Question

Kirmani's third study, as described in the passage, suggests which of the following conclusions about a black-and-white advertisement?

• A. It can be repeated more frequently than a comparable color advertisement could before consumers begin to suspect low manufacturer confidence in the quality of the advertised product.
• B. It will have the greatest impact on consumers' perceptions of the quality of the advertised product if it appears during periods when a color version of the same advertisement is also being used.
• C. It will attract more attention from readers of the print publication in which it appears if it is used only a few times.
• D. It may be perceived by some consumers as more expensive than a comparable color advertisement.
• E. It is likely to be perceived by consumers as a sign of higher manufacturer confidence in the quality of the advertised product than a comparable color advertisement would be.

Hint:

When a question refers to a specific study (e.g., "the third study"), look for a finding that is a refinement, a nuance, or even an exception to the general theory presented earlier in the passage. Authors often structure passages by presenting a general rule and then exploring its complexities through specific research examples.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This is another inference question, but it's highly specific. It asks for a conclusion about black-and-white (B&W) ads that comes directly from "Kirmani's third study." The correct answer will likely involve a nuance or a comparison with color ads that was a key finding of that particular study.

Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
This question builds on the ideas from Q51. We know Kirmani's research deals with frequency and signals of ad cost (color vs. B&W). Economic signaling theory would suggest that higher cost (color) and higher frequency both signal higher quality. However, there might be a limit or a counter-intuitive effect. Let's analyze the options:
\[\begin{array}{rl} \bullet & \text{(A) This option suggests a "diminishing returns" or even a negative effect of frequency. The idea is that too much repetition might make consumers suspicious. It further proposes that this suspicion threshold is different for B&W and color ads. Since B&W ads are cheaper, a manufacturer can run them more often before consumers think, "They are trying too hard; maybe the product is bad." This is a sophisticated and plausible finding for an advanced study.} \\ \bullet & \text{(B) This introduces a new variable (simultaneous use of color and B&W ads) not hinted at elsewhere.} \\ \bullet & \text{(C) This suggests that infrequent use is better for attention, which is a plausible advertising principle but may not relate to the perception of quality, the central theme.} \\ \bullet & \text{(D) This is illogical. A B&W ad is almost universally understood to be cheaper than a color ad. It's highly unlikely a study would find the opposite.} \\ \bullet & \text{(E) This directly contradicts the basic premise of signaling theory, which would state that the more expensive signal (color) implies higher confidence. A B&W ad would signal lower, not higher, confidence than a color ad.} \\ \end{array}\]

Step 3: Final Answer:
Option (A) presents the most complex and nuanced research finding, which is typical for questions that refer to a specific "third study." It builds on the core concepts of signaling (cost) and frequency, but introduces a limiting condition (consumer suspicion), and shows how this condition applies differently to low-cost (B&W) and high-cost (color) signals. This is the most likely conclusion to be drawn from the study described.