Three items measure the level of doubt and uncertainty a consumer has with the veracity of some stimulus. In the study by Babin, Boles, and Darden (1995), the stimulus being evaluated was a car salesperson as described in some text. In the study by Taylor, Halstead, and Haynes (2010), the focus was on the "marketer" who supposedly had placed a certain ad in a telephone directory.
The scale is composed of four statements with a seven-point Likert-type response format and is intended to measure the degree to which a person is doubtful that a claim by a marketer is true.
Seven, seven-point Likert-type items are used to measure the degree to which a person believes that an advertisement contains price information that is not correct and, in fact, the retailer is intentionally trying to deceive consumers.
The nine item, five-point Likert-type scale measures a consumer's general disbelief of advertising claims. It is not intended to be specific to any one medium but, instead, to be a consumer's view of how the marketplace as a whole operates.
The scale is composed of ten, semantic differential phrases measuring a person's reaction to an ad he/she has been exposed to with the emphasis on the negative types of feelings that were experienced.
This measure is composed of several uni-polar items and is purported to measure the degree of negative feelings a consumer reports experiencing when exposed to a specific advertisement. The scale has been used over time with varying numbers of items.
There is an important distinction between this measure and attitude-toward-the-ad. As Mooradian stated in the directions used with his scale, subjects were to describe "reactions to the ad, not to how you would describe the ad" (1996, p. 101). Admittedly, there should be a high correspondence between the two but they are still theoretically distinct constructs.
