Since the last millennium, O'hanians scales on celebrity in advertising have been used in a comparative way but by analysis, or adaptation of scales to different cultures/groups, then compared by analysis.
In essence I would think you can apply many scales that are validated/used to determine the efficacy of advertising or perceptual/behavioural responses to advertising - as for the comparative process that could be facilitated by analysis rather than question style?
See the comment by Robert about o'hanians scale. Essentially the comparative nature is part of study design and analysis rather than the instrument itself. In other words, its how you use it that is of importance here.
Perhaps it depends on the goal, positioning---for example! Meaning, when marketplace dynamics prompt a familiar brand to change its positioning, consumers often meet such attempts with resistance. In a recent research study (Jewell & Saenger, 2014) demonstrated how familiar brands can incorporate new attribute (scales!) information into the brand's position via comparative advertising in order to broaden the brand's marketplace positioning. Study 1 shows how the use and nature of comparative advertising affects the ability of a familiar brand to broaden its positioning. Studies 2a and 2b demonstrate that a comparative advertising strategy that incorporates a specific sequencing of dissociative and associative comparative advertisements best broadens brand positioning!
Jewell, R. D., & Saenger, C. (2014). Associative and dissociative comparative advertising strategies in broadening brand positioning. Journal Of Business Research, 67(7), 1559-1566.
There is some limited research -- and significant practitioner interest in utilizing the ad impression (aka exposure) as a measure of cross-platform delivery. Attitudes, of course, would have to be a downstream factor (post-exposure).