Dual Coding Theory, originally proposed by Paivio, posits that human cognition relies on two functionally independent but interconnected representational systems: a verbal system specialized for linguistic information and a nonverbal system specialized for imagery (Paivio, 1971). These systems differ in structure, processing characteristics, and representational units. Verbal representations are organized sequentially and are optimized for symbolic processing, whereas nonverbal representations are analogical and preserve perceptual features of objects and events. Information can be encoded in either system or in both simultaneously, a process referred to as dual coding. According to the theory, cognitive performance is enhanced when information is encoded in both systems, because it benefits from additive and partially independent retrieval paths (Paivio, 1986).

A central assumption of Dual Coding Theory is that the two systems are functionally distinct yet interconnected through referential links. These links allow activation in one system to elicit corresponding representations in the other, such as when a word evokes a mental image or when an image triggers a verbal label. Empirical work has consistently shown that concrete stimuli, which readily elicit imagery, are more likely to be dual coded than abstract stimuli, leading to superior memory performance. This concreteness effect has been robustly observed across tasks involving recall, recognition, and associative learning, and constitutes a cornerstone empirical validation of the theory (Paivio, 1971; Paivio, 1986).

Importantly, Dual Coding Theory does not claim that imagery and verbal processing are interchangeable or redundant. Instead, it emphasizes their complementary roles and predicts differential effects depending on task demands. Tasks requiring sequential or propositional processing should benefit more from verbal codes, whereas tasks involving spatial, perceptual, or holistic judgments should benefit more from imagery-based codes. Neurocognitive evidence has further supported the theoretical distinction between verbal and imagery processing, while remaining consistent with the assumption of inter-system connectivity rather than strict modularity (Paivio, 1991).

In marketing and advertising research, Dual Coding Theory has provided a foundational framework for understanding how consumers process and remember persuasive messages. Marketing communications that combine verbal claims with relevant visuals are more likely to be dual coded, thereby enhancing recall, recognition, and attitude formation. Empirical studies have shown that advertisements pairing concrete verbal information with imagery-consistent visuals yield superior memory and more favorable evaluations than text-only or incongruent formats (Childers & Houston, 1984). Visual elements can also facilitate comprehension by reducing cognitive load and supporting inferential processing, particularly for complex or unfamiliar products.

Furthermore, Dual Coding Theory helps explain variability in advertising effectiveness as a function of message concreteness and consumer processing goals. Imagery-rich executions are especially effective when the objective is to enhance memorability or evoke experiential responses, whereas predominantly verbal messages may be more suitable for analytical evaluations. Overall, the theory remains a well-established and parsimonious explanatory framework for the strategic integration of words and images in marketing communication.

References

Childers, T. L., & Houston, M. J. (1984). Conditions for a picture-superiority effect on consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(2), 643–654.

Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.

Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 255–287.