克鲁门的三打理论

克鲁门的三打理论简述

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》一文中曾提出下方力争：

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，足够对消费者造成作用。

概括起来就是：消费者对广告的反映有三个阶段：

首次目睹广告的反映是“这是什么？”

第二次造成好奇，并对广告消息造成熟悉感；

第三次造成证实感，并起到加深与警示作用。甚至会促使其采取措施。

三次以上或许造成浪费，差于三次，则很难逾越门槛效应。三次务必是有效接触。

他觉得，民众广泛相信的“广告需要持续加深才可防止受众忘却”的看法是片面的，广告持续暴露，还不如广告公布的最初的二至三次有效。对于产品能否符合自己的需求，三次广告接触就可以清晰了解，以后看涨少次，其效果均为一样的。

克鲁门的三打理论的根据^[1]

这一看法具有哪些方面的根据作为它的支撑呢？

（1）从心理学的学习理论来说，民众伴随语言和视觉的刺激，会渐渐增长学习反映，但是伴随频率的增长，效果会高达一个饱和点，以后渐渐下滑。三次，就是库鲁曼博士所觉得已高达的“饱和点”。

（2）从注意的角度来说，一家公司利用一种测定仪器执行调查的结果显示，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，以后即便频率增长，效果也会递减。

（3）从消费者对不同商品的关注曲线来说，消费者对不同商品的广告的接触在两至四次时全将高达注意的高峰，以后渐渐减弱。

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

（5）从消费者举动的更改来说，在一个买入周期中，消费者目睹两次广告而更换品牌的频率最高。

依据一般的记忆规律，大部分消费者的确需要有三次信息暴露，才可造成记忆。假使观众接连承受五次以上广告信息的刺激，其记忆度可增长30%以上。回忆程度及建立的立场在广告中止阶段有所衰退。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，其实这个困难并无定论，有的广告重复四次之后就显现了负效果，而有的重复了七次，消费者的关注与接受曲线还在上升。

Krugman‘s Three Hit Theory

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 interpted 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.

参考文献

↑ 江民繁.理论如果的“饱和点”是三次——广告频次及广告力度之四