which occasions an emotional response. Based on the empirical results of Lang's emotion theory, we may conclude that response information elicits a stronger emotional response than stimulus information. Therefore the first hypothesis is: H1: Stimulus and response information elicits a stronger appraisal and emotional experience than mere stimulus information. Regarding visual pursuasion the model suggests that enactive imagery is an experiential processing strategy with elaborated cognitions. H2: Enactive imagery has a stronger potency to elicit appraisal and emotional experience than nonenactive imagery. This can be explained because subjects who imagine themselves interacting with a situation have to activate relevant experience schemas. On the contrary, nonenactive imagery is more detached— that is, the self-experience schemas are not involved, so that it is less likely that the emotion network and corresponding knowledge structures will be activated. The MIP model takes imagery processing, memories, and emotional experiences (e.g., feelings) as interrelated concepts. A person can, for example, renew feelings (as opposed to simply recalling them) by mentally reliving an event that has already happened. The more vivid is the reliving, the stronger is the affect experienced. In such a case, the affect would not simply be retrieved from memory, it would be regenerated (Frijda, 1988). In a marketing context, the vividness of message information is assumed to influence consumers' evaluations or judgments. Information may be described as vivid, that is, as likely to attract and hold attention and to excite the imagination to the extent that it is: (a) emotionally interesting, (b) concrete ande imagery provoking, and (c) proximate in a sensory, temporal, or spatial way (McGill & Anand, 1989, p. 188). Marketers can use these ingredients in visual advertising, in order to stimulate enactive imagery. Finally, the model can be considered as a framework for future research on visual persuasion and experiential processing.