Question

The passage suggests that Kirmani would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about consumers' perceptions of the relationship between the frequency with which a product is advertised and the product's quality?

• A. Consumers' perceptions about the frequency with which an advertisement appears are their primary consideration when evaluating an advertisement's claims about product quality.
• B. Because most consumers do not notice the frequency of advertisement, it has little impact on most consumers' expectations regarding product quality.
• C. Consumers perceive frequency of advertisement as a signal about product quality only when the advertisement is for a product that is newly on the market.
• D. The frequency of advertisement is not always perceived by consumers to indicate that manufacturers are highly confident about their products' quality.
• E. Consumers who try a new product that has been frequently advertised are likely to perceive the advertisement's frequency as having been an accurate indicator of the product's quality.

Hint:

In reading comprehension, be wary of absolute words like "always," "never," "only," or "primary." Nuanced statements using words like "not always," "can," or "suggests" are often more likely to be correct in passages discussing complex social or psychological phenomena.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question asks for an inference about Kirmani's view on the link between ad frequency and perceived product quality. We must synthesize the information suggested in the previous questions (especially Q52) to determine the most likely statement Kirmani would support. The key is to understand the nuances of the relationship, not just the basic theory.

Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
From the context of the preceding questions, Kirmani's research explores economic signaling theory, where advertising expenditure and frequency act as signals of a manufacturer's confidence. However, Q52 introduced a more complex finding from Kirmani's "third study": there's a limit to how frequently an ad can be shown before consumers become suspicious.
Let's analyze the options based on this nuance: \[\begin{array}{rl} \bullet & \text{(A) This is too strong. Stating frequency is the "primary consideration" is an extreme claim that is unlikely to be supported. Consumers consider many factors. } \\ \bullet & \text{(B) This contradicts the premise of the entire passage, which is that consumers do use signals like frequency to judge quality. } \\ \bullet & \text{(C) This adds a limitation ("only when... newly on the market") that is not suggested elsewhere. The signaling effect of frequency is likely more general. } \\ \bullet & \text{(D) This option perfectly captures the nuanced finding. It states that frequency is not always a positive signal. This aligns with the idea from Q52 that excessive frequency can lead to suspicion about the manufacturer's confidence. A manufacturer who has to advertise too much might be perceived as desperate or as trying to compensate for a poor product. This makes the signal ambiguous in some cases. } \\ \bullet & \text{(E) This shifts the focus to post-purchase perception, which is beyond the scope of how advertising initially shapes expectations.} \\ \end{array}\]

Step 3: Final Answer:
The most accurate statement reflecting Kirmani's research is (D), as it acknowledges that the relationship between ad frequency and perceived quality is not linear or simple. High frequency can, under certain circumstances, cease to be a positive signal and may even become a negative one.