AIDA, AIDCA, ACCA, PAS, PASO and SLAP

A copywriting formula is an order of questions a text answers. AIDA leads from attention to action, PAS from problem to solution; AIDCA and PASO extend them.

What a formula is, and what it doesn’t do

A formula in copywriting is an order of questions the reader gets answered. A reader arriving at a page wants to know what it is about and whether it is for them, then why they should care, then whether they can believe it, then what to do. Formulas fix such orders, so that the author needn’t invent a structure from scratch each time.

Three warnings, so that a formula doesn’t become a crutch.

• A formula is a skeleton, not a text. A “desire” block with no facts about your offer is an empty line. Everything alive, the reader’s words, your proofs, your numbers, comes from your brief.
• The reader needn’t climb the steps. All the formulas in this lesson come from the “hierarchy of effects” theory: a person supposedly passes one step after another. A 1999 review by the advertising researchers Vakratsas and Ambler found no convincing evidence that this is what really happens. People reach for the button before they’ve wanted to, read from the middle, and come back. So a formula is applied to each block of a page separately, not to the page as a tunnel.
• A formula doesn’t replace honesty. Whatever you write, you answer for every word to the reader and to advertising law. “The formula said so” is no defense.

The six formulas of the lesson are related. AIDCA is AIDA plus a link; PASO is PAS plus a link; ACCA is a close relative of AIDA, set to a different task. So they are easy to learn in pairs.

Before taking them one at a time, open the diagram. It lays the formulas out on your brief: the lines “From your brief” come from your data. And the “Guess the formula” tab tests whether you can tell them apart by ear.

Lay it out on the brief Guess the formula

AIDAAIDCAACCAPASPASOSLAP

AIDA: attention, interest, desire, action

Where from. The oldest of the formulas. The American advertising man Elias St. Elmo Lewis (1872 to 1948) put forward around 1898 a slogan: attract attention, maintain interest, create desire. The fourth link, “get action”, he added later. The acronym was fixed by the textbooks of the 1920s: in 1925 the psychologist Edward Strong, in The Psychology of Selling and Advertising, credited the idea to Lewis. For over a hundred years the formula has served advertisers and salespeople as a teaching aid.

How it is built. Attention stops the eye. Interest gives a reason to read. Desire shows the result so that it’s wanted. Action names one step.

An example with the default persona (the invented Kate Alder).

• Attention: “Is your fence not where the map says the boundary is?”
• Interest: “A boundary is set by measurement, not by fence posts. A boundary plan shows where it really runs.”
• Desire: “Picture it: the documents in order, the boundary on record, and nothing left to argue about with your neighbor.”
• Action: “Book a consultation: we’ll go through your papers.”

When it works. For a short page or an email about a simple offer with one action, for a reader at the third or fourth level.

When it lets you down. It assumes desire can be created, when it usually grows out of a need the person already has. For an expensive service it lacks proof, and that’s the answer of the next formula. And on a page you’ve already been given attention: the person came. The “attention” block on a site works as a headline, not as a shout.

AIDCA: plus conviction

Where from. An extension of AIDA long found in sales textbooks; we can’t name the author and won’t invent one. The idea is that between “I want” and “I do” stands the question “am I being lied to?”. For a cheap item the question is quiet; for a service with money and documents it’s loud.

How it is built. AIDA, and before the action a block of conviction: checkable proof, documents, cases, terms.

An example. To the same text is added: “Licensed surveyor, license no. 00-00-00, and association membership, reg. no. 00-00-00: the numbers can be checked in the registers.”

When it works. For services where the decision involves money, health or law, which means all expert projects.

When it lets you down. Conviction is easily turned into pressure: made-up reviews, “limited offer”, “10,000 customers chose us” with no source. In the United States the FTC’s rule on consumer reviews, in force since October 2024, bans fake reviews, and the UK and EU have their own. Honest conviction is checkable: a document, a number, a link, the name of someone who agreed to be named.

ACCA: awareness, comprehension, conviction, action

Where from. From the DAGMAR model, which the American advertising man Russell Colley proposed in 1961 in Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising Results for the Association of National Advertisers. The model described not the form of a text but the goals of advertising: at which step we want the audience (does it know, understand, believe, act) and how to measure that. It was made a text formula later.

How it is built. Awareness: “this exists”. Comprehension: how it works. Conviction: why it can be believed. Action.

An example.

• Awareness: “A boundary is confirmed by a boundary survey.”
• Comprehension: “A visit to the site, a measured survey, a boundary plan, filing with the county recorder. At every step we name the time.”
• Conviction: “The surveyor’s documents, with numbers in the register.”
• Action: “Book a consultation.”

When it works. For complex services and expensive decisions, where the reader has to understand before they believe. It has less emotion than AIDA, and that is more honest for serious subjects.

When it lets you down. For impulse purchases and where emotion decides everything (a café, a festival): the “comprehension” block drags the text out. One more caveat: in the same year, 1961, Lavidge and Steiner proposed their own “hierarchy of effects” (awareness, knowledge, liking, preference, conviction, purchase). It’s a family of schemes with one weakness: they assume a person climbs the ladder step by step.

PAS: problem, agitate, solve

Where from. It’s popular thanks to the American direct-marketing writer Dan Kennedy, who called it the most reliable formula for sales letters, but it was probably devised earlier, as a way of talking to a buyer. Three steps: name the problem, show what it threatens, offer a solution.

How it is built. Problem: name the reader’s pain in their words. Agitate: show the price of doing nothing. Solve: show how the offer removes it.

An example.

• Problem: “You bought a lot, and on paper it is two feet narrower than it is on the ground.”
• Agitate: “Without a confirmed boundary it is harder to get a building permit or to sell, and a dispute with a neighbor only gets dearer with time.”
• Solve: “A boundary plan by measurement: a site visit, a survey, a plan ready to file. At the consultation I’ll explain what you need in your case.”

The honest version of agitate. This is where the formula most often turns into manipulation. It’s easy to “agitate”: pile on the color, press on fear. But a fear that isn’t in the situation is a deception, and a fear that is there has to be described accurately. So the rule is: agitate with facts, not with emotion. What will really happen to the time, the money and the options if it’s put off. For lawyers, experts, doctors and any profession with limits on advertising, scaring people is also not allowed (more in the next lessons and in the lesson on legal texts). In the US a false claim is deceptive under the FTC Act even when it plays on fear, and the UK’s CAP Code says marketing must not cause fear or distress without good reason.

When it works. For a second- or third-level reader who feels the problem but sees no way out. It’s good in an email and in a short section of a page.

When it lets you down. If the reader doesn’t feel the problem, you have to show it first (the first level), or the “agitate” looks absurd. If the problem is complex and sensitive (an illness, a debt, a dispute), piling on is dangerous: the person is already frightened.

PASO: plus an offer

Where from. PAS with a fourth link; no author can be named, it’s a craft extension. The logic is simple: after the solution the reader asks, “and what do I do now, and on what terms?”

How it is built. PAS and an offer: specific, with a price, a time, a condition and one action.

An example. To the same text: “A consultation: an hour on your documents. The price is on the page, and we book you for the next business day.”

When it works. For a reader at the fifth level and where the end needs an action with terms: an email, a page of prices.

When it lets you down. Offer only what you can deliver: honest terms, not invented deadlines. And for regulated professions the offer must not hold guarantees of results or pressure by deadlines.

SLAP: stop, look, act, purchase

Where from. The formula turns up in copywriting textbooks and blogs as a device for short ads. We found no author, so we name none. It stands for Stop, Look, Act, Purchase.

How it is built. Stop: a first line that stops them. Look: the point and a fact. Act: a call. Purchase: the terms.

An example (an ad of four lines).

• Stop: “Boundary in dispute?”
• Look: “A boundary plan by measurement, price and time on the page.”
• Act: “Book a consultation.”
• Terms: “A first talk about your documents, with a reply within one business day.”

When it works. In an ad, a social media post, an email subject, a banner: anywhere there’s only a second of attention.

When it lets you down. For a page that is read, the formula is too short. And “stop” easily turns into a shout (SHOCKING! EVERYONE ACT NOW!), and a shout isn’t an honest way to stop someone.

Check yourself: how does AIDCA differ from AIDA, and PASO from PAS?

AIDCA adds a block of conviction before the action: checkable proof. PASO adds an offer after the solution: a price, a time, a condition, one action.

How to choose

A formula is chosen by two things: who the reader is (the level from the last lesson) and where the text stands.

• A reader at the second level (feels the problem): PAS.
• At the third (knows solutions, but not you): AIDA or BAB (the next lesson).
• At the fourth (knows you, doubts): AIDCA or ACCA: they need proof.
• At the fifth (ready): PASO or SLAP: terms and a button.
• At the first (doesn’t know the problem): the formulas of this lesson are too early, a story comes first (the part on storytelling).
• An ad, a post, an email subject: SLAP. An email: PAS or PASO. A service page: AIDCA. An explanatory page: ACCA.

Don’t look for the “best” formula. Write the same block several ways and see which you would read to the end if you were that reader.

Practice

Choose your project’s main offer (by default the first in the brief) and write six short blocks about it, one for each formula. The labels are already there.

1. AIDA: four short phrases.
2. AIDCA: the same plus conviction, with a proof from the brief in full.
3. ACCA: awareness, comprehension, conviction (a proof again), action.
4. PAS: your reader’s problem, an honest agitation with facts, a solution.
5. PASO: the same text plus an offer with a price, a time or a condition.
6. SLAP: an ad of four short lines.
7. At the end choose the two best blocks for readers at different levels and explain the choice.

In every block that has an action, write the main action from the brief in the same words. The “Lay it out on the brief” tab above will show which facts of your brief go where. The check looks at form: the labels, the proofs, the action, the absence of scaremongering. Whether the text is good is for you to decide: read both best blocks aloud through the eyes of a reader at the level you chose.