing H1 and H2, ANOVA analysis was conducted where the dependent variable is the attitude toward the advertisement and the independent variables are the dual model and message based on regulatory focus. The main effect of regulatory-focused dual model(F(1, 101) = 0.74, ns) was not significant. However, the main effect of regulatory-focused message(F(1, 101) = 10.81, p < 0.01) was significant and the interaction effect between regulatory-focused dual model and message was statistically significant (F(1, 101) = 8.84, p < 0.01). The result implied that the promotion-focused model impacted on the attitude toward the advertisement more positively when it was congruent with a promotion-focused message(M = 5.27) than prevention-focused message(M = 3.97). H1 was supported. On the other hand, for prevention- focused model, there was no significant difference between the congruence with promotion-focused message (M = 4.44) and prevention-focused message(M = 4.38). The results of the present study indicate that in the dual model situation, the higher the congruence between promotion-focused message and model, the more positive the impact is on the attitude toward the advertisement. But in the case of prevention-focused message and model, in spite of statistically insignificant results, the direction(higher congruence between prevention-focused message and model, the more positive the impact is on the attitude toward the advertisement) was consistent with the hypothesis. This study has contributions compared with previous studies that do not to focus on the number of models but separates the type of dual model by regulatory focus, promotion-focused model vs. prevention-focused model. In conclusion, there are suggested implications and future research directions on the basis of the results of this study.