Rahim Hussain, PhD Candidate, Griffith University, Business School, Department of Marketing [HREF1], Gold Coast, Qld, Australia. R.Hussain@griffith.edu.au
Dr. Arthur Sweeney,
Griffith University, Business School, Department of Marketing [HREF1],
Gold Coast, Qld, Australia.
A.Sweeney@griffith.edu.au
Abstract: Although a large number of research studies have been conducted measuring consumers’ cognitive responses to banner advertisements, the responses are measured on a single advertisement. However, most people who go on-line are exposed to banner advertisements multiple times during Web navigation, and it is not known how consumers respond to multiple exposures. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to propose a theoretical model identifying the impact of multiple banner advertisement exposure on consumers’ cognitive responses. Also, advertising appeal, product involvement, and banner advertisement type are proposed to moderate consumer’s responses to such exposures. That is, the strength of the relationship between advertising frequency and consumers’ cognitive responses is moderated by advertising appeal, product involvement, and banner advertisement type. Based on the theoretical model, a number of propositions are developed and theoretical as well as managerial implications are discussed.
Keywords: Web advertising, advertising frequency, advertising appeal, banner advertisement type, product involvement
Frequency of advertisement exposure is an important determinant of advertising effectiveness in traditional mass communication such as broadcast and print because most media decisions are based on advertising frequency (Cambell & Keller, 2003; Hitchon & Thorson, 1995). One way of measuring advertising effectiveness is through brand awareness, which is an essential initial step for a communication process to begin; without brand awareness, no other communication effects can occur (Rossiter & Percy, 1998). That is, at the brand level, brand attitude cannot be formed and purchase intention cannot be made unless consumers are aware of the brand. Therefore, brand awareness is deemed an essential communication objective for every advertising campaign.
In traditional (off-line) advertising, the impact of multiple advertisement exposures on consumers’ memory has a linear effect. That is, as advertising exposures increase, consumers’ capability of remembering the advertisement increases (Appel, 1971; Hitchon & Thorson, 1995; Pechmann & Stewart, 1989; Sawyer, 1981). However, because of the different nature of the Web compared to the traditional media, it is not known whether these findings apply to Web advertising. Therefore, there is a need to investigate the impact of multiple banner advertisement exposures on consumers’ cognitive responses because consumers are exposed to advertisements multiple times during the Web navigation and the impact of these multiple advertisements is still unexplored. Therefore, the essential problem driving this research is:
How do consumers cognitively respond to multiple banner advertisement exposures?
The impact of multiple banner advertisements is expected to be different from traditional media such as broadcast and print. In broadcast media, frequency and duration of exposure is externally controlled (Pieters, Rosbergen, & Weded, 1999). That is, the frequency and duration of exposure is limited and controlled by the advertisers. In print media, although recipient control the frequency and the duration of exposure, tracking the number of exposure is unrealistic (Lee & Briley, 2005). Web provides precise measure of frequency and on-line users’ navigational behaviour through click-stream data (Chartterjee, Hoffman, & Novak, 1998).
In addition to advertising frequency, advertising appeal, product involvement, and advertisement type are important moderators in advertising communication. Advertising appeal is important because emotional and rational appeals elicit different consumers’ responses (Singh & Cole, 1993). Also, consumers’ responses to advertising differ according to their level of product involvement, which may be low or high (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Moreover, different types of banner advertisements (static or pop-up) also generate different consumers’ responses (Cho, Lee, & Tharp, 2001). Thus, the purpose of this research is to propose a theoretical model identifying the impact of multiple banner advertisement exposures on consumers’ cognitive responses (brand recall) moderated by advertising appeal, product involvement, and advertisement type.
This research paper comprises three sections. Following the introduction, we propose a theoretical model, establish a conceptual framework, and present research propositions. The third section briefly discusses the likely contributions and limitations of the research; theoretical and managerial implications are discussed and a set of guidelines is provided for future research.
We propose a theoretical model that consists of five constructs: an independent variable (advertising frequency), three moderating variables (advertising appeal, product involvement, and advertisement type), and a dependent variable (brand recall). It is proposed that brand recall is determined by advertising frequency and moderated by advertising appeal, product involvement, and advertisement type (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Theoretical model of consumers’ cognitive responses to multiple banner advertisements
The twenty first century is characterized by technological revolution brought by the Internet, which has changed communication, transactions, and advertising patterns. According to one estimate, 133 of 218 million adults over age 18 surf the Web in the United States alone (Wendy, 2004). These numbers are still growing, which in turn provides more opportunities for business-to-consumer (B2C) transactions. Annual B2C transactions, which were US$ 7.8 billion in 1998 and US$ 33 billion in 1999, rose to US$ 42 billion in 2000 (George, 2002). This growth in B2C transactions turns large numbers of advertisers to the Web. The Web advertising revenue was zero in 1994 but reached US$ 7.8 billion in 2001. Despite the economic slowdown in the Dot.com business in 2002, Web advertising not only survived but also emerged as a stronger and more standardized medium, and for the first time, Web advertising revenue has reached US$ 9.6 billion in 2004 (IAB, 2005). This exceptional growth, however, has increased the demand for effective Web advertising strategies (Danaher & Mullarykey, 2003), which is the focus of this research.
The Internet is a unique marketing communication medium; it is an advertising medium, distribution channel, and communication forum simultaneously (Peterson, Balasubramanian, & Bronnenberg, 1997). Second, it enables measuring precise behavioural data such as clickstream (Chartterjee, Hoffman, & Novak, 1998; Huberman, Pirolli, James, & Lukose, 1998). Third, the Internet offers two-way communication; users are no-longer passive recipients of information but can be actively engaged in the communication process, which gives them more control over the advertising exposure since they can select how many promotional messages they want to view, what they want to view, when they want to view, and if they want to view it at all. Other important characteristics of the Internet include precise targeting (Berthon, 1996) multimedia capability (Sundar & Kalyanaraman, 2004), and global reach (Hamill, 1997; Quelch & Klen, 1996; Samiee, 1998). However, the most unique characteristic that distinguishes the Web from traditional media is interactivity (Alba et al., 1997; Harvey, 1997; Rossiter & Bellman, 1999). Interactivity is a multidisciplinary concept and defined in terms of responsiveness (Ha & James, 1998; Milles, 1992; Rafaeli, 1998; Wu, 1999), user control (Bezjian-Avery, Calder, & Iacobucci, 1998; Jensen, 1998; Lieb, 1998; Lombard & Snyder-Duch, 2001; McMillan, 2000a, 2000b), two-way communication (McMillan, 2000a; Pavlik, 1998), real-time participation (Steuer, 1992), feedback (Straubhaar & LaRose, 1996), and interchange (Cho & Leckenby, 1999; Dennis, Fenech, & Merrilees, 2004) between consumers and advertisers. Interactivity leads to different kinds of activities, which were not available with the traditional media. For example, traditional media transfers messages from advertisers to consumers but not the other way around; that is, consumers are passive receivers of the promotional message. Interactivity made two-way communication possible between advertisers and consumers on a real time basis. This two-way communication facilitates both consumers and advertisers. For consumers, viewing time, pace, and the order of presentation are in their control. For advertisers, they gained more opportunities to track consumers’ activities and continually evaluate their on-line behaviour through easily accessible click-stream data (Chartterjee et al., 1998). One way of achieving interactivity is through banner advertisements discussed next.
Although Web advertising has a variety of formats such as email marketing, sponsorships, classifieds, search engines, Web sites etc., the most frequent type is banner advertising, which is a display advertisement hyperlinked to an advertiser’s Web site (Li & Bukovac, 1999). Banner advertisements are not only effective for advertising products, providing information, generating traffic to a targeted Web site, and making on-line sales but also effective in creating brand effects such as brand awareness and brand attitude. However, the strength of this impact depends on the type of banner advertisement (Cho et al., 2001). In particular, banner advertisements can be classified into five major types such as static, pop-up, animated, dynamic, or rotated (Search-Engine-Optimization-Ethics, 2002).
A static advertisement that neither moves nor changes its contents with every loading page includes only one GIF or JPEG image file (Search-Engine-Optimization-Ethics, 2002). It is deemed passive because it does not interrupt visitors’ Web activity (surfing).
A pop-up banner advertisement appears on a separate small window at the top of a visitor’s screen when navigating from one Web page to another. However, a pop-up is considered intrusive because it interrupts visitors’ Web navigation (Edwards, Li, & Lee, 2002), particularly so when the information displayed does not match visitors’ interests. Because of the annoyance factor and the availability of pop-up blocking software, their use is not growing, and their share is only 4 to 7 percent of the total banner advertising market (Koegel, 2004). Despite these disadvantages, pop-ups are more effective for creating brand awareness than are static banner advertisements (Cho et al., 2001). Specifically, they are more effective when the advertising message is emotional rather than rational.
An animated banner advertisement includes many GIF or JPEG files that are shown in rapid succession to create animation effects. The impact of animated banner advertisements on consumers’ cognitive, attitudinal, and click-through responses varies. They do have a positive impact on consumers’ cognitive responses (Cleland & Carmichael, 1997; Dreze & Hussherr, 2003; Li & Bukovac, 1999; Mand, 1998; Taylor & Thomson, 1982) but do not have a greater impact on persuasion (Taylor & Thomson, 1982; Taylor & Wood, 1983), and click through (Dreze & Hussherr, 2003; Hershberger, Donthu, & Lohtia, 2002; Kim & Leckenby, 2002; Li, 1998; Rae & Brennan, 1998) than non-animated advertisements.
Rich media or dynamic banner advertisements are made-up of audio, video, Java, and Macromedia Flash etc. that impact on consumers in the same way a TV commercial does with an added dimension of interactivity (Koegel, 2003). Almost 39 percent of all Internet users in the US logged on through broadband connections in 2003. Subsequently, it is expected that more than 50 percent of all on-line advertising will contain dynamic advertisements and will become the standard for Web advertising by 2005 (Koegel, 2003).
A rotated banner advertisement consists of an array of advertisements shown in different successions in a single presentation. It is considered one of the effective ways of presenting banner advertising because different messages from one or a number of advertisers can be delivered to visitors during a single visit.
Frequency of advertising is one of the frequently used persuasive techniques in advertising because people often believe something they hear over and over again (Cambell & Keller, 2003; Hitchon & Thorson, 1995; Krugman, 1965; Nordhielm, 2002; Sawyer, 1981). Generally, an advertising message seems to be remembered, believed, and recalled at the time of purchase the more time it is seen or heard (Sawyer, 1981). Therefore, understanding the functions of frequency is important because it is critical to the effectiveness of advertising, regardless of whether it is traditional media advertising or Web advertising. Moreover, the precise number of advertising repetition depends on a variety of factors (Weilbacher, 1970). In this research, three moderators: advertising appeal, product involvement, and banner advertisement type are proposed which are discussed in the following section.
A moderator is a qualitative or a quantitative variable that impacts on the strength and/or the direction of the relationship between an independent and a dependent variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986). In the following section, the moderating variables advertising appeal, advertisement type, and product involvement are reviewed.
Advertising appeals may be rational (think) or emotional (feel) (Claeys, Swinnen, & Abeele, 1995; Holbrook, 1978; Puto & Wells, 1984; Ratchford, 1987; Rossiter & Percy, 1998; Vaughn, 1980, 1986) where rational means a factual, logical, objectively verifiable information that consumers have greater confidence in their ability to assess the merits by buying the brand after having seen the advertisement. Further, the rational motives are based on utilitarian need, and advertising appeals focus on the functional performance, while these messages are cognitively processed and evaluated (Rothschild, 1979; Venkatraman, Marlino, Kardes, & Sklar, 1990). On the other hand, emotional advertising associates the experience of using the advertised brand with a unique set of psychological characteristics that would not normally be linked to the brand experience to the same degree without exposure to the advertisement. Further, the feel motives are based on ego gratification, social acceptance, and sensory stimulation. These message focus on self-enhancement and are affectively evaluated (Ratchford, 1987).
In terms of consumer responses, advertising strategies that make rational appeals are more effective when there is a high-level need of cognitive evaluation and rational decision criteria are used to make a purchase decision (Vaughn, 1980, 1986; Venkatraman et al., 1990). In this case, low levels of advertisement frequency may be sufficient for advertising effectiveness because learning takes place rapidly (Rossiter & Percy, 1998). On the other hand, advertising strategies that make emotional appeals focusing on “image” are more effective when there is a low-level need of cognition (Venkatraman et al., 1990). Hence, relatively higher levels of repetition are needed for advertising effectiveness because learning takes place slowly and repetition of advertising is crucial (Rossiter & Percy, 1998).
Involvement is an important construct in marketing whether product involvement (Greenwald & Leavitt, 1984; Ratchford, 1987; Zaichkowsky, 1985, 1986, 1994), brand involvement (Rossiter & Percy, 1998), advertising message involvement (Krugman, 1962, 1965, 1967, 1977), purchase-decision involvement (Mittal, 1989), enduring and situational involvement (Celsi & Olsen, 1988; Laurent & Kapferer, 1985), or felt involvement (Celsi & Olsen, 1988). These different types of involvement may lead to various consumer behavioural outcomes (Zaichkowsky, 1985).
Involvement in this research refers to product category involvement, which is a function of decision importance, degree of thoughts, and perceived risk of making the wrong purchase decision (Ratchford, 1987). Buyer’s perceived risk may be functional or psychosocial (Rothschild & Ray, 1974). Functional risk refers to the post-purchase risk that the product will not perform properly, whereas psychosocial risk refers to the social embarrassment of purchasing the wrong product. Most high-priced products are considered high involvement because they are associated with high functional risk. However, a low-priced product could also be considered a high-involvement product if the buyer perceives psychosocial risk in making a purchase decision.
Product involvement is considered an important variable that influences consumers’ responses (Antil, 1984; Bloch, 1981; Lastovicka, 1979; Laurent & Kapferer, 1985; Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983; Zaichkowsky, 1985, 1986, 1994). When product involvement is low, consumers are passive and little mental activity is required to process the advertisement. Thus, the effectiveness of advertising depends on frequency to “build and sustain” the association between the message and the product. In contrast, when product involvement is high, consumers are actively seeking product information, and the aim of the advertising is to reach the specific target market rather than repetition of the message. Thus, low levels of advertisement frequency are sufficient (Rothschild, 1979).
Banner advertisements have shown to have influence on consumers’ memory such as brand recall (Briggs & Hollis, 1997; Dreze & Hussherr, 2003; IAB, 1997; Meeker, 1997). However, the strength of this impact depends on the type of banner advertisement such that pop-up advertisements elicit higher brand awareness than static banner advertisements (Cho et al., 2001). This is because, static banner advertisements are passive, can be easily ignored; thus, a high level of advertisement frequency may be required for advertisement effectiveness. On the contrary, pop-up advertisements can get visitors’ attention easily and a low level of repetition may be sufficient for advertisement effectiveness. Because of these systematic differences in banner advertisements, it is proposed that advertisement type (static, pop-up) moderates banner advertisement frequency and consumers’ cognitive responses.
Cognitive responses are measured by brand recall. Traditional advertising research confirms that repetition of an advertisement has positive effects on brand recall (Leong, Ang, & Tham, 1996; Pechmann & Stewart, 1989). This effect has been found in different conditions including product classification such as convenience and shopping goods (Ray & Sawyer, 1971), advertising format such as low-scoring and high-scoring ads (Appel, 1971), interactive print ads (Ang, Leong, & Lock, 1996), as well as with the introduction of a new product (Rethans, Swasy, & Marks, 1986). In the present research, it is proposed that the relationship between banner advertising frequency and brand recall is moderated by banner advertisement type, advertising appeal, and product involvement.
In terms of advertisement type, Ray and Sawyer (1971) found that the inflection point for “grabber” ads, which were intrusive and supposed to accomplish communication objectives in a single exposure, approached earlier than the “non-grabber” ads. Applying this to the Web context, a static banner advertisement is considered passive and in turn the least intrusive (Chartterjee et al., 1998; Cho & Leckenby, 2000) because it does not interrupt visitors’ Web navigation. Therefore, it is proposed that repeated exposures of banner advertisements would increase brand recall because repetition assists consideration and comprehension. On the other hand, a pop-up advertisement is deemed intrusive (Edwards et al., 2002) and annoying. A low level of banner advertisement exposure will help increase brand recall (Cho et al., 2001) but a high level of banner advertisement exposures will decrease brand recall. This reasoning leads us to the following proposition:
Proposition 1: Increasing the number of banner advertisement exposures from a single to multiple exposures will result in a higher brand recall for a static banner advertisement than for a pop-up advertisement.
Advertising appeals are classified as emotional and rational. Emotional advertisements tend to contain relatively little information about brand attributes because the focus of the advertisement is to create emotional-eliciting interaction between a brand and its users. The lack of information, however, does not prevent the advertisement from influencing consumers’ memory (Hitchon & Thorson, 1995). Repetition of emotional advertisements is important because they are entertaining and generate emotional experiences, and despite previously processed information, subsequent exposures would still be found interesting. Contrarily, a rational advertisement is direct and clear in its message, and once the message is conveyed the job of advertising is usually done and more repetitions are not required. Consequently, rational advertisements are relatively more vulnerable to wear out (Rothschild, 1979). Based on this theoretical and empirical evidence, the following proposition is made.
Proposition 2: Increasing the number of banner advertisement exposures from a single to multiple exposures will result is a higher brand recall for an emotional advertising appeal than for a rational advertising appeal.
Product involvement is an important variable that influence consumers’ responses (Antil, 1984; Bloch, 1981; Lastovicka, 1979; Laurent & Kapferer, 1985; Petty et al., 1983; Zaichkowsky, 1985, 1986, 1994). When product involvement is low, consumers are passive and little mental activity is required to process the advertisement. Thus, the effectiveness of advertising depends on frequency to build and sustain the association between the message and the product. On the other hand, when product involvement is high, consumers are actively seeking product information, and the aim of the advertising is to reach the specific target market rather than repetition of the message. Thus, low levels of frequency are sufficient (Rothschild, 1979). Applying this to the Web context, the following proposition is made:
Proposition 3: Increasing the number of banner advertisement exposures from a single to multiple exposures will result in a higher brand recall for a low-involvement product than for a high-involvement product.
Although various research methods can be employed to test the given propositions, we suggest a laboratory experiment. A lab experiment permits manipulation of the independent variable (advertisement frequency) and the moderator variables (advertisement type, advertising appeal, and brand involvement). Also, a lab experiment allows complete control over banner advertisement exposures required for making repetition effects. That is, a lab experiment allows us to exactly control how many times each participant is exposed to a given stimulus. Further, a lab experiment permits random assignment of participants to various experimental treatments and provides relatively more control over extraneous variables (Cook & Richard, 1983). Finally, a lab experiment enables researchers to measure behavior with a greater degree of precision.
Despite a number of advantages, lab experiment has some weaknesses. First, respondents will be exposed to banner advertisements in a controlled laboratory setting. That is, the stimulus, response, and experimental setting are different from real life, and the results observed in the lab experiment may not be generalized to the population of interest. Second, a lab experiment is believed to have a lack of external validity, specifically in the case of a convenience sample, which may adversely affect the generalization of the results to the general population (Churchill, 1995; Malhotra, 1999). The external validity is somewhat sacrificed for greater statistical power through controlled settings, standardized procedure, and homogeneity of respondents.
To test the moderating effects of each moderator, three factorial design matrixes can be developed. Each factorial design consists on a 3 (levels of independent variable) by 2 (levels of moderator variable) matrix. The independent variable, advertisement frequency, has three levels: low, moderate, and high. Low frequency may refer to one, moderate to four, and high to eight exposures. The three moderators are advertising type, advertising frequency, and product involvement. Advertisement type has two levels of static and pop-up, advertisement appeal has two levels of rational and emotional, and product involvement has two levels of low and high.
With a large number of banner advertisements on commercial Web sites, the question of how to make banner advertisements more memorable becomes highly significant. One way to build brand awareness is through advertising repetition. As consumers are exposed more and more to promotional messages, it is more likely that they remember the advertisements. However, all banner advertisements are not the same and the ability of banner advertisements to create a strong memory trace in users may depend on a number of factors. In this research, we considered three moderating factors: advertising appeal, product involvement, and banner advertisement type.
One of the important aspects of this research is the identification of advertisement appeal, product involvement and advertisements type. Advertising appeal is an important variable in order to measure consumers’ responses. This is because, different advertising appeals elicit different consumers responses (Singh & Cole, 1993). Therefore, the distinction of advertising appeal is significant before measuring consumers’ responses. Additionally, according to the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), it is well documented that consumers’ responses are different according to the level of involvement (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Advertisements may be very effectively designed; however, if the recipient is less or more involved the extent of the responses would be different. Therefore, it is equally important to consider recipient involvement in measuring consumers’ responses. Moreover, in the Web medium, different levels of intensity (i.e., intrusiveness) of banner advertisements can be designed. It is investigated that banner advertisement generates different responses based on the intensity of the banner advertisement (Cho et al., 2001). Therefore, advertisement type (static and pop-up), advertising appeal (emotional and rational), and product involvement (low and high) are considered as moderator variables.
The identification of these moderating variables will help marketing designing appropriate communication strategies. For example, if the aim of advertising is to create brand awareness, a viable communication strategy will be a high level of repetition for emotional advertising appeal, low-product involvement, and static banner advertisements. Contrarily, a low-level of repetition would be sufficient for informational advertising appeals, high-involvement products and pop-up banner advertisements.
The potential contribution of this study to the knowledge of advertising is considerable both theoretically and practically. Theoretically, despite the importance of advertising, little effort has been devoted to investigate the impact of multiple banner advertisement exposures on consumers’ cognitive responses. This research endeavors to fill this gap. For managers, Internet data transformation and widespread availability of broadband connection allows greater use of high-resolution dynamic banner presentations much like TV commercials (Brown, 2001; Koegel, 2004; Olsen, 2001), which in turn causes on-line users to spend more time and consume more advertisements (Koegel, 2004). Therefore, understanding the impact of multiple dynamic banner advertisements on consumers’ responses will be an important asset in the Web advertisers’ arsenal. Additionally, faced with increasing advertising costs, it is important to know exactly how long an advertising campaign should be run. Thus, conclusions from this research will be of considerable value to advertising practitioners.
In summary, the purpose of this research is to extend our understanding of the relationship between advertising frequency and consumer cognitive responses to banner advertisement; this was done by proposing three moderating variables. The contention is that the strength of the relationship between banner advertising frequency and brand recall is moderated by advertising appeal (emotional vs. rational), product involvement (low vs. high), and banner advertisement type (static vs. pop-up). It is proposed that the multiple banner advertisement exposures has positive effects on consumers’ cognitive responses when the advertisement is static rather than pop-up, when the advertising appeal is emotional rather than rational, and when the product involvement is low rather than high. Future research on this topic may extend the developed propositions to Web sites instead of mere banner advertisements. Moreover, initially, a lab experiment can be used to measure consumers’ responses, which can be replicated later in the field (survey) on real life banner advertisements.
Alba, J. W., Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., Lutz, R., Sahay, A., et al. (1997). Interactive home shopping: Retail and manufacturer incentives to participate in electronic market place. Journal of Marketing, 61(July), 38-54.
Ang, S. H., Leong, S. M., & Lock, K. L. (1996). The effects of picture-word consistency, processing motivation and repetition on advertisement recall. Journal of Marketing Communications, 2(1), 37-50.
Antil, J. H. (1984). Conceptualization and operationalization of involvement. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 203-209.
Appel, V. (1971). On advertising wear out. Journal of Advertising Research, 11(February), 11-13.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Berthon, P. (1996). The world wide web as an advertising medium: Toward an understanding of conversion efficiency. Journal of Advertising Research(January/February), 43-54.
Bezjian-Avery, A., Calder, B., & Iacobucci, D. (1998). New media interactive advertising vs. Traditional advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 38(July/August), 23-32.
Bloch, P. (1981). An exploration into scaling of consumers involvement with a product class. Advances in Consumers Research, 8, 61-65.
Briggs, R., & Hollis, N. (1997). Advertising on the web: Is there response before click-through? Journal of Advertising Research, 37(March/April), 33-45.
Brown, J. (2001). Analyst view: The emergence of rich media. Available online [HREF2] .
Cambell, C. M., & Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(September), 292-304.
Celsi, R. L., & Olsen, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(September), 210-224.
Chartterjee, P., Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1998). Modeling the clickstream: Implication for web-based advertising effects.Unpublished manuscript.
Cho, C., & Leckenby, J. D. (1999). Interactivity as a measure of advertising effectiveness. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising.
Cho, C., & Leckenby, J. D. (2000). The impact of banner exposure and clicking on attitude change. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising, Newport, Rhode Island.
Cho, C., Lee, J., & Tharp, M. (2001). Different forced-exposure to banner advertisements. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(July/August), 45-56.
Churchill, G. A. J. (1995). Marketing research methodological foundation (6th Edition ed.). Orlando, Florida: The Dryden Press.
Claeys, C., Swinnen, A., & Abeele, P. V. (1995). Consumers' mean-end and chains for "think" and "feel" products. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12, 193-208.
Cleland, C., & Carmichael, M. (1997). Banner that moves makes big impression. Advertising Age.
Cook, T. D., & Richard, C. S. (1983). Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research.Beverly Hills, California: CA: Saga Publications, Inc.
Danaher, P. J., & Mullarykey, G. W. (2003). Factors affecting online advertising recall: A study of students. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(September), 252-267.
Dennis, C., Fenech, T., & Merrilees, B. (2004). E-retailing.London: Routledge.
Dreze, X., & Hussherr, F.-X. (2003). Internet advertising: Is anybody watching? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(4), 8-23.
Edwards, S. M., Li, H., & Lee, J.-H. (2002). Forced exposure and psychological reactance: Antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. Journal of Advertising, XXXI(3), 83-95.
George, F. F. (2002). Influences on the intent to make internet purchases. Internet Research: Electronics Networking Applications and Policy, 12(2), 165-180.
Greenwald, A. G., & Leavitt, C. (1984). Audience involvement in advertising: Four levels. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(June), 581-592.
Ha, L., & James, E. L. (1998). Interactivity re-examined: A baseline analysis of early business web sites. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 43(4), 457-474.
Hamill, J. H. (1997). The internet and international marketing. International Marketing Review, 14(5), 300-323.
Harvey, B. (1997). The expanded arf model: Bridge to the accountable advertising future. Journal of Advertising Research, 37(March/April), 11-20.
Hershberger, E. K., Donthu, N., & Lohtia, R. (2002). Banner ad effectiveness: Lesson fro 8,725 ads.Unpublished manuscript, Georgia State University.
Hitchon, J. C., & Thorson, E. (1995). Experience of repeated commercial viewing. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 39(2), 376-389.
Holbrook, M. B. (1978). Beyond attitude structure: Toward the informational determinants of attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, XV(November), 545-556.
Huberman, B. A., Pirolli, P. L. T., James, E. P., & Lukose, R. M. (1998). Strong regulation in world wide web surfing. Science, 280(3), 95-97.
IAB. (1997). Interactive advertising bureau. Available Online [HREF3].
IAB. (2005). Interactive advertising bureau. Available Online [HREF4].
Jensen, J. F. (1998). Interactivity: Tracing a new concept in media and communication studies. Nordicom Review, 19(1), 184-207.
Kim, H.-G., & Leckenby, J. D. (2002). Creative factors in interactive advertising. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising.
Koegel, K. (2003). Rich media: What? Where? Why? Retrieved July 2004, 2003, from http://emea.ie.doubleclick.net/documents/English/dc_richmedia_0307.pdf
Koegel, K. (2004, March 2004). Doubleclick's year in online advertising 2003. Available Online [HREF5].
Krugman, H. E. (1962). An application of learning theory to tv copy testing. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26, 626-634.
Krugman, H. E. (1965). The impact of television advertising: Learning without involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(Fall), 349-356.
Krugman, H. E. (1967). The measurement of advertising involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 30, 583-596.
Krugman, H. E. (1977). Memory without recall, exposure without perception. Journal of Advertising Research, 17(4), 7-12.
Lastovicka, J. L. (1979). Questioning the concept of involvement defined product classes. Advances in Consumer Research, 6, 174-179.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profile. Journal of Marketing Research, XXII, 41-53.
Leong, S. M., Ang, S. H., & Tham, L. l. (1996). Increasing brand recall in print advertising among Asian consumers. Journal of Advertising, XXV(2), 65-81.
Li, H. (1998). What makes users click on a banner ad: Two field experimental studies of banner ad size, type and incentive. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising.
Li, H., & Bukovac, J. L. (1999). Cognitive impact of banner ad characteristics: An experimental study. Journal of Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 341-353.
Lieb, T. (1998). Interactivity on interactivity. Journal of Electronic Advertising Publishing, 3(3).
Lombard, M., & Snyder-Duch, J. (2001). Interactive advertising and presence: A framework. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1(2), 1-13.
Malhotra, N. K. (1999). Marketing research and applied orientation (3rd ed.). New Jersey: NJ: Prentice Hall.
Mand, A. (1998). There's gold in them banners! Adweek, 39(17), 28-29.
McMillan, S. J. (2000). Interactivity is in the eye of the beholder: Function, perception, involvement, and attitude toward the web site. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising.
Meeker, M. (1997). Technology internet/new media (U.S. Investment Research). New York: Morgan Stanley.
Milles, I. (1992). What mediation is the message: How suppliers envisage new markets. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 145-167). New York: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
Mittal, B. (1989). Must consumer involvement always imply more information search? Advances in Consumer Research, 16, 167-172.
Nordhielm, C. L. (2002). The influence of level of processing on advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(December), 371-382.
Olsen, S. (2001). C/net news.Com. Available Online [HREF6] .
Pavlik, J. V. (1998). New media technology: Cultural and commercial perspective (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Pechmann, C., & Stewart, D. W. (1989). Advertising repetition: A critical review of wearin and wearout. Current Issues in Research and Advertising, 11(1/2), 285-330.
Peterson, R. A., Balasubramanian, S., & Bronnenberg, B., J. (1997). Exploring the implication of the internet for consumer marketing. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 25(4), 329-346.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change.New York: Springer Verlag.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(September), 135-146.
Puto, C. P., & Wells, W. D. (1984). Informational and transformational advertising: The differential effects of time. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 638-643.
Quelch, J., & Klen, L. (1996). The internet and the international marketing. Sloan Management Review, 37, 60-76.
Rae, N., & Brennan, M. (1998). The relative effectiveness of sound and animation in web banner advertisements. Marketing Bulletin, 9, 76-82.
Rafaeli, S. (1998). Interactivity: From new media to communication. In R. P. Hawkins, J. M. Wiemann & S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal process (pp. 100-134). Newbury Park: Saga.
Ratchford, B. T. (1987). New insights about the fcb grid. Journal of Advertising Research, 27(August/September), 24-38.
Ray, M. L., & Sawyer, A. G. (1971). Repetition in media models: A laboratory techniques. Journal of Marketing Research, VIII(February), 20-29.
Rethans, A. J., Swasy, J. L., & Marks, L. J. (1986). Effects of television commercials repetition, receiver knowledge, and commercial length: A test of the two-factor model. Journal of Marketing Research, XXIII(February), 50-61.
Rossiter, J. R., & Bellman, S. (1999). A proposed model for explaining and measuring web ad effectiveness. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 21(1), 1-15.
Rossiter, J. R., & Percy, L. (1998). Advertising communication and promotion management (2nd ed.). New York: Irwin/ McGraw-Hill.
Rothschild, M. L. (1979). Advertising strategies for high and low involvement situations. Paper presented at the American Marketing Association (Proceedings Series).
Rothschild, M. L., & Ray, M. (1974). Involvement and political advertising effect: An exploratory experiment. Communication Research, 1, 291-308.
Samiee, S. (1998). Exporting and the internet. International Marketing Review, 15(5), 413-426.
Sawyer, A. G. (1981). Repetition cognitive response and persuasion. In Repetition, cognitive response, and persuasion (pp. 237-261): Hillsdale, IL: Erbaum.
Search-Engine-Optimization-Ethics. (2002). Banner advertising. Available Online [HREF7].
Singh, S. N., & Cole, C. A. (1993). The effects of length, content, and repetition on television commercial effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, XXX(February), 91-104.
Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93.
Straubhaar, J., & LaRose, L. (1996). Communication media in the information society.Belmont: Ca: Belmont: Ca, Wadsorth Press.
Sundar, S. S., & Kalyanaraman, S. (2004). Arousal, memory, and impression-formation effects of animation speed in web advertising. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 7.
Taylor, S. E., & Thomson, S. C. (1982). Stalking the elusive vividness effect. Psychological Review, 89(2), 155-181.
Taylor, S. E., & Wood, J. V. (1983). The vividness effect: Making a mountain out of a molehill? Advances in Consumer Research, 10, 540-542.
Vaughn, R. (1980). How advertising works: A planning model. Journal of Advertising Research, 20(5), 27-33.
Vaughn, R. (1986). How advertising works: A planning model revisited. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(February/March), 57-66.
Venkatraman, M. P., Marlino, D., Kardes, F. R., & Sklar, K. B. (1990). The interactive effects of message appeal and individual differences on information processing and persuasion. Psychology and Marketing, 7(2), 85-96.
Weilbacher, W. M. (1970). What happens to advertising when they grew up. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(Summer), 216-223.
Wendy, D. (2004). Iab: Web advertising tops $2.4 billion in the third quarter. Available Online [HREF8].
Wu, G. (1999). Perceived interactivity and attitude toward website. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising, New Mexico.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(December), 341-352.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1986). Conceptualizing involvement. Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 4-14.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, XXIII(4), 59-70.
Hypermedia References
HREF 1
http://www.griffith.edu.au/school/gbs/mkt/
HREF 2
http://www.redhering.com/index.asp?layout=story7channel=20000002&doc_id=1210017521
HREF 3
HREF 4
HREF 5
http://www.doubleclick.com/us/knowledge_central/documents/trend_reports/dc_2003yearinonline_0403.pdf
HREF 6
http://news.com/2100-1023-275992.html
HREF 7
http://www.searchengineetics.com/bannerads.html
HREF 8
http://www.mediapost.com/PrintFriend.cfm?articleId=278677
Copyright
<Rahim Hussain and Arthur Sweeney > © 2005. The authors assign to Southern Cross University and other educational and non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive licence to Southern Cross University to publish this document in full on the World Wide Web and on CD-ROM and in printed form with the conference papers and for the document to be published on mirrors on the World Wide Web.