摘要
This research explores the moderating roles of ad claim type and rhetorical style in the ads of competitor brands for diluting the consumers' brand commitment to the existing brands. Results indicate that, for highly committed consumers, experiential ad claims will elicit more favorable attitudes toward the competitor brand than functional ad claims. Conversely, for low committed consumers, functional ad claims will elicit more favorable attitudes toward the competitor brand than experiential ad claims. Moreover, for highly committed consumers, metaphorical ads will elicit more favorable attitudes toward the competitor brand than straightforward ads. On the contrary, for low committed consumers, straightforward ads will elicit more favorable attitudes toward the competitor brand than metaphorical ads. Subsequently, for highly committed consumers, metaphorical ads with experiential claims will lead to more favorable attitudes toward the competitor brand than metaphorical ads with functional claims. In contrast, highly committed consumers will not engender differentially favorable attitudes toward the straightforward ads, regardless of ad claim type. At last, for low committed consumers, functional claims will elicit more favorable attitudes toward the competitor brand than experiential claims, regardless of rhetorical styles.