523  2007 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc. ● Vol. 33 ● March 2007 All rights reserved. 0093-5301/2007/3304-0012$10.00 The Influence of Experience and Sequence of Conflicting Emotions on Ad Attitudes APARNA A. LABROO SURESH RAMANATHAN* Two experiments suggest that when participants evaluate an ad, they prefer im- proving ad emotions, because attitudes are based on an assessment of whether the emotions deviate positively or negatively from previous levels of emotions. In contrast, when emotions are experienced, positive emotions facilitate coping with later negativity, and an ad with declining (vs. improving) emotions results in more favorable attitudes. This beneficial effect of experienced positive emotions in re- ducing the impact of subsequent negative emotions is reversed when the positive emotions are allowed to dissipate over a time delay between the experiences of the two emotions. A n ad for one-a-day multivitamins employs a narrator presenting unpleasant information on bone loss fol- lowed by positive information about healthiness from the supplement. In contrast, an ad for aspirin evokes positive feelings about a wedding and then induces negative emo- tions about death and how the bride’s father could attend the wedding only because aspirin saved his life during a recent heart attack. Such advertisements portraying conflict- ing emotions in sequence—negative then positive or positive then negative—are not uncommon, and research on mixed emotions is of growing interest (Larsen, McGraw, and Ca- cioppo 2001; Priester and Petty 1996). For example, we now know that the use of emotions (vs. not) in ad appeals is beneficial because it garners attention but also that con- flicting (vs. pure) ad emotions make consumers unhappy and reduce persuasion (Williams and Aaker 2002). In such studies, emotions are induced in a mixed manner (each ad statement has positive and negative aspects); however, if the emotions are sorted by valence (the ad contains all positive and then all negative aspects, or the reverse), it is not clear *Aparna A. Labroo (aparna.labroo@chicagoGSB.edu) is assistant profes- sor of marketing, and Suresh Ramanathan (suresh.ramanathan@chicagoGSB .edu) is associate professor of marketing at the Graduate School of Busi- ness, University of Chicago, 5807 S. Woodlawn Ave., Chicago, IL 60637. Support to the two authors from the Beatrice Foods Co. Research Fund and the James M. Kilts Center for Marketing, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, is gratefully acknowledged. The two authors con- tributed equally to this research, and authorship is alphabetical. The authors thank the editor, associate editor, and the three reviewers of this manuscript for their suggestions. Dawn Iacobucci served as editor and Gita V. Johar served as associate editor for this article. Electronically published December 12, 2006 whether the sequence of emotions will affect persuasion differently. Although a normative assumption suggests that as long as the total emotional content across ads is the same the sequence of emotions will not matter, some research in non- advertising contexts shows that improving (vs. declining) sequences will be preferred. For instance, Loewenstein and Prelec (1993) report that consumers prefer a fancy dinner to follow an ordinary one over the converse. Reportedly, recent emotions affect judgment to a greater extent than earlier ones (Fredrickson and Kahneman 1993; Lau-Gesk 2005), and positive (negative) departures from the current affect level are judged as favorable (unfavorable). Also, the evaluation of affective outcomes is marked by contrast ef- fects, and preceding events affect the perception of subse- quent ones. Positive (negative) events appear more positive (negative) when preceded by negative (positive) ones than not (Olsen and Pracejus 2004). Furthermore, negative emo- tions signal change, and positive emotions signal safety (Schwarz and Clore 1983); thus, improving (vs. declining) emotions are more positive because they signal that the prior (negative) problem state has been resolved. However, other studies suggest that declining (vs. improving) emotions will be preferred. For example, Raghunathan and Trope (2002) report that positive (vs. not positive) feelings enhance per- suasion from negative self-relevant ad messages, and Fred- rickson and Joiner (2002) report that participants instructed (vs. not instructed) to find positive meaning in their lives develop psychological resistance against adverse events. Positive emotions trigger positive thoughts that help people overcome the emotional costs of negative information and cope with stressful experiences (Aspinwall 1998; Fredrick- son 1998). Positive emotions also distract attention away from threatening information (Bower 1981) by suggesting