Ethnic Identity in Advertising: A Review and Meta-Analysis

The corpus of research on ethnic identity in advertising indicates that (1) ethnic identity influences commonly examined attitudinal and purchase-intention outcomes, and (2) attitudes toward both actor(s)/model(s) and the ad moderate attitudes towards brands depicted in ethnically resonant ads. Individual studies often differ by underlying theoretical framework, measurement type (i.e., single-item measure versus multi-item scale), study design (i.e., experiment versus survey), and diversity of respondent sample. Seemingly, ethnic-identity effects are higher for atheoretical studies that relied on single-item measures, experimental designs, and less diverse samples. Implications and future research directions are suggested. Effective advertising draws and holds viewers‘ attention. Creating distinctive ads has become increasingly challenging as ad clutter has worsened. Ads with ethnically resonant cues have been effective in breaking though clutter and creating favorable responses. In particular, consumers cognizant of a firm‘s efforts to target their ethnic group are more likely to (1) recall and respond favorably to that firm‘s ads (Cui 1997; Whittler and Spira 2002), and (2) respond more favorably to that firm‘s brand (Grier and Brumbaugh 1999; Sierra, Hyman, and Torres 2009). Ethnic identity, which is a lasting and robust sense of connection to a social group (Tajfel 1978), encompasses self-identification as a group member, a sense of belonging to a group, and favorable attitudes toward one‘s group (Phinney 1990). Because ethnic identity can influence consumers‘ responses to marketing strategies and shopping behaviors (Davis and Gandy 1999; Green 1999), its role within the advertising hierarchy-of-effects has been studied extensively. Despite the prevalence of ethnic cues in ads and the importance of ethnic identification for marketers (e.g., Green 1999; Whittler and Spira 2002), findings of ethnic identity in advertising research are inconsistent. Some studies show that Whites (Blacks) identify more with White (Black) actors than Black (White) actors, respond more favorably to ads with White (Black) actors, and are more likely to buy the advertised brand when White (Black) actors are featured (Whittler 1989). In contrast, other studies show that Whites respond similarly to point-of-purchase displays with all Black models, all White models, or an amalgamation of White and Black models (Bush, Gwinner, and Solomon 1974). Using Asian models in ads favorably affects attitudes and purchase intentions toward the featured brand for both Asian and White consumers (Martin, Lee, and Yang 2004). Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics identify most with ads that use Black actors; and Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites evaluate ads that use Black actors more positively than ads featuring White actors (Appiah 2001b). These inconsistent findings cloud the role of ethnic identification in advertising and complicate decisions about ad design. Two possibilities that may explain these inconsistent findings are (1) a mismatch between ethnic-identity effects and one or more constructs typical to advertising hierarchy-ofeffects models, and (2) inter-study methodological artifacts. This first systematic review of the ethnic identity in advertising literature explores these possibilities. Our exposition proceeds as follows. First, we briefly describe the various theoretical frameworks that ground these studies. After we review commonly examined advertising constructs and posit related hypotheses, we suggest potential causes of artifactually biased findings. Then, we present our sampling procedure, meta-analysis methods, and results. Finally, we discuss implications and recommend avenues for future research.