<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:hal="http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/" xmlns:gml="http://www.opengis.net/gml/3.3/" xmlns:gmlce="http://www.opengis.net/gml/3.3/ce" version="1.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0 http://api.archives-ouvertes.fr/documents/aofr-sword.xsd">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>HAL TEI export of sic_00001284</title>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt>
        <distributor>CCSD</distributor>
        <availability status="restricted">
          <licence target="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/">CC0 1.0 - Universal</licence>
        </availability>
        <date when="2026-05-24T17:47:40+02:00"/>
      </publicationStmt>
      <sourceDesc>
        <p part="N">HAL API Platform</p>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <text>
    <body>
      <listBibl>
        <biblFull>
          <titleStmt>
            <title xml:lang="en">L'influence publicitaire en l'absence de souvenir des messages : les effets implicites de la simple exposition ; The influence of advertising without message recall: the implicit effects of brand mere exposure</title>
            <author role="aut">
              <persName>
                <forename type="first">Didier</forename>
                <surname>Courbet</surname>
              </persName>
              <email type="md5">3acedf604945634be2156be64b153da5</email>
              <email type="domain">orange.fr</email>
              <idno type="idhal" notation="string">courbet-didier</idno>
              <idno type="idhal" notation="numeric">5410</idno>
              <idno type="halauthorid" notation="string">12446-5410</idno>
              <idno type="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5506-1850</idno>
              <idno type="GOOGLE SCHOLAR">https://scholar.google.fr/citations?user=6v5ehJgAAAAJ&amp;hl=fr</idno>
              <idno type="IDREF">https://www.idref.fr/050402668</idno>
              <idno type="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4090-777X</idno>
            </author>
            <editor role="depositor">
              <persName>
                <forename>Didier</forename>
                <surname>Courbet</surname>
              </persName>
              <email type="md5">3acedf604945634be2156be64b153da5</email>
              <email type="domain">orange.fr</email>
            </editor>
          </titleStmt>
          <editionStmt>
            <edition n="v1" type="current">
              <date type="whenSubmitted">2004-12-21 07:16:08</date>
              <date type="whenModified">2019-05-27 10:56:18</date>
              <date type="whenReleased">2004-12-21 07:16:08</date>
              <date type="whenProduced">2003-05-21</date>
              <date type="whenEndEmbargoed">2004-12-21</date>
              <ref type="file" target="https://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00001284v1/document">
                <date notBefore="2004-12-21"/>
              </ref>
              <ref type="file" n="1" target="https://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00001284v1/file/sic_00001284.pdf" id="file-62548-624353">
                <date notBefore="2004-12-21"/>
              </ref>
            </edition>
            <respStmt>
              <resp>contributor</resp>
              <name key="106716">
                <persName>
                  <forename>Didier</forename>
                  <surname>Courbet</surname>
                </persName>
                <email type="md5">3acedf604945634be2156be64b153da5</email>
                <email type="domain">orange.fr</email>
              </name>
            </respStmt>
          </editionStmt>
          <publicationStmt>
            <distributor>CCSD</distributor>
            <idno type="halId">sic_00001284</idno>
            <idno type="halUri">https://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00001284</idno>
            <idno type="halBibtex">courbet:sic_00001284</idno>
            <idno type="halRefHtml">&lt;i&gt;Les cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale&lt;/i&gt;, 2003, 57 (3/2003)</idno>
            <idno type="halRef">Les cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 2003, 57 (3/2003)</idno>
            <availability status="restricted">
              <licence target="https://about.hal.science/hal-authorisation-v1/">HAL Authorization<ref corresp="#file-62548-624353"/></licence>
            </availability>
          </publicationStmt>
          <seriesStmt>
            <idno type="stamp" n="SHS">Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</idno>
            <idno type="stamp" n="SIC">archiveSIC</idno>
          </seriesStmt>
          <notesStmt>
            <note type="audience" n="1">Not set</note>
            <note type="popular" n="0">No</note>
            <note type="peer" n="1">Yes</note>
            <note type="archivesic_reference">Banaji M. H., Lemm K. M. et Carpenter S. J. (2001), The Social Unconscious, in Tesser A. et Schwarz N. (eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology : Intraindividual Processes (pp. 134-158), Oxford, Blackwell Publishers. Bargh J. A. et Chartrand T. L. (1999), The Unbearable Automaticity of Everyday Life, American Psychologist, 54, 462-479. Bargh J. A., Chaiken S., Govender R. et Pratto F. (1992), The generality of the automatic attitude activation effect, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 893-912. Bonnet C. (1990), Psychophysical approaches, contextual effects and response bias, In J. P. Caverni, J. M., Fabre et M. Gonzales (eds.), Cognitive Biases, Amsterdam, Elsevier. Bornstein R. F. (1989), Exposure and affect : Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987, Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289. Bornstein R. F. et Pittman T. S (Eds.) (1992), Perception without Awareness, The Guilford Press, New York. Bornstein R. F. et D'Agostino P. R. (1994), The attribution of Discounting of Perceptual Fluency: Preliminary Tests of a Perceptual Fluency/Attributional Model of the Mere Exposure Effect, Social Cognition, 12, 103-128. Bower G. H. et Mayer J. D. (1991), The state of mood and memory research : a selective review, in Kuiken D. (Ed), Mood and memory, theory, research and applications, pp. 133-168, London Sage Publications. Chambres P., Bonin D. et Grenier K. (2001), Indirect and subliminal ``mere exposure'' effect: implicit aspect of attitude formation, Current Psychology Letters, 4 (april 2001), pp. 85-100. Channouf A. (2000), Les images subliminales, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France (Coll. Médecine et Société). Channouf A. et Pichevin M.F. (dir.) (1998), Le pouvoir subliminal, Delachaux et Niestlé, Paris. Courbet D. (1999), Puissance de la Télévision, Stratégies de communication et influence des marques, Préface de J.N. Kapferer, Paris, L'Harmattan (coll. Communication), 473 p. Courbet D. (2000), Les effets automatiques du parrainage télévisuel sur la marque : étude de la mésattribution de la familiarité, du transfert sémantique et de l'influence des émotions déclenchées par le programme, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 15, 1, 39-62. Courbet, D. (2001), Les professionnels de la communication, in Beauvois J. L. et Monteil J. M., (eds), La Psychologie Sociale, tome 5 : Des compétences pour l'application , pp. 285-300, Presses Universitaires de Grenoble,. Fazio R. H. (1990), A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological research, in C. Hendrick et M. S. Clark (eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology, pp. 74-97, Newbury Park, CA : Sage. Fazio R. H. (1995), Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences and correlates of attitude accessibility, in R. E. Petty et Krosnick J. A. (Eds), Attitude Strength : Antecedents and consequences, Mahwah, NJ Erlbaum. Fazio R. H., Powell M. C. et Williams C. J. (1989), The role of attitude accessibility in the attitude-to-behavior process, Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 280-288. Forgas J. P. (1994), The Role of Emotion in Social Judgements: an Introductory Review and an Affect Infusion Model (AIM), European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 1-24. Fourquet M. P. et Courbet D. (2001), Les professionnels du marketing, in Beauvois J. L. et Monteil J. M., (eds), La Psychologie Sociale, tome 5 : Des compétences pour l'application (pp. 301-312), Presses Universitaires de Grenoble,. Greenwald A. G et Banaji M. R. (1995), Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes, Self-esteem and Stereotypes, Psychological Review, 102, 1, 4-27. Greenwald A. G, Mc Ghee D. E et Schwarz J. L. K (1998), Measuring Individuals Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test, Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 74, 6, 1464-1480. Higgins E. T. (1989), Knowledge accessibility and activation: Subjectivity and Suffering from unconscious sources, in J. S. Uleman et J. A. Bargh (eds), Unintended thought, pp. 75-123, New York: Guilford Press. Jacoby L. L et Dallas M. (1981), On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306-340. Jacoby L. L., Lindsay D.S. et Toth J.P. (1992), Unconscious influences revealed: attention, awareness, and control, American Psychologist, 47, 802-809.. Laurent G. et Kapferer J.-N. (1986), Les profils d'implication, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 1, 1, 41-57. Mandler G., Nakamura Y. et Van Zandt B. J. S. (1987), Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimulus that cannot be recognized, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 13 (4), 646-648. Masling J. M., Bornstein R. V, Poynton F. G., Reed S. et Katkin E. S. (1991), Perception without awareness and electrodermal responding: A strong test of subliminal psychodynamic activation effect, The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 12, 33-48. Meyers-Levy Joan et Prashant Malaviya (1999), Consumers' Processing of Persuasive Advertisements: An Integrative Framework of Persuasion Theories, Journal of Marketing, 63, 45-60. Moreland R. L et Zajonc R. B. (1977), Is Stimulus Recognition a Necessary Condition for the Occurrence of Exposure Effects ? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 191-199. Petty R.E. et Cacioppo J.T. (1986), The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion, in Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 19, 123-205. San Diego, CA : Academic Press. Pham, M. T. (1998), Representativeness, Relevance and the Use of Feelings in Decision Making, Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 144-159. Pham, M. T. et Vanhuele M. (1997), Analyzing the Memory Impact of Advertising Fragments, Marketing Letters, 8, (4), 407-417. Seamon J. G., Ganor-Stern D., Crowley M. J., Wilson S. M., Weber W. J., O'Rourke C. M. et Mahoney J. K. (1997), A mere exposure effect for transformed three-dimension objects: Effects of reflection, size, or color changes on affect and recognition, Memory and Cognition, 25 (3), 367-374. Schuette R. A et Fazio R. H (1995), Attitude Accessibility and Motivation as Determinants of Biased Processing: A Test of the MODE Model, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 704-710. Shavitt Sharon et Wäncke Michaela (2001), Consumer Behavior, in Tesser Abraham et Norbert Schwarz (eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology : Intraindividual Processes, pp. 569-590, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers. Stadler M. et Frensch P. (1998), (eds), Handbook of Implicit Learning and Implicit Memory, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Strack F., Schwarz N., Bless H., Kübler A et Wänke M. (1993), Awareness of the influence as a determinant of assimilation versus contrast, European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 53-62. Verplanken B., Hofstee G. et Janssen H. J. W. (1998), Accessibility of affective versus cognitive components of Attitudes, European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 28-35. Welford A. T. (1980), (ed.), Reaction Time, New York, Academic Press. Williamson S. J., Kaufman L. et Brenner D. (1978), Latency of the neuromagnetic Response of the Human Cortex, Vision Research, 18, 107-110. Wilson T. D., Lindsey S. et Shooler T. Y. (2000), A Model of Dual Attitude, Psychological Review, 107, 1, 101-126. Zajonc R. B. (1980), Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need no Inferences, American Psychologist, 35, 151-175. Zajonc R. B. (1994), Evidence for nonconscious emotion, in Eckman, P. et Davidson R.J. (Eds.), The nature of emotion: fundamental questions, pp. 293-297, New York: Oxford University Press. Annexe Les trois logotypes expérimentaux Tableau 1 Pré-test des logotypes : moyenne (m) et écart-type des évaluations +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ |------------------------------------------------------------------+| | | Calmin | Banroi | Mitain ||| | | | | ||| | | m (écart-type) | m (écart-type) | m (écart-type) ||| |--------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+|| | Plaît (1-6) | 2.49 (1.03) | 3.82 (0.88) | 4.51 (1.02) ||| |--------------+----------------+----------------+----------------++| | Choisi (1-6) | 2.61 (1.11) | 3.78 (1.17) | 4.55 (1.10) ||| +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ Note. L'item Plaît correspond à l'échelle `` extrêmement plaisant vs extrêmement déplaisant '' à 6 échelons. L'item Choisi correspond à l'échelle `` extrêmement bien choisi vs extrêmement mal choisi '' à 6 échelons. +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+| | | | | ||Tableau 2| | || | | || |--------------------------------+-----+------+--------------------------------------------------------------------+| | Comparaison des contenus de | | | | | réponse et des TR selon les | | | | | logotypes entre le groupe | | | | | expérimental logos présentés | | | | | comme inédits et le groupe | | | | | contrôle logos présentés comme | | | | | inédits | | | | |--------------------------------+-----+------+---------------------------------------------------------------------| |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| | | |Banroi| || |Calmin| || |Mitain| || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| | | G1 | G3 |Comparaison|| G1 | G3 |Comparaison|| G1 | G3 |Comparaison|| | | | | G1-G3 || | | G1-G3 || | | G1-G3 || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |Réponses aux 4 | | | || | | || | | || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |Items : | n | n | ÷² (dl) || n | n | ÷² (dl) || n | n | ÷² (dl) || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |Oui | 110 | 67 | || 127 | 103 | || 59 | 59 | || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |Non | 45 | 85 |22.8 (1)***|| 53 | 49 | 0.3 (1) || 93 | 93 | 0 (1) || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |TR^a (ms) : | m | m | F (dl) || m | m | F (dl) || m | m | F (dl) || | | | | || | | || | | || | |(E.T)|(E.T) | || (E.T.) |(E.T) | ||(E.T.)|(E.T) | || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |TR oui |1022 |1398 | 16.1 ||871 (302)|1283 | 37.5 ||1184 |1796 | 17.6 || | |(378)|(856) |(1,176)*** || |(680) |(1,228)*** ||(507) |(997) |(1,116)*** || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |TR non |1147 |1568 | 9.3 ||1180 |1397 |2.7 (1,100)||1007 |1278 | 10.1 || | |(493)|(850) |(1,128)*** ||(522) |(786) | ||(383) |(727) | (1,184)** || |--------------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-----------+| |--------------------------------+-----+------+---------------------------------------------------------------------| |Notes. G1 et G3 sont | | | | |respectivement les groupes logos| | | | |présentés comme inédits | | | | |expérimentaux et contrôle. Les | | | | |quatre items sont `` dites si | | | | |les logotypes vous plaisent (1) | | | | |ou (2) donnent une image haut | | | | |de gamme au produit ou (3) | | | | |: vous semblent bien choisis ou | | | | |(4) : donnent une bonne image | | | | |au produit ''. | | | | | | | | | |m = moyenne ; E.T.= écart type ;| | | | |n = effectif. | | | | | | | | | |^a Le TR est le temps de réponse| | | | |moyen aux 4 items. *p &lt; .05 ; | | | | |**p &lt; .01 ; ***p &lt; .001. | | | | | | | | | |Pour G1, les effectifs sont | | | | |différents selon les logotypes | | | | |car certaines réponses ont été | | | | |supprimées (voir procédure). | | | | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+| | | | | ||Tableau 3| | || | | || |-----------------------------+-----+------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+| | Comparaison des contenus de | | | | | réponse et des TR selon les | | | | | logotypes entre les groupes | | | | |expérimentaux logos présentés| | | | | comme inédits et logos | | | | | présentés comme connus | | | | |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------| |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| | | |Banroi| || |Calmin| || |Mitain| || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| | | G1 | G2 |Comparaison|| G1 | G2 |Comparaison|| G1 | G2 | Comparaison || | | | | G1-G2 || | | G1-G2 || | | G1-G2 || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |Réponses aux 4 | | | || | | || | | || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |items : | n | n | ÷² (dl) || n | n | ÷² (dl) || n | n | ÷² (dl) || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |Oui | 110 | 67 | || 127 | 120 | || 59 | 28 | || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |Non | 45 | 109 |35.8 (1)***|| 53 | 56 | 0.24 (1) || 93 | 148 | 21.9 (1)*** || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |TR^a (ms) | m | m | F (dl) || m | m | F (dl) || m | m | F (dl) || | | | | || | | || | | || | |(E.T)|(E.T) | || (E.T.) |(E.T) | ||(E.T.)|(E.T) | || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |TR oui |1022 |1244 | 12.2 ||871 (302)|1045 | 18.3 ||1184 |1284 | 0.7 (1,85) || | |(378)|(461) |(1,176)*** || |(339) |(1,245)*** ||(507) |(493) | || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |TR non |1147 |1167 |0.1 (1,152)||1180 |1178 | 0 (1,107) ||1007 |1137 |6.6 (1,239)**|| | |(493)|(464) | ||(522) |(509) | ||(383) |(382) | || |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------++---------+------+-----------++------+------+-------------+| |-----------------------------+-----+------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------| |Notes. G1 = Groupe | | | | |expérimental logos présentés | | | | |comme inédits; G2 = Groupe | | | | |expérimental logos présentés | | | | |comme connus. Pour le codage | | | | |des items voir tableau I. | | | | | | | | | |m = moyenne ; E.T.= écart | | | | |type ; n = effectif. | | | | | | | | | |^a Le TR est le temps de | | | | |réponse moyen aux 4 items. *p| | | | |&lt; .05 ; **p &lt; .01 ; ***p &lt; | | | | |.001. | | | | | | | | | |Pour G1, les effectifs sont | | | | |différents selon les | | | | |logotypes car certaines | | | | |réponses ont été supprimées | | | | |(voir procédure). | | | | +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+| | | | | ||Tableau 4| | || | | || |---------------------------+-----+------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+| |Comparaison des contenus de| | | | |réponse et des TR selon les| | | | | logotypes entre le groupe | | | | | expérimental logos | | | | | présentés comme connus et | | | | | le groupe contrôle logos | | | | | présentés comme connus | | | | |---------------------------+-----+------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------| |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| | | |Banroi| || |Calmin| || |Mitain| || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| | | G2 | G4 |Comparaison || G2 | G4 | Comparaison || G2 | G4 |Comparaison|| | | | | G2-G4 || | | G2-G4 || | | G2-G4 || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |Réponses aux 4 | | | || | | || | | || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |items : | n | n | ÷² (dl) || n | n | ÷² (dl) || n | n | ÷² (dl) || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |Oui | 67 | 72 | || 120 | 104 | || 28 | 40 | || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |Non | 109 | 84 | 2.2 (1) || 56 | 52 | 0.09 (1) || 148 | 116 | 4.08 (1)* || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |TR^a (ms) | m | m | F (dl) || m | m | F (dl) || m | m | F (dl) || | | | | || | | || | | || | |(E.T)|(E.T) | || (E.T) |(E.T) | ||(E.T)|(E.T) | || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |TR oui |1245 |1488 |4.5 (1,137)*||1045 |1290 |15 (1,222)***||1284 |1627 |3.6 (1,66) || | |(461)|(827) | ||(339) |(589) | ||(493)|(859) | || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |TR non |1167 |1643 | 24.4 ||1178 |1375 | 2.7 (1,106) ||1137 |1375 |10.5 || | |(464)|(856) | (1,191)*** ||(509) |(732) | ||(383)|(780) |(1,262)** || |---------------------------+-----+------+------------++---------+------+-------------++-----+------+-----------+| |---------------------------+-----+------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------| |Notes. G2 = Groupe | | | | |expérimental Logos | | | | |présentés comme connus; | | | | |G4 = Groupe contrôle Logos | | | | |présentés comme connus. | | | | |Pour le codage des items | | | | |voir tableau I. | | | | | | | | | |m = moyenne ; E.T.= écart | | | | |type ; n = effectif. | | | | | | | | | |^a Le TR est le temps de | | | | |réponse moyen aux 4 items. | | | | |*p &lt; .05 ; **p &lt; .01 ; ***p| | | | |&lt; .001. | | | | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+</note>
          </notesStmt>
          <sourceDesc>
            <biblStruct>
              <analytic>
                <title xml:lang="en">L'influence publicitaire en l'absence de souvenir des messages : les effets implicites de la simple exposition ; The influence of advertising without message recall: the implicit effects of brand mere exposure</title>
                <author role="aut">
                  <persName>
                    <forename type="first">Didier</forename>
                    <surname>Courbet</surname>
                  </persName>
                  <email type="md5">3acedf604945634be2156be64b153da5</email>
                  <email type="domain">orange.fr</email>
                  <idno type="idhal" notation="string">courbet-didier</idno>
                  <idno type="idhal" notation="numeric">5410</idno>
                  <idno type="halauthorid" notation="string">12446-5410</idno>
                  <idno type="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5506-1850</idno>
                  <idno type="GOOGLE SCHOLAR">https://scholar.google.fr/citations?user=6v5ehJgAAAAJ&amp;hl=fr</idno>
                  <idno type="IDREF">https://www.idref.fr/050402668</idno>
                  <idno type="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4090-777X</idno>
                </author>
              </analytic>
              <monogr>
                <idno type="halJournalId" status="VALID">24879</idno>
                <idno type="issn">0777-0707</idno>
                <idno type="eissn">2406-4696</idno>
                <title level="j">Les cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale</title>
                <meeting>
                  <date type="start">2003-05-21</date>
                </meeting>
                <imprint>
                  <publisher>Éd. de l'Université de Liège</publisher>
                  <biblScope unit="volume">57</biblScope>
                  <biblScope unit="issue">3/2003</biblScope>
                  <date type="datePub">2003-05-21</date>
                </imprint>
              </monogr>
            </biblStruct>
          </sourceDesc>
          <profileDesc>
            <langUsage>
              <language ident="fr">French</language>
            </langUsage>
            <textClass>
              <keywords scheme="author">
                <term xml:lang="fr">subliminal</term>
                <term xml:lang="fr">attitude implicite</term>
                <term xml:lang="fr">simple exposition</term>
                <term xml:lang="fr">influence</term>
                <term xml:lang="fr">persuasion</term>
                <term xml:lang="fr">Publicité</term>
                <term xml:lang="ro">implicit attitude</term>
                <term xml:lang="ro">mere exposure</term>
                <term xml:lang="ro">advertising</term>
              </keywords>
              <classCode scheme="halDomain" n="shs.info.orga">Humanities and Social Sciences/Library and information sciences/Organisation and communication</classCode>
              <classCode scheme="halTypology" n="ART">Journal articles</classCode>
              <classCode scheme="halOldTypology" n="ART">Journal articles</classCode>
              <classCode scheme="halTreeTypology" n="ART">Journal articles</classCode>
            </textClass>
            <abstract xml:lang="en">
              <p>title: The influence of advertising without message recall: the implicit effects of brand mere exposure ; Abstract: The experiment reproduces the advertising influence conditions when the consumers, at the time to buy, do not remember the messages seen very quickly, several days before. By mobilizing the concepts of implicit attitude and implicit memory, this research studies the implicit effects of mere exposure of new brand, seven days later, when the subjects forgot to have been beforehand exposed. When the subjects think that they see the brand for the first time, the mere exposure makes positive the initially moderate evaluations. The positive and negative initially attitudes become more accessible. If one says to the subjects that they already saw the brand during advertising messages, these effects disappear. The discussion explain that the model of the misattribution of the perceptive fluidity cannot explain to him only the results. Those underline that the brand negative evaluations would be implicitly memorized.</p>
            </abstract>
            <abstract xml:lang="fr">
              <p>L'expérience cherche à reproduire les conditions propres à l'influence publicitaire lorsque les consommateurs au moment d'acheter ne se souviennent pas des messages vus très rapidement, plusieurs jours auparavant. En mobilisant les concepts de mémoire et d'attitude implicites, cette recherche étudie, sept jours après, les effets implicites de simple exposition à des nouvelles marques lorsque les sujets ont oublié d'avoir été préalablement exposés. Quand les sujets pensent qu'ils voient les marques pour la première fois, la simple exposition rend positives les évaluations initialement moyennes. Elle rend plus accessible l'attitude, qu'elle soit initialement positive ou négative. Quand les sujets pensent qu'ils ont déjà vu les marques au cours de publicité, ces effets disparaissent. La discussion montre que le modèle de mésattribution de la fluidité perceptive ne peut expliquer à lui seul les résultats puisque ceux-ci semblent mettre en évidence une mémorisation implicite des évaluations négatives.</p>
            </abstract>
          </profileDesc>
        </biblFull>
      </listBibl>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>