The Mere Exposure Effect: Why Familiar Wins, Even When It Shouldn’t

Bite-size: The more we see something, the more we tend to like it. This is the Mere Exposure Effect—a well-documented psychological phenomenon where repeated exposure to a stimulus increases our preference for it. First introduced by social psychologist Robert Zajonc in the 1960s, the idea is simple but powerful: familiarity breeds favorability, even without conscious awareness or evaluation.

For marketers, this principle is more than theory. It’s a quiet force behind brand preference, purchase intent, and customer loyalty.

Full-size:
Why It Matters in Marketing

In a world flooded with choices, people don’t stop to carefully weigh every option. They default to what feels familiar—what’s easy to recall, process, or recognize. That’s why repeated exposure works. It makes brands feel safe, trustworthy, even likable.

And yet, many marketers resist repetition. They worry that their message will get stale. That people will get bored. But the truth is: if you’re tired of your campaign, your audience is probably just starting to notice it.

Sticking with a message—visually, verbally, emotionally—is how brands move from awareness to preference. Repetition doesn’t kill creativity. It reinforces it.

Example: GEICO vs. Quibi

Consider GEICO, the insurance giant that’s spent years investing in offbeat, humorous campaigns featuring everything from geckos to cavemen. The ads don’t explain policies or push rational selling points. But they do make GEICO familiar. And that familiarity makes it top-of-mind when it’s finally time to shop for insurance.

Now contrast that with Quibi, the short-form video platform that launched with a $1.75 billion war chest and fizzled in less than a year. Despite the star-studded content and media buzz, the product was too unfamiliar—and the exposure window too short—for people to build any kind of meaningful connection.

Same with new logos, new taglines, new campaigns launched in quick succession. When you change the message too often, you reset the exposure clock before anything has a chance to stick.

So What?

We live in a world where attention is fragmented, fleeting, and increasingly expensive to earn. Consumers are bombarded with content, ads, and choices—scrolling past thousands of messages a day, barely registering most.

In that environment, clarity isn’t enough. Consistency isn’t enough. You need repetition.

The Mere Exposure Effect reminds us that people often choose what they recognize—not what they’ve scrutinized. It’s why reach and frequency still matter. Why sticking with the same message, visual system, or audio cue over time isn’t boring—it’s brand building.

The Pratfall Effect: When Mistakes Can Make (or Break) a Brand

Bite-size: Mistakes don’t always spell disaster. In fact, psychology tells us that small blunders can actually increase likability—a phenomenon known as the Pratfall Effect. When someone (or a brand) perceived as competent makes a harmless mistake, they become more relatable and endearing. However, when applied incorrectly, it can backfire, making a brand seem careless or inauthentic.

Full-size:
Let’s break down why the Pratfall Effect can be a powerful tool for marketers, where it works, and where it fails—using Coors Light’s Case of the Mondays campaign and KFC’s FCK apology as examples.

Why Brands Should Leverage the Pratfall Effect

1. It Humanizes the Brand
   Consumers connect with brands that feel real. KFC’s FCK campaign in 2018, responding to a supply chain disaster that left them without chicken, is a perfect example. Their self-deprecating apology—rearranging their logo to spell “FCK”—felt authentic and relatable. It made them seem accountable, self-aware, and ultimately more likable.

2. It Enhances Likeability Through Humor
   People enjoy brands that don’t take themselves too seriously. When a brand acknowledges a blunder with humor (instead of ignoring or over-explaining it), it creates a more approachable image. KFC’s playful response worked because the humor felt natural—it wasn’t a gimmick, it was a smart reaction to a real issue.

3. It Boosts Engagement and Talkability
   When executed well, a small, controlled mistake can spark conversation. The FCK campaign became a viral moment, with consumers and media outlets praising KFC’s response. The key? It was an actual problem they had to address, not a fabricated one.

When the Pratfall Effect Backfires

1. If the Mistake Feels Manufactured
   Coors Light’s Case of the Mondays campaign, launched during the 2025 Super Bowl, deliberately misspelled “refreshment” in outdoor ads to spark conversation. Unlike KFC’s FCK campaign, which addressed a real supply issue, Coors’ approach felt forced and gimmicky. Rather than making the brand more likable, it came off as a cheap attempt at engagement. If consumers sense a mistake is staged, they’re less likely to find it charming and more likely to feel manipulated.

2. If the Brand Isn’t Seen as “Competent” Enough
   The Pratfall Effect only works when a brand is already perceived as strong. KFC, despite its missteps, has a solid reputation and a loyal fan base. Coors Light, on the other hand, doesn’t hold the same prestige in the beer world—it's often seen as just another generic light beer. A deliberate typo didn’t humanize the brand; it just reinforced perceptions of carelessness rather than playfulness.

3. If It Comes Off as Disrespectful to Consumers
   There’s a fine line between being self-deprecating and looking down on your audience. KFC’s FCK campaign worked because it empathized with frustrated customers. Coors Light’s misspelled refreshment felt more like a joke on consumers rather than a joke with them. When brands try too hard to be clever, they risk alienating their audience instead of engaging them.