Introduction
Long before marketers could measure impressions, clicks and conversions in real time, advertising practitioners were already trying to understand the sequence through which a message becomes a sale. They recognised that exposure alone was insufficient. A prospective buyer first had to notice an appeal, remain mentally engaged, develop a favourable motivation and eventually do something.
The best-known expression of this process is the AIDA model: Attention, Interest, Desire and Action.
It is one of the oldest surviving frameworks in advertising and sales education. Its four terms appear in copywriting manuals, campaign plans, sales presentations, landing-page templates and explanations of the marketing funnel.
Its apparent simplicity has also encouraged an inaccurate origin story. Most textbooks and online explanations state that the American advertising practitioner E. St. Elmo Lewis invented AIDA in 1898. Some add that Lewis originally proposed Attention, Interest and Desire and later included Action.
That attribution became conventional after Edward Kellogg Strong repeated it in The Psychology of Selling and Advertising in 1925. Strong did not identify the 1898 document in which Lewis supposedly presented the formula (Strong, 1925).
A detailed historical investigation by Akinori Iwamoto has challenged this conventional account. After reviewing contemporary advertising and sales literature, Iwamoto concluded that the claim that Lewis invented and completed AIDA in 1898 is unsupported by strong evidence. The research instead identifies Frank H. Dukesmith and Arthur Frederick Sheldon as decisive contributors to the model’s formulation, with Sheldon arguably having the strongest claim to being its originator (Iwamoto, 2023).
Lewis should not therefore be removed from the history. He developed influential principles connecting attention, information, interest, conviction and action. The problem is the conversion of a collective intellectual development into a single moment of invention.
The history of AIDA reveals how marketing concepts are created. Ideas often emerge through professional debate, teaching, journalism and practical experimentation before a later textbook assigns them a name and an inventor.
AIDA’s importance similarly requires careful definition. It was not designed as a complete theory of marketing. It says little about product development, pricing, distribution, customer service or competitive strategy. It is primarily a model of persuasive communication and selling.
Nevertheless, it introduced an extraordinarily durable idea: advertising effects occur through stages. That proposition influenced later hierarchy-of-effects models, advertising research, direct-response marketing, sales funnels and digital conversion optimisation.
The Commercial Context of AIDA
The model emerged during a period of rapid change in American business.
Industrial production created larger quantities of standardised goods. Railways and national distribution networks separated manufacturers from final consumers. Urbanisation, newspapers, magazines and mail-order catalogues made it possible to address audiences on a scale that personal traders could not reach.
Advertising became an important intermediary between mass production and mass consumption. Yet the industry lacked a settled body of theory.
Many advertisements were little more than announcements. Others relied on exaggerated claims, decorative typography or repetition. Practitioners who wanted advertising to gain professional legitimacy argued that it should be based on principles.
The emerging psychology of attention, memory, emotion, habit and decision-making offered a promising vocabulary. Advertising could be understood not merely as printed space but as a series of effects within the reader.
Sales schools developed a related ambition. Selling was presented as a teachable occupation rather than an inborn talent. The salesperson could follow stages, diagnose resistance and move the prospect towards a decision.
AIDA grew from this shared environment of advertising instruction and systematic salesmanship.
E. St. Elmo Lewis and the Conventional Origin Story
Elias St. Elmo Lewis became an influential figure in early American advertising. He wrote for trade publications, provided instruction and worked in corporate advertising and sales roles.
Lewis argued that effective advertising required more than attracting the eye. It had to communicate information, sustain interest, create conviction and produce a commercial response.
In 1925 Strong stated that Lewis had formulated the slogan “Attract attention, maintain interest, create desire” in 1898 and later added “get action” (Strong, 1925).
The phrase was concise and historically convenient. It supplied both an inventor and a date.
Later reviews and textbooks repeated the statement. Barry’s influential historical study of hierarchy-of-effects models accepted Lewis as the originator around the turn of the twentieth century (Barry, 1987). Marketing texts subsequently cited Strong or reproduced the established account without returning to an original 1898 document.
The result was a century of attribution built largely upon one uncited statement.
What the Surviving Lewis Sources Actually Show
The absence of an 1898 source does not mean that Lewis contributed nothing.
In 1899 he wrote that an advertisement should catch the reader’s eye, inform the reader and make a customer. In another text from that year, he argued that the proposition should be presented so that it would attract, interest and convince (Lewis, 1899a; Lewis, 1899b).
These statements clearly anticipate hierarchy-of-effects thinking. They begin with attention and move towards a commercial result.
Lewis continued developing similar ideas. In Financial Advertising, published in 1908, he discussed the problems of attracting attention, awakening interest, creating conviction and persuading people to act (Lewis, 1908).
His formulations varied. He referred at different times to information, conviction, demand and action. The stages were not always presented as the exact four-word sequence later known as AIDA.
Iwamoto’s archival study found no available Lewis publication from around 1898 containing Strong’s quoted formula. Lewis may have taught related ideas orally, but historical research cannot treat an undocumented possibility as established fact (Iwamoto, 2023).
Lewis is most accurately described as an important precursor and developer of staged advertising principles rather than the securely documented sole inventor of AIDA.
The Broader Nineteenth-Century Background
The core idea was already developing beyond Lewis.
Frederick Bartlett Goddard wrote in 1889 that selling agencies should attract attention, interest customers, convince them and awaken desire for goods. His discussion did not offer the later standardised AIDA formula, but it demonstrates that sequences of attention, interest, conviction and desire were circulating before 1898 (Jones, 1971).
Trade journals also published comparable statements. An anonymous contribution to Printers’ Ink in 1898 argued that an advertisement must attract attention and then contain material that would interest and convince the reader.
These examples matter because they change the nature of the historical question. Instead of asking which person suddenly invented AIDA, historians should examine how a common professional problem generated multiple overlapping formulas.
Advertising practitioners broadly agreed that attracting attention alone was insufficient. They differed over whether the next essential effects were information, interest, conviction, desire, confidence or action.
AIDA emerged through the gradual selection and ordering of these terms.
Frank H. Dukesmith’s Contribution
Frank H. Dukesmith was a publisher, editor and advertising practitioner who wrote extensively about sales and promotional communication.
His importance lies particularly in the connection between psychological preparation and action. Advertising had to do more than create a favourable state of mind. It had to produce a response.
Dukesmith used combinations of attention, interest, desire and action in a way closely resembling the later model. Iwamoto’s reconstruction therefore treats him as one of the decisive formulators of AIDA (Iwamoto, 2023).
The inclusion of Action gave the model practical accountability. A reader might admire an advertisement, remember it and even want the product, yet the business objective remained incomplete until some behaviour followed.
In early direct advertising, the behaviour could be the return of a coupon, a letter, a store visit or an order. These responses allowed advertisers to connect creative communication with measurable outcomes.
This logic anticipated later direct marketing and performance advertising.
Arthur Frederick Sheldon and Systematic Salesmanship
Arthur Frederick Sheldon developed one of the most systematic early approaches to sales education.
He treated selling as a sequence that could be studied, taught and improved. His work incorporated attention, interest, desire and action at an early stage and attempted to explain how each condition developed.
Iwamoto argues that Sheldon recognised both the importance of the fourth term and the need to theorise the whole sequence before Lewis did so in any surviving publication. On this evidence, Sheldon has the strongest claim to being the principal originator of AIDA (Iwamoto, 2023).
Sheldon also moved beyond the four stages by emphasising satisfaction. Successful selling should not be defined solely by obtaining an order. The purchase had to produce satisfaction if the seller wanted future business, reputation and trust (Sheldon, 1911).
The resulting logic is often represented as AIDAS:
Attention, Interest, Desire, Action and Satisfaction.
This early extension anticipated relationship marketing. It recognised that the value of a customer cannot be reduced to one transaction.
The Earliest Complete Ordering
According to Iwamoto’s review, a 1904 article by Brown is among the earliest located sources to arrange Attention, Interest, Desire and Action explicitly in that order (Iwamoto, 2023).
The finding does not necessarily establish Brown as a sole inventor. Terminology circulated across teaching, professional journals and sales organisations.
It does demonstrate that the full sequence existed publicly by the early twentieth century and that its development cannot be reconstructed solely from Lewis’s work.
A historically balanced account should therefore distribute credit:
Lewis developed influential staged principles for advertising and persuasion. Dukesmith helped connect the stages to the requirement for action. Sheldon offered a more complete theoretical system and included satisfaction. Strong later established Lewis as the conventional inventor through the authority of his textbook.
Edward K. Strong and the Making of the AIDA Tradition
Strong’s The Psychology of Selling and Advertising became an important synthesis of applied psychology and commercial practice.
The book examined the purchase, the sale, wants, motivation, decision, action, satisfaction, memory, trademarks and sales strategy. Its scope was far broader than the AIDA slogan.
Strong’s historical statement nevertheless became one of its most influential legacies. By attributing the three-part formula to Lewis in 1898 and describing Action as a later addition, he supplied the narrative repeated by generations of authors.
The case illustrates the power of textbooks in shaping disciplinary memory. Once a claim enters a respected teaching source, later writers may cite the textbook rather than investigate the primary evidence.
AIDA’s conventional history thus became a product of marketing communication itself: a simple, memorable story displaced a more complicated reality.
Attention: Entering the Buyer’s Perceptual Field
Attention is the necessary beginning of the classic model because an unnoticed message cannot produce the intended persuasive effect.
Early print advertisers used display type, white space, illustrations, borders and arresting headlines. Shopkeepers relied on signage and window displays. Salespeople used introductions, questions and demonstrations.
Modern media multiply the techniques but preserve the problem. Search advertisements compete on a results page. Social videos compete within an endless feed. Email subject lines compete within crowded inboxes.
Digital practitioners often speak of a “hook”: the opening image, sentence or sound that prevents immediate abandonment.
The commercial value of attention is conditional. A dramatic execution can become memorable while the brand remains forgotten. Controversy can create exposure while reducing trust.
Effective attention must therefore be selective and connected to the proposition. The objective is not to make everyone look, but to attract relevant people in a way that supports the following stages.
Interest: Sustaining Mental Engagement
Once noticed, the message must earn continued attention.
Interest depends upon relevance. The prospect recognises a problem, goal, curiosity or opportunity that justifies further processing.
Early copywriters used stories, facts, questions, demonstrations and detailed explanations. Salespeople connected product characteristics with the prospect’s circumstances.
Modern landing pages use benefit-led headings, interactive elements, videos and problem–solution narratives. Content marketing often creates interest before presenting a direct sales proposition.
Interest is not identical to entertainment. An advertisement can entertain without creating meaningful engagement with the offer. Conversely, a highly relevant technical explanation may interest a small professional audience without broad entertainment value.
Digital metrics such as dwell time, video completion and scroll depth can indicate engagement, but they do not directly reveal the psychological state. A visitor may remain because the page is useful, confusing or difficult to navigate.
Desire: Connecting the Offer to Personal Motivation
Desire represents the shift from knowing about an offer to wanting its benefits.
The transition requires personalisation in the broad psychological sense. The buyer imagines how the product changes a situation, solves a problem or supports a valued identity.
Functional desire can arise from efficiency, durability or convenience. Emotional desire may involve pleasure, relief or confidence. Social desire can involve belonging, recognition or status.
Advertising frequently converts attributes into outcomes. A battery is not simply described by chemistry but by the moments it will continue to power. A business service is not merely a set of features but a route to reduced risk or greater control.
The concept also reveals advertising’s active role. Persuasion does not merely catalogue pre-existing needs. It directs and intensifies wants by linking them to specific brands and symbolic meanings.
Critical historians such as Ewen and Tadajewski therefore treat advertising as a social and cultural practice, not simply an information system (Ewen, 1976; Tadajewski, 2016).
Action: Converting Motivation into Behaviour
The final classic stage requires an observable response.
For a salesperson, Action meant securing the order. For a newspaper advertiser, it might mean receiving a coupon or enquiry. For a retailer, it could be a store visit.
Online marketing has expanded the category. Action may be a click, subscription, download, account creation, enquiry, trial or purchase.
Calls to action reduce ambiguity by stating the next step. Buttons, links, forms and checkout systems make the step operational.
Action is not produced by communication alone. A customer may desire a product but be unable to afford it. Poor website design, unavailable stock, delivery costs or lack of trust may prevent conversion.
AIDA therefore describes one dimension of the route to action. It does not explain the complete market system around it.
AIDA and the Hierarchy-of-Effects Tradition
AIDA became the earliest widely remembered member of a larger family of hierarchical advertising models.
These models commonly distinguish cognitive, affective and behavioural effects. A consumer first learns or thinks, then forms feelings or preferences, and finally acts.
Lavidge and Steiner’s 1961 model expanded the sequence into Awareness, Knowledge, Liking, Preference, Conviction and Purchase (Lavidge and Steiner, 1961).
The model acknowledged that brand recognition, understanding, positive attitude, preference and buying conviction are distinct outcomes.
Colley’s DAGMAR approach similarly argued that advertising objectives should be defined as specific, measurable communication tasks rather than vague ambitions to “increase sales” (Colley, 1961).
McGuire later developed information-processing stages including exposure, attention, comprehension, acceptance, retention and behaviour.
AIDA’s historical contribution was not to provide the final scientific model. It established the durable proposition that advertising effects could be separated into stages and managed accordingly.
From AIDA to the Marketing Funnel
The modern funnel adds a quantitative image to the sequence.
A large number of people may be exposed at the top. Fewer become interested, fewer develop serious consideration and still fewer buy.
The narrowing shape helps organisations identify conversion rates and losses between stages.
Digital analytics made the funnel especially influential because impressions, visits, leads and transactions can be counted.
However, the funnel should not be confused with a direct historical illustration created by Lewis. It is a later visual interpretation related to AIDA and other stage models.
Nor should it be treated as a literal map of every customer. People enter at different points, consult several channels, leave, return and influence others.
The funnel remains useful as an aggregate business measurement even when individual journeys are nonlinear.
AIDA in Print and Direct Response
Print advertising offers a clear application of the model.
A headline or image attracts attention. The opening copy develops interest. Benefits, evidence and testimonials build desire and confidence. A coupon, address or order instruction creates action.
Direct-response advertising was particularly compatible because the response could be measured.
Claude Hopkins described advertising as salesmanship in print and argued that claims, offers and results should be tested (Hopkins, 1923).
Although Hopkins did not simply reproduce the AIDA acronym, his approach shared its practical orientation. Advertising was judged by movement towards a business response, not by decoration alone.
The combination of staged persuasion and response measurement became foundational for later direct marketing.
AIDA in Personal Selling
Sales educators used AIDA to structure the sales interview.
The salesperson first had to obtain attention, then establish relevance, create preference and ask for a decision.
Demonstration, questioning, objection handling and closing techniques could be aligned with the stages.
The framework helped make selling teachable, but it could also encourage a manipulative interpretation. The seller appeared to move a passive prospect through predetermined mental conditions.
Consultative and relationship selling later placed greater emphasis on diagnosis, dialogue and mutual value.
Even so, the underlying diagnostic question remains valuable: What prevents the buyer from proceeding, and what information or reassurance is legitimately required?
AIDA in Broadcast Advertising
Radio and television converted the structure into a timed sequence.
A distinctive sound, image or opening scene gains attention. Narrative or problem recognition sustains interest. Demonstration and emotional resolution create desire. The conclusion provides the brand, offer and next step.
Short formats compress the stages into seconds.
Brand advertising does not always fit this structure. Many campaigns seek gradual familiarity and emotional association without demanding immediate behaviour.
AIDA is therefore better suited to direct and proposition-led communication than to every form of long-term brand building.
AIDA in Websites and Landing Pages
A typical conversion-oriented page follows a recognisable sequence.
The hero section presents a strong headline and visual. Supporting copy identifies the problem and develops interest. Benefits, demonstrations, social proof and guarantees increase desire and confidence. Buttons or forms make action possible.
The model helps designers check whether the page has omitted a persuasive function. A page may attract attention but fail to explain the product. It may provide information without creating a clear reason to choose the offer. It may persuade but hide the next step.
AIDA cannot determine whether the underlying proposition is attractive or ethical. It can only help organise its communication.
Search, Email and Content Marketing
In search advertising, the query already indicates some degree of interest. The headline must capture attention within that context, the description must establish relevance and the landing page must develop preference and enable action.
In email marketing, the subject line competes for attention. The opening creates interest, the body communicates value and the call to action directs behaviour.
Content marketing often separates the stages across multiple encounters. An educational article creates awareness and interest. A case study or comparison strengthens desire and conviction. A later email or sales conversation prompts action.
This illustrates an important modification: AIDA need not occur within one advertisement. The functions can be distributed across a broader communication system.
Social Media, Creators and AIDA
A social video may perform the sequence rapidly.
The first seconds attract attention. A relatable situation holds interest. A product demonstration or creator recommendation creates desire. A link, product tag or promotional code enables action.
However, social media makes communication participatory. Users comment, share, remix and review. Their responses affect how other people enter the process.
A customer review can create Attention and Interest for a new prospect after the original customer has completed Action.
The journey becomes circular rather than linear.
AIDA remains useful for structuring an individual post, but it cannot fully describe platform communities, word of mouth or post-purchase advocacy.
Satisfaction and the AIDAS Extension
The omission of post-purchase experience is one of AIDA’s most important limitations.
Sheldon’s inclusion of satisfaction recognised that a sale can damage rather than create value when expectations are disappointed.
Satisfaction influences repeat purchase, loyalty, reviews and referrals. In digital markets, those outcomes become visible to future buyers.
AIDAS therefore provides a more complete commercial logic:
Attention attracts the prospect, Interest maintains engagement, Desire creates motivation, Action produces the transaction, and Satisfaction determines whether the relationship continues.
Even AIDAS remains incomplete, but it corrects the most obvious transactional bias.
Conviction, Trust and High-Risk Decisions
Some extensions insert Conviction before Action.
Desire is not sufficient for expensive, complex or risky purchases. The buyer may want the outcome but doubt the provider or the evidence.
Financial services, medical products, business software and education require trust, proof and risk reduction.
Case studies, demonstrations, certifications, guarantees, independent reviews and transparent conditions help create conviction.
This distinction is especially valuable in contemporary online markets, where attractive claims can be produced easily but trust is scarce.
The Problem of Linear Sequence
The central scientific criticism is that consumers do not always move through the stages in one order.
Routine purchases may involve Action with very little conscious Interest or Desire. Familiarity and availability determine behaviour.
Impulse purchases compress Attention, Desire and Action into a short episode.
High-involvement decisions can involve repeated cycles of search, emotion, doubt, consultation and reconsideration.
Experience can also precede attitude. A consumer may try a low-risk product first and form interest or preference afterwards.
Barry and Howard concluded that hierarchy-of-effects models should not assume one invariant sequence across products and situations (Barry and Howard, 1990).
Vakratsas and Ambler’s extensive review similarly found no universal hierarchy through which all advertising operates. Advertising effects depend upon experience, involvement, emotion, cognition, competition and context (Vakratsas and Ambler, 1999).
The Weak Link between Mental Stages and Sales
AIDA implies that successful movement through mental stages contributes to action. Measuring these stages is difficult.
Attention can be observed indirectly through eye tracking, recall or exposure metrics. Interest and desire are usually inferred from surveys or behaviour. Action is easier to observe but may have multiple causes.
Sales depend upon product value, price, distribution, competitive activity and economic circumstances as well as advertising.
A conversion after exposure does not prove that the advertisement caused it. Contemporary measurement increasingly relies on controlled experiments, incrementality analysis and marketing-mix modelling.
AIDA provides a conceptual sequence, not a causal measurement method.
Attention without Brand Growth
Modern digital marketing often overvalues the first stage.
Platforms reward content that generates views, reactions and sharing. Advertisers may therefore optimise for surprise, outrage or entertainment.
Yet attention can be commercially empty. People may remember the joke and forget the brand. Viral controversy may produce negative associations. Broad reach may attract people with no relevance to the product.
AIDA itself implies that Attention is only useful when it develops into the following effects. The model can therefore be used to criticise attention-only marketing.
The Missing Marketing Mix
AIDA is frequently described as a marketing model, but its scope is narrower.
It does not determine what product should be created, how it should be priced, where it should be distributed or which market should be targeted.
It belongs primarily to promotional communication.
A poor product can generate initial Action through powerful persuasion, but the result may be dissatisfaction and reputational damage.
Marketing management requires alignment among customer needs, value proposition, product, price, access and communication (Kotler and Keller, 2016).
AIDA should therefore support a marketing strategy rather than substitute for one.
Ethics, Manipulation and Consumer Autonomy
The historical purpose of the model was explicitly persuasive. The advertiser or salesperson sought to produce desire and action.
Persuasion is not inherently unethical. Customers need information, explanation and confidence before making decisions.
Problems arise when attention is gained through deception, interest through misleading claims, desire through manufactured insecurity or action through coercive design.
Digital dark patterns exploit this final stage. Interfaces can conceal costs, make refusal difficult or create false urgency.
An ethical AIDA process should preserve the consumer’s ability to understand, compare and decline.
The objective should be an informed action that creates value for both parties, not behaviour obtained at any cost.
Why AIDA Still Matters
The model survives because it is memorable and operational.
It encourages marketers to distinguish exposure from engagement, engagement from motivation and motivation from behaviour.
It helps diagnose communication failures. High reach with low engagement suggests weak relevance. Strong content consumption with low conversion may indicate insufficient value, trust or usability.
It also supports creative structure. A presentation, advertisement, page or sales conversation can be reviewed against the four functions.
Its value is heuristic rather than universal. AIDA helps practitioners ask useful questions; it does not prove how every consumer thinks.
Conclusion
AIDA is one of marketing history’s most successful simplifications.
Its four terms provided advertising and sales practitioners with a common language for the movement from perception to behaviour. The model helped establish the idea that communication works through stages and that each stage requires a different task.
Its origin, however, is more complex than the conventional Lewis story suggests.
E. St. Elmo Lewis clearly contributed to the development of staged advertising principles. His surviving writings connected attention with information, interest, conviction and commercial response. No located 1898 source contains the complete formula attributed to him by Strong.
Frank H. Dukesmith played an important role in emphasising Action. Arthur Frederick Sheldon systematised the sequence early and recognised the importance of Satisfaction. Edward K. Strong’s 1925 textbook subsequently established Lewis as the widely accepted inventor.
AIDA should therefore be understood as a cumulative product of early advertising and sales thought rather than the creation of one individual in one year.
Its historical influence is substantial. It contributed to hierarchy-of-effects research, DAGMAR, direct-response advertising, sales funnels and digital conversion optimisation.
Its limitations are equally clear. Consumer journeys are not universally linear. Purchase behaviour can precede preference, occur habitually or involve repeated feedback loops. The model omits product quality, price, distribution, post-purchase experience and long-term relationships.
The most appropriate modern use is therefore modest but meaningful. AIDA is a framework for organising persuasive communication, not a complete science of marketing.
It remains valuable when practitioners use it to connect attention with relevance, relevance with genuine value and value with a transparent next step.
After more than a century, the enduring question behind AIDA is not how to manipulate every consumer through four automatic stages. It is how communication can responsibly transform a moment of attention into an informed action and a satisfactory exchange.
References
Barry, T.E. (1987) ‘The development of the hierarchy of effects: An historical perspective’, Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 10(2), pp. 251–295.
Barry, T.E. and Howard, D.J. (1990) ‘A review and critique of the hierarchy of effects in advertising’, International Journal of Advertising, 9(2), pp. 121–135.
Colley, R.H. (1961) Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising Results. New York: Association of National Advertisers.
Ewen, S. (1976) Captains of Consciousness: Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer Culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hopkins, C.C. (1923) Scientific Advertising. New York: Lord & Thomas.
Iwamoto, A. (2023) ‘The origin of AIDA: Who invented and formulated the AIDA model?’, Proceedings of the Conference on Historical Analysis and Research in Marketing, 21, pp. 1–18.
Jones, F.A. (1971) ‘The origins of the salesmanship movement’, Journal of Marketing History, 1, pp. 1–21.
Kotler, P. and Keller, K.L. (2016) Marketing Management. 15th edn. Harlow: Pearson.
Lavidge, R.J. and Steiner, G.A. (1961) ‘A model for predictive measurements of advertising effectiveness’, Journal of Marketing, 25(6), pp. 59–62.
Lewis, E.St.E. (1899a) ‘Side talks about advertising’, The Western Druggist, 21, p. 66.
Lewis, E.St.E. (1899b) ‘Side talks about advertising’, The Western Druggist, 21, p. 70.
Lewis, E.St.E. (1908) Financial Advertising. Indianapolis: Levey Brothers.
Sheldon, A.F. (1911) Successful Selling. Chicago: Sheldon School.
Strong, E.K. (1925) The Psychology of Selling and Advertising. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tadajewski, M. (2016) ‘Critical marketing history’, in Jones, D.G.B. and Tadajewski, M. (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Marketing History. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp. 36–52.
Vakratsas, D. and Ambler, T. (1999) ‘How advertising works: What do we really know?’, Journal of Marketing, 63(1), pp. 26–43.
