2021年，臺灣貓狗認養數量首度超越嬰兒出生數量，社會型態的轉變說明寵物越趨受到民眾的重視與關注。隨著寵物的崛起，寵物視覺也被大量運用在臺灣政壇中，2022年九合一選舉，男女候選人們紛紛推出加入寵物線索的競選廣告，有的將貓狗抱在懷裡，有的則將寵物作為廣告主視覺設計，希望藉此吸引選民關注。然而，寵物廣告的推出也引發選民對候選人的不同評價，一方給予讚賞，但也有一方質疑起候選人的工作能力，於是如何有效使用寵物線索於廣告中仍待釐清。
本研究透過三個實驗，首次從競選行銷的角度切入，結合意義移轉模型、社會判斷、性別刻板印象、概念隱喻理論等，探討廣告中加入寵物線索的效果。結果發現：（1）競選廣告加入寵物，會提升選民對候選人的溫暖感知，但降低能力感知；（2）於地方選舉，溫暖感知及能力感知對候選人的投票意願皆具重要影響力；（3）在溫暖提升的正向情境中，採用偏女性形象的寵物視覺線索能更為男性候選人加分；（4）在能力下降的負向情境中，採用性別形象與候選人性別相同的寵物視覺線索能減少對候選人的減分；（5）女性候選人使用女性形象犬有助於提升選民投票意願與候選人態度；（6）當廣告中的寵物小候選人大時，加入女性形象犬會提升候選人溫暖；（7）無論廣告中是寵物小候選人大或寵物大候選人小，加入女性或男性形象犬，皆不影響候選人能力；（8）當廣告中的寵物小候選人大時，加入女性形象犬會提升對候選人的投票意願和候選人態度。本研究在實驗法建構具有完整前後因果關聯的寵物政治廣告框架下，跨領域的讓意義移轉和社會判斷進行理論對話，並在瞭解寵物線索的侷限後，供廣告商和不同性別候選人參照寵物線索的使用條件與廣告上的搭配呈現方式，同時幫助選民瞭解競選廣告上寵物線索的影響機制，協助其更理性的做出投票決策。

In 2021, the number of cats and dogs adopted surpassed the number of newborn babies for the first time in Taiwan. The change in the social pattern shows that pets are getting more and more attention from the public. With the rise of pets, pet-related visual cues have also been widely utilized in Taiwan’s politics. In the 2022 nine-in-one elections, both male and female candidates launched campaign advertisements with pet cues. Some held cats and dogs in their arms, and some used pets as the main visual designs in their advertisements, hoping to attract voters’ attention. However, pet campaign advertising has also caused voters to evaluate the candidates differently. One side appreciates the candidates, but the other side questions the candidates’ competence in doing their jobs; therefore, how to effectively use pet clues in advertisements remains to be clarified.
Through three experiments, this study is the first time from the perspective of campaign marketing, combining the meaning transfer model, social judgments, gender stereotypes, and the conceptual metaphor theory, to explore the effects of adding pet cues in campaign advertisements. The results show: (1) Adding pets to campaign advertisements can improve voters’ perceived candidate’s warmth, but weaken their perceived candidate’s competence; (2) In local elections, perceived warmth and competence of candidates have an important influence on voters’ voting intention towards candidates; (3) In the positive contexts of improving perceived warmth, applying pet visual cues with feminine imagery scores extra points for male candidates; (4) In the negative contexts of weakening perceived candidate’s competence, using pet visual cues that bears the same sex (feminine or masculine) imagery as the candidate can ease the popularity declination of the candidate; (5) Female candidates using dogs with feminine imagery is helpful to improve voting intention and attitudes towards candidates; (6) When the pet appears to be smaller than the candidate in the advertisement, adding dogs with feminine imagery will enhance the perceived warmth of the candidate; (7) Whether the pet appears to be bigger or smaller than the candidate in the advertisement, adding dogs with feminine or masculine imagery will not affect the perceived candidate’s competence; (8) When the pet appears to be smaller than the candidate in the advertisement, adding dog with feminine imagery will improve the voters’ voting intention and attitudes toward the candidate. In this study, under the framework of experimental construction of pet political advertisements with a complete causal relationship, a theoretical dialogue is conducted between cross-domain meaning transfer and social judgment. After understanding the limitations of pet cues, advertisers and candidates of different genders can refer to the conditions of using pet cues and the collocation presentation in advertisements. The results also help voters to understand the influencing mechanism of pet cues in campaign advertisements, thereby helping them making more rational voting decisions.

論文審定書 i
謝誌 ii
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 iv
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 4
第三節 研究問題 8
第四節 研究目的 8
第五節 研究範圍 9
第二章 文獻回顧 12
第一節 動物運用 12
第二節 社會判斷 21
第三節 性別刻板印象 27
第四節 概念隱喻 32
第三章 研究架構與假說 43
第一節 研究架構 43
第二節 假說推論 44
第四章 研究概述 53
第一節 樣本與實驗設計 53
第二節 實驗情境、刺激與前測 55
第五章 實驗一 65
第一節 樣本與實驗設計 65
第二節 實驗刺激與程序 65
第三節 變數衡量 67
第四節 分析結果 70
第五節 討論 88
第六章 實驗二 94
第一節 樣本與實驗設計 94
第二節 實驗刺激與程序 95
第三節 變數衡量 96
第四節 分析結果 98
第五節 討論 122
第七章 實驗三 127
第一節 樣本與實驗設計 127
第二節 實驗刺激與程序 127
第三節 變數衡量 129
第四節 分析結果 130
第五節 討論 152
第八章 結論與建議 157
第一節 研究發現 157
第二節 研究意涵 161
第三節 研究限制及未來研究方向 171
參考文獻 176
附錄一　前測問卷 195
附錄二　正式實驗問卷 218

一、中文文獻
古芙仙、許文男（2018年11月30日）。陳其邁開直播 愛貓"陳小米"亂入暴紅。華視新聞網。取自https://news.cts.com.tw/cts/politics/201811/201811301944591.html。
行政院（2021）。國情簡介-政治、國防、外交。取自：https://www.ey.gov.tw/state/62879155A536D543/c78552af-72f4-45ef-bb89-a044cf2f3f1c。
吳靜君（2021年3月9日）。毛小孩遽增今年恐超越真小孩。中時新聞網。取自https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20210307000362-260102?chdtv。
呂妍庭（2019）。九頭身美女立委候選人抱愛貓拍選舉看板　市民眼睛一亮。中時新聞網。取自https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20191221002905-260407?chdtv。
卓宜姿（2019年12月23日）。2020決戰中臺灣！蔡、韓對決「這些人」是關鍵。TVBS新聞網。取自https://news.tvbs.com.tw/politics/1252921
周軒逸（2016）。小小改變、大大不同：競選廣告細微變化的神奇作用。科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告（編號：MOST 104-2410-H-110-027-SSS），未出版。
周軒逸（2021）。幽默非幽默反駁之相對效果：候選人核心形象之干擾。新聞學研究，149，51-112。
周軒逸、練乃華 （2010）。時間距離對負面競選廣告效果之影響。臺灣民主季刊，7(2)，33-76。
林佳賢、蔡立勳（2019年12月31日）。2020總統大選藍綠攻防戰　800萬中間選民在哪？。天下雜誌。取自https://web.cw.com.tw/taiwan-swing-districts/index.html。
洪立文（2020年11月05日）。臺灣「搖擺縣市」在哪？網一面倒狂點這2地。華視新聞網。取自https://news.cts.com.tw/cts/life/202011/202011052019503.html。
財政部統計處（2019年9月19日）。財政統計通報（第17號）。取自https://www.mof.gov.tw/download/21589。
張純端、王欣怡（2020）。「物大」便是美？探討廣告產品圖像與模特兒大小比例與品牌關係類型對廣告效果的影響。臺大管理論叢，30(1)，131-161。
張嘉哲（2018年10月20日）。蠢羊打造桃園超狂競選看板！被打槍的更爆笑。新頭殼新聞網。取自https://newtalk.tw/news/view/2018-10-20/155321。
黃伊玲（2019年10月2日）。【十大犬系男友】他屬哪類型？柴犬是暖男　哥基不靠樣俘虜女生心。香港01。取自https://www.hk01.com/sns/article/380022?utm_source=01articlecopy&utm_medium=referral。
黃信維（2019）。增加堵訪、強化肢體加重語氣！競選看板精心設計　蔡陣營要讓蔡英文「確實變大聲」。風傳媒。取自：https://www.storm.mg/article/1980859。
資策會產業情報研究所（2020年9月1日）。近七成網友曾養寵物Z世代與未婚族是潛力飼主。資策會產業情報研究所。取自https://mic.iii.org.tw/news.aspx?id=576。
雷勝雲（2018）。選戰「笑」應：笑容類型與真實性對競選看板廣告效果之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中山大學，高雄市。
監察院（2020）。109年總統、副總統選舉政治獻金收支結算表。取自https://reurl.cc/5r2GMG。
劉珮芬（2020年5月1日）。全國首見！頑固柴柴居然通過「國際搜救犬認證」飼主：全靠一句秘訣。自由時報。取自https://playing.ltn.com.tw/article/23142/1。
蔡佩蓉、洪欣慈、謝汶均（2018）。我的存款夠不夠參選？遊戲告訴你選舉多燒錢。聯合新聞網。取自https://udn.com/upf/newmedia/2018_data/2018election/game1/。
蔣婕妤（2020）。超萌！陳其邁競選看板成「配角」　主角是「貓」超搶戲。ETtoday新聞雲。取自https://www.ettoday.net/news/20200720/1764934.htm。

二、英文文獻
Aaker, J., Vohs, K. D., & Mogilner, C. (2010). Nonprofits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 224-237.
Abele, A. E., Cuddy, A. J. C., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2008). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(7), 1063-1065.
Åkestam, N., Rosengren, S., Dahlén, M., Liljedal, K. T., & Berg, H. (2021). Gender stereotypes in advertising have negative cross-gender effects. European Journal of Marketing, 55(13), 63-93.
American Kennel Club (n.d.). Maltese. Retrieved October 9, 2022, from https://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/maltese/
Amiot, C., Bastian, B., & Martens, P. (2016). People and companion animals: It takes two to tango. BioScience, 66(7), 552-560.
Atkinson, M. D., Deam, M., & Uscinski, J. E. (2014). What’s a dog story worth?. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47(4), 819-823.
Barone, M. J., Coulter, K. S., & Li, X. (2020). The upside of down: Presenting a price in a low or high location influences how consumers evaluate it. Journal of Retailing, 96(3), 397-410.
Batra, R. (2019). Creating brand meaning: A review and research agenda. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 29(3), 535-546.
Bauer, N. M. (2017). The effects of counterstereotypic gender strategies on candidate evaluations. Political Psychology, 38(2), 279-295.
Bauer, N. M., & Carpinella, C. (2018). Visual information and candidate evaluations: The influence of feminine and masculine images on support for female candidates. Political Research Quarterly, 71(2), 395-407.
Bauer, N. M., & Santia, M. (2022). Going Feminine: Identifying How and When Female Candidates Emphasize Feminine and Masculine Traits on the Campaign Trail. Political Research Quarterly, 75(3), 691-705.
Bellman, S., Nenycz-Thiel, M., Kennedy, R., Hartnett, N., & Varan, D. (2019). Best measures of attention to creative tactics in TV advertising: When do attention-getting devices capture or reduce attention?. Journal of Advertising Research, 59(3), 295-311.
Bennett, A. M., & Hill, R. P. (2012). The universality of warmth and competence: A response to brands as intentional agents. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(2), 199-204.
Bennett, A. M., Malone, C., Cheatham, K., & Saligram, N. (2019). The impact of perceptions of politician brand warmth and competence on voting intentions. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 28(2), 256-273.
Brader, T. (2005). Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 388-405.
Bray, E. E., Otto, C. M., Udell, M. A., Hall, N. J., Johnston, A. M., & MacLean, E. L. (2021). Enhancing the selection and performance of working dogs. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 8, 644431.
Brooks, D. J. (2011). Testing the double standard for candidate emotionality: Voter reactions to the tears and anger of male and female politicians. The Journal of Politics, 73(2), 597-615.
Brown, S. E. (2004). The human-animal bond and self psychology: Toward a new understanding. Society & Animals, 12(1), 67-86.
Bruce, N. I., Becker, M., & Reinartz, W. (2020). Communicating brands in television advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(2), 236-256.
Burghardt, W. F. (2003). Behavioral considerations in the management of working dogs. Veterinary Clinics: Small Animal Practice, 33(2), 417-446.
Burton, L., & Collins, F. L. (2015). Mediated animal geographies: Symbolism, manipulation and the imaginary in advertising. Social & Cultural Geography, 16(3), 276-298.
Callahan, M. M., Satterfield, T., & Zhao, J. (2021). Into the animal mind: Perceptions of emotive and cognitive traits in animals. Anthrozoös, 34(4), 597-614.
Carpinella, C., & Bauer, N. M. (2021). A visual analysis of gender stereotypes in campaign advertising. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 9(2), 369-386.
Carpinella, C. M., & Johnson, K. L. (2013). Politics of the face: The role of sex-typicality in trait assessments of politicians. Social Cognition, 31(6), 770-779.
Castelli, L., Carraro, L., Ghitti, C., & Pastore, M. (2009). The effects of perceived competence and sociability on electoral outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(5), 1152-1155.
Castillo-Mayén, R. (2014). Analysis of current gender stereotypes. Anales de psicología, 30(3), 1044-1060.
Cautela, J. R., & McCullough, L. (1978). Covert conditioning: A learning theory perspective on imagery. In J. L. Singer & K. S. Pope (Eds.), The Power of Human Imagination (pp. 227-250). New York: Plenum.
Cavanaugh, L. A., Leonard, H. A., & Scammon, D. L. (2008). A tail of two personalities: How canine companions shape relationships and well-being. Journal of Business Research, 61(5), 469-479.
Chae, B., Li, X., & Zhu, R. (2013). Judging product effectiveness from perceived spatial proximity. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(2), 317-335.
Chang, Y., Li, Y., Yan, J., & Kumar, V. (2019). Getting more likes: The impact of narrative person and brand image on customer-brand interactions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(6), 1027-1045.
Charlesworth, T. E., & Banaji, M. R. (2021). Patterns of implicit and explicit stereotypes III: Long-term change in gender stereotypes. Social Psychological and Personality Science,13(1), 14-26.
Chiao, J. Y., Bowman, N. E., & Gill, H. (2008). The political gender gap: Gender bias in facial inferences that predict voting behavior. PLoS ONE, 3(10), e3666.
Chou, H. Y. (2019). Labeling candidates as underdogs in political communications: The moderation of candidate-related factors. Electoral Studies, 59, 120-135.
Chou, H. Y. (2020). Effects of pronoun use in campaign advertisements on young Taiwanese voters. Chinese Journal of Communication, 13(2), 165-186.
Chu, K., Lee, D.-H., & Kim, J. Y. (2016). The effect of non-stereotypical gender role advertising on consumer evaluation. International Journal of Advertising, 35(1), 106-134.
Cian, L., Krishna, A., & Schwarz, N. (2015). Positioning rationality and emotion: Rationality is up and emotion is down. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(4), 632-651.
Cobb, M., Branson, N., McGreevy, P., Lill, A., & Bennett, P. (2015). The advent of canine performance science: Offering a sustainable future for working dogs. Behavioural Processes, 110, 96-104.
Coronel, J. C., Moore, R. C., & deBuys, B. (2020). Do gender cues from images supersede partisan cues conveyed via text? Eye movements reveal political stereotyping in multimodal information environments. Political Communication, 38 (3), 1-24.
Dahl, D. W., Argo, J. J., & Morales, A. C. (2012). Social information in the retail environment: The importance of consumption alignment, referent identity, and self-esteem. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(5), 860-871.
de Boer, N. (2020). How do citizens assess street‐level bureaucrats’ warmth and competence? A typology and test. Public Administration Review, 80(4), 532-542.
De Meulenaer, S., Dens, N., De Pelsmacker, P., & Eisend, M. (2018). How consumers' values influence responses to male and female gender role stereotyping in advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 37(6), 893-913.
Delouya, S. (2022, Jul 14). Nearly half of Gen Z is using TikTok and Instagram for search instead of Google, according to Google's own data. INSIDER. https://www.businessinsider.com/nearly-half-genz-use-tiktok-instagram-over-google-search-2022-7
Dessart, L. (2018). Do ads that tell a story always perform better? The role of character identification and character type in storytelling ads. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 35(2), 289-304.
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1171-1188.
DogTime Media (n.d.). Maltese. Retrieved October 9, 2022, from https://dogtime.com/dog-breeds/maltese#/slide/1
Dolan, K., & Lynch, T. (2014). It takes a survey: Understanding gender stereotypes, abstract attitudes, and voting for women candidates. American Politics Research, 42(4), 656-676.
Dotson, M. J., & Hyatt, E. M. (2008). Understanding dog-human companionship. Journal of Business Research, 61(5), 457-466.
Eagly, A. H., Nater, C., Miller, D. I., Kaufmann, M., & Sczesny, S. (2020). Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of US public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist, 75(3), 301-315.
Economist Intelligence Unit(2021). Democracy Index 2020: In sickness and in health?. Retrieved from https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2020/
Eddy, T. J., Gallup Jr, G. G., & Povinelli, D. J. (1993). Attribution of cognitive states to animals: Anthropomorphism in comparative perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 49(1), 87-101.
Ehrlich, M. C. (2016). Taking animal news seriously: Cat tales in the New York Times. Journalism, 17(3), 366-381.
Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 275-298.
Faber, R. J., Tims, A. R., & Schmitt, K. G. (1993). Negative political advertising and voting intent: The role of involvement and alternative information sources. Journal of Advertising, 22(4), 67-76.
Ferreira Da Silva, F., & Costa, P. (2019). Do we need warm leaders? Exploratory study of the role of voter evaluations of leaders’ traits on turnout in seven european countries. European Journal of Political Research, 58(1), 117-140.
Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421-435.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77-83.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878-902.
Foreman-Worsley, R., Finka, L. R., Ward, S. J., & Farnworth, M. J. (2021). Indoors or outdoors? An international exploration of owner demographics and decision making associated with lifestyle of pet cats. Animals, 11(2), 253.
Fox, R., & Gee, N. R. (2016). Changing conceptions of care: Humanization of the companion animal-human relationship. Society & Animals, 24(2), 107-128.
Fragale, A. R., Overbeck, J. R., & Neale, M. A. (2011). Resources versus respect: Social judgments based on targets' power and status positions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 767-775.
Freedman, P., Franz, M., & Goldstein, K. (2004). Campaign advertising and democratic citizenship. American Journal of Political Science, 48(4), 723-741.
Funk, C. L. (1997). Implications of political expertise in candidate trait evaluations. Political Research Quarterly, 50(3), 675-697.
Gazzano, A., Zilocchi, M., Massoni, E., & Mariti, C. (2013). Dogs' features strongly affect people's feelings and behavior toward them. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 8(4), 213-220.
Goldschmied, N., & Vandello, J. A. (2009). The advantage of disadvantage: Underdogs in the political arena. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31(1), 24-31.
Gordon, A., Shafie, D. M., & Crigler, A. N. (2003). Is negative advertising effective for female candidates? An experiment in voters' uses of gender stereotypes. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8(3), 35-53.
Guinote, A. (2017). How power affects people: Activating, wanting, and goal seeking. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 353-381.
Hasty, C., & Maner, J. K. (2020). Power, status, and social judgment. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 1-5.
He, X., Chen, J., Zhang, E., & Li, J. (2015). Bidirectional associations of power and size in a priming task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 290-300.
He, J. C., Kang, S. K., Tse, K., & Toh, S. M. (2019). Stereotypes at work: Occupational stereotypes predict race and gender segregation in the workforce. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, 103318.
Hediger, R. (2012). Timothy Treadwell’s Grizzly love as freak show: The uses of animals, science, and film. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 19, 82-100.
Herzog, H. A. (2007). Gender differences in human-animal interactions: A review. Anthrozoös, 20(1), 7-21.
Herrnson, P. S., Lay, J. C., & Stokes, A. K. (2003). Women running “as women”: Candidate gender, campaign issues, and voter-targeting strategies. The Journal of Politics, 65(1), 244-255.
Huddy, L., & Terkildsen, N. (1993). Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 119-147.
Illicit Encounters (2017, August 8). Cat owners are most likely to cheat, while dog owners are the most faithful. Illicit Encounters. https://illicitencounterspress.wordpress.com/2017/08/08/cat-owners-are-most-likely-to-cheat-while-dog-owners-are-the-most-faithful/
Iyengar, S., & Simon, A. F. (2000). New perspectives and evidence on political communication and campaign effects. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 149-169.
Jacobson, G. C. (2015). How do campaigns matter?. Annual Review of Political Science, 18, 31-47.
Jha, S., Balaji, M. S., Peck, J., Oakley, J., & Deitz, G. D. (2020). The effects of environmental haptic cues on consumer perceptions of retailer warmth and competence. Journal of Retailing, 96(4), 590-605.
Jia, L., Yang, X., & Jiang, Y. (2022). The Pet Exposure Effect: Exploring the Differential Impact of Dogs Versus Cats on Consumer Mindsets. Journal of Marketing, 86(5), 42-57.
Judd, C. M., James-Hawkins, L., Yzerbyt, V., & Kashima, Y. (2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 899-913.
Karl, K. L. (2021). Motivating participation through political ads: Comparing the effects of physiology and self-reported emotion. Political Behavior, 43, 687-710.
Kennedy, P. F., & McGarvey, M. G. (2008). Animal-companion depictions in women's magazine advertising. Journal of Business Research, 61(5), 424-430.
Kim, M. (2019). Digital product presentation, information processing, need for cognition and behavioral intent in digital commerce. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50, 362-370.
Kim, J., Lim, J. S., & Bhargava, M. (1998). The role of affect in attitude formation: A classical conditioning approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), 143-152.
Kim, M., & Lennon, S. (2008). The effects of visual and verbal information on attitudes and purchase intentions in internet shopping. Psychology & Marketing, 25(2), 146-178.
Knapen, J. E., Pollet, T. V., & van Vugt, M. (2019). When better seems bigger: Perceived performance of adult professional football players is positively associated with perceptions of their body size. Evolutionary Psychology, 17(2), 1-13.
Koch, T., & Obermaier, M. (2016). With heart and (no) mind? How recipients negatively infer missing information about politicians and how this affects the assessment of the speaker. Communication Research, 43(7), 972-995.
Ksiazkiewicz, A., Vitriol, J., & Farhart, C. (2018). Implicit candidate‐trait associations in political campaigns. Political Psychology, 39(1), 177-195.
Kulczynski, A., Ilicic, J., & Baxter, S. M. (2016). When your source is smiling, consumers may automatically smile with you: Investigating the source expressive display hypothesis. Psychology & Marketing, 33(1), 5-19.
Laebens, M. G., & Öztürk, A. (2021). Partisanship and autocratization: polarization, power asymmetry, and partisan social identities in Turkey. Comparative Political Studies, 54(2), 245-279.
Lakoff, G. (2014). Mapping the brain’s metaphor circuitry: Is abstract thought metaphorical thought. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 958.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. The Journal of Philosophy, 77(8), 453-486.
Lancendorfer, K. M., Atkin, J. L., & Reece, B. B. (2008). Animals in advertising: Love dogs? Love the ad!. Journal of Business Research, 61(5), 384-391.
Landau, M. J., Meier, B. P., & Keefer, L. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1045-1067.
Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 46-70.
Lau, R., & Redlawsk, D. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 951-971.
Laustsen, L., & Bor, A. (2017). The relative weight of character traits in political candidate evaluations: Warmth is more important than competence, leadership and integrity. Electoral Studies, 49, 96-107.
Lee, Y. K. (2014). Gender stereotypes as a double-edged sword in political advertising: Persuasion effects of campaign theme and advertising style. International Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 203-234.
Lerner, J. E., & Kalof, L. (1999). The animal text: Message and meaning in television advertisements. Sociological Quarterly, 40(4), 565-586.
Li, X., Chan, K. W., & Kim, S. (2019). Service with emoticons: How customers interpret employee use of emoticons in online service encounters. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(5), 973-987.
Li, M., Mai, Z., Wang, S., Feng, T., Van Overwalle, F., & Ma, N. (2021). Warmth is more influential than competence: An fMRI repetition suppression study. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 15(1), 266-275.
Lin, Y., & Oyserman, D. (2021). Upright and honorable: People use space to understand honor, affecting choice and perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(1), 3-19.
Lukaszewski, A. W., Simmons, Z. L., Anderson, C., & Roney, J. R. (2016). The role of physical formidability in human social status allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3), 385-406.
Lynch Jr, J. G., & Srull, T. K. (1982). Memory and attentional factors in consumer choice: Concepts and research methods. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 18-37.
MacInnis, D. J., & Price, L. L. (1987). The role of imagery in information processing: Review and extensions. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 473-491.
Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 93-120.
Madsen, J. K. (2019). Voter reasoning bias when evaluating statements from female and male political candidates. Politics & Gender, 15(2), 310-335.
Maglio, S. J., & Feder, M. A. (2017). The making of social experience from the sounds in names. Social Cognition, 35(6), 663-674.
Maltzman, F., Lebovic, J. H., Saunders, E. N., & Furth, E. (2012). Unleashing presidential power: The politics of pets in the white house. PS, Political Science & Politics, 45(3), 395-400.
Marchetti-Mercer, M. C. (2019). The role of companion animals in the process of emigration a family rerspective. Society & Animals, 28(1), 81-100.
Martin, A. E., & Slepian, M. L. (2020). The primacy of gender: gendered cognition underlies the big two dimensions of social cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1-16.
McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 71-84.
McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement process. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), 310-321.
Meier, B. P., Moeller, S. K., Riemer-Peltz, M., & Robinson, M. D. (2012). Sweet taste preferences and experiences predict prosocial inferences, personalities, and behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1), 163-174.
Miller, F. M., & Allen, C. T. (2012). How does celebrity meaning transfer? Investigating the process of meaning transfer with celebrity affiliates and mature brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 443-452.
Min, Y. (2004). News coverage of negative political campaigns: An experiment of negative campaign effects on turnout and candidate preference. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 9(4), 95-111.
Morini, M. (2018). 'Animals first!' the rise of animal advocacy parties in the EU: A new party family. Contemporary Politics, 24(4), 418-435.
Mutz, D. C. (2010). The dog that didn't bark: The role of canines in the 2008 campaign. PS: Political Science and Politics, 43(4), 707-712.
Naomi, E. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annu Rev Psychol, 69(1), 275-298.
Nownes, A. J. (2017). Celebrity endorsements and voter emotions: Evidence from two experiments. American Politics Research, 45(4), 648-672.
O'Connell, D. (2020). The dynamics of congressional popularity on Instagram. Online Information Review, 44 (5), 995-1011.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
Partridge, B., & Rossmeisl Jr, J. H. (2020). Companion animal models of neurological disease. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 331, 108484.
Pease, A., & Brewer, P. R. (2008). The Oprah factor: The effects of a celebrity endorsement in a presidential primary campaign. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(4), 386-400.
Percy, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (1983). Effects of picture size and color on brand attitude responses in print advertising. ACR North American Advances, 10(1), 17-20.
Peterson, A. L. (2018). Canine Rescue as a Social Movement: The Politics of Love. Society & Animals, 28(5-6), 670-687.
Phillips, B. J. (1996). Advertising and the cultural meaning of animals. Advances in Consumer Research, 23 (1), 354-360.
Pongrácz, P., & Szapu, J. S. (2018). The socio-cognitive relationship between cats and humans-companion cats (felis catus) as their owners see them. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 207, 57-66.
Putrevu, S. (2008). Consumer responses toward sexual and nonsexual appeals: The influence of involvement, need for cognition (NFC), and gender. Journal of Advertising, 37(2), 57-69.
Rooney, N. J., & Sargan, D. R. (2010). Welfare concerns associated with pedigree dog breeding in the UK. Animal Welfare, 19(5), 133-140.
Rossiter, J. R., & Percy, L. (1978). Visual imaging ability as a mediator of advertising response. Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 621-629.
Sanders, C. R. (2003). Actions speak louder than words: Close relationships between humans and nonhuman animals. Symbolic Interaction, 26(3), 405-426.
Sapiro, V., Cramer Walsh, K., Strach, P., & Hennings, V. (2011). Gender, context, and television advertising: A comprehensive analysis of 2000 and 2002 House races. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 107-119.
Schneider, M. C. (2014a). Gender-based strategies on candidate websites. Journal of Political Marketing, 13(4), 264-290.
Schneider, M. C. (2014b). The effects of gender-bending on candidate evaluations. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 35(1), 55-77.
Schubert, T. W. (2020). Grounding of rank: Embodiment, space, and magnitude. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 222-226.
Schubert, T. W., Waldzus, S., & Giessner, S. R. (2009). Control over the association of power and size. Social Cognition, 27(1), 1-19.
Serpell, J. (2003). Anthropomorphism and anthropomorphic selection—beyond the" cute response". Society & Animals, 11(1), 83-100.
Sevillano, V., & Fiske, S. T. (2016a). Animals as social objects. European Psychologist, 21(3), 206-217.
Sevillano, V., & Fiske, S. T. (2016b). Warmth and competence in animals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(5), 276-293.
Sevillano, V., & Fiske, S. T. (2019). Stereotypes, emotions, and behaviors associated with animals: A causal test of the stereotype content model and BIAS map. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(6), 879-900.
Shen, Y. (1999). Principles of metaphor interpretation and the notion of ‘domain’: A proposal for a hybrid model. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(12), 1631-1653.
Sonntag, Q., & Overall, K. L. (2014). Key determinants of dog and cat welfare: Behaviour, breeding and household lifestyle. Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics), 33(1), 213-220.
Spears, N., & Germain, R. (2007). 1900-2000 in review: The shifting role and face of animals in print advertisements in the twentieth century. Journal of Advertising, 36(3), 19-33.
Spears, N. E., Mowen, J. C., & Chakraborty, G. (1996). Symbolic role of animals in print advertising: Content analysis and conceptual development. Journal of Business Research, 37(2), 87-95.
Sundar, A., & Noseworthy, T. J. (2014). Place the logo high or low? Using conceptual metaphors of power in packaging design. Journal of Marketing, 78(5), 138-151.
Swigger, N., & Meyer, M. (2019). Gender essentialism and responses to candidates’ messages. Political Psychology, 40(4), 719-738.
Thorson, E., Ognianova, E., Coyle, J., & Denton, F. (2000). Negative political ads and negative citizen orientations toward politics. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 22(1), 13-40.
Tourangeau, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (1982). Understanding and appreciating metaphors. Cognition, 11(3), 203-244.
Trivedi, R. H., & Teichert, T. (2020). Consumer reactions to animal and human models in print ads: How animals and people in ads influence the purchase-decision journey. Journal of Advertising Research, 60(4), 426-438.
Wang, Z., Mao, H., Li, Y. J., & Liu, F. (2017). Smile big or not? Effects of smile intensity on perceptions of warmth and competence. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), 787-805.
Xue, J., Zhou, Z., Zhang, L., & Majeed, S. (2020). Do brand competence and warmth always influence purchase intention? The moderating role of gender. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 248.
Yoon, K., Pinkleton, B. E., & Ko, W. (2005). Effects of negative political advertising on voting intention: An exploration of the roles of involvement and source credibility in the development of voter cynicism. Journal of Marketing Communications, 11(2), 95-112.
Zhang, Y., Kwak, H., Jeong, H., & Puzakova, M. (2019). Facing the “right” side? The effect of product facing direction. Journal of Advertising, 48(2), 153-166.
Zhang, K., Li, S., & Ng, S. (2022). Sizes are gendered: The effect of size cues in brand names on brand stereotyping. Journal of Consumer Research, 49(2), 252-267.