The interactive web


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The interactive web

  1. 1. The Internet HAIRONG LI Michigan State University The Interactive Web Toward a New Discipline This paper reviews the most significant studies of the Web and interactive advertising that have been published in the Journal of Advertising Research over the past 15 years. These studies have covered a wide range of issues and, along with many articles in other advertising journals, they have contributed to the formation of a new discipline of interactive advertising, which is transforming the advertising business and education around the world. These studies are exemplary and may inspire new breakthrough studies of interactive advertising in the years to come. HISTORY The World Wide Web (Web) emerged as an adver- marketing industry’s knowledge about interactive tising medium in the early 1990s. It since has been advertising. used not only as an advertising vehicle itself but as When we review the literature of the past 15 a platform for new forms of interactive advertis- years, we see that a new discipline of interac- ing, such as display ads, sponsorship, search ads tive advertising has been created. This particu- and, more recently, blogs and microblogs, social lar review, however, does not intend to cover the ads, user-generated content, and widgets and entire body of literature on interactive advertising apps. The Web—as well as digitally focused adver- from all advertising, communication, and market- tising concepts—is transforming the advertising ing journals, as such reviews are already available business and education in the United States and (Cho and Khang, 2006; Ford and Merchant, 2008; around the world. Ha, 2008; Kim and McMillan, 2008). Rather, it sum- The Journal of Advertising Research (JAR) was one marizes major articles from the Journal that are of the first advertising journals to publish research highly influential, still largely current, or possibly articles on the Web and interactive advertising. In inspirational for future studies of emerging issues the first 10 years of Internet advertising, between of interactive advertising. Select articles from other 1994 and 2003, the JAR published 55 articles on journals are included only to offer a fuller picture the subject, the most among advertising journals of the themes that have emerged from Journal of (Cho and Khang, 2006). The Journal of Advertising Advertising Research articles. Research has since published more than 50 articles Specifically, often-cited articles in the Journal on the same subject. These papers have covered have converged on six themes over the years: a wide range of issues on the Web and interac- tive advertising and, alone with many articles in • The Web as an advertising medium other advertising journals, they have advanced the • Display advertising DOI: 10.2501/JAR-51-1-013-026 March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  13
  2. 2. The Internet• Interactive media planning and reach/ The Web started as simple pages and has gradually frequency estimates• Electronic word of mouth become richly sophisticated, with new features,• The Web integration with other media• New concepts and models of advanced applications, and various functions. advertising. Important aspects and issues of each The contribution of this study was to not on the list. The study showed that thetheme have been explored in these arti- establish the multi-phased conversion degree and nature of interactivity had acles, which make an essential part of the concept and associated measures, which significant effect on the ranking of corpo-literature of interactive advertising. Thus, revealed for the first time how the Web rate Web sites.a review of these articles can shed light works in the marketing communications Web interactivity also was studied ason the formation of this new discipline of mix. a perception of Web users (Coyle andadvertising and encourage more innova- Dreze and Zufryden, in their 1997 “Is Thorson, 2001; Heeter, 2000; McMillantive studies. Internet Advertising Ready For Prime and Hwang, 2002; Ha and James, 1998). Time?” Journal paper, furthered this line In 2002, synchronicity was added to the of research by going beyond conceptual definition of Web interactivity besides twoTHE WEB AS ADVERTISING MEDIUM models to examine the impact of Web-site existing dimensions of active control andThe Web started as simple pages and has attributes on site effectiveness as meas- two-way communication (Liu and Shrum,gradually become richly sophisticated, ured by click streams. 2002). What followed was the develop-with new features, advanced applications, Using a field experimental design and ment of a scale of interactivity on the basisand various functions. Journal of Advertis- conjoint analysis of four variables (back- of this three-dimensional concept (Liu,ing Research articles initially focused on the ground style, image size, sound file dis- 2003). Through several phases of item-role and characteristics of the Web as an play, and celebrity endorsement) that pool generation, revision, purification,advertising medium and soon expanded defined a total of 96 site configurations, and validation in three tests, Liu estab-to include user characteristics of the Web. the study concluded that the choice of the lished the validity (and reliability) of a With the proliferation of e-commerce, best Web-site configuration would depend new scale of Web interactivity for 15 items.studies also began profiling online shop- on how well a Web-site owner traded off This scale has facilitated more studies ofpers and business users of the Web. New one effectiveness dimension for the other Web characteristics.concepts, methods, and findings were (e.g., number of pages accessed versusgenerated from these articles as build- time spent). This study’s design, analysis Understanding Web Usersing blocks of the interactive advertising methods, and measures of site effective- Research on Web users started withliterature. ness were inspirational for the research of an analysis of user perceptions of Web Web-design features. sites (Eighmey, 1997). “Profiling UserCharacteristics of the Web The relationship between interactive Responses to Commercial Web Sites”The first article on interactive advertising features and the popularity of Web sites introduced Journal readers to the theoryin the Journal of Advertising Research hap- was explored in the Journal’s “Interac- of uses and gratifications from conven-pened to be titled “The World Wide Web tive Functions and Their Impacts on the tional media research to the study of Webas An Advertising Medium.” In this pio- Appeal of Internet Presence Sites” (Ghose users. This pilot study and field experi-neering study, the authors introduced a and Dou, 1998). The authors developed an ment identified and validated a scale ofmodel of the conversion process (Berthon, inventory of 23 interactive features in five items that measured how users perceivedPitt, and Watson, 1996). They saw that categories (customer support, marketing the Web site. It consisted of six thematicusers of a Web site may convert from surf- research, personal-choice helper, advertis- areas: marketing perceptions, entertain-ers to aware surfers and that each of the ing/promotion/publicity, and entertain- ment value, informational value, easeconversion phases of hits, active visitors, ment) and compared 49 Web sites on the of use, credibility, and interactivity. Thepurchasers, and repurchasers could be top five percent of a list of a popular direc- results indicated that the most importantmeasured with an efficiency formula. tory with another 52 Web sites that were features for Web users were14  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  3. 3. The Internet• information placed in an enjoyable Stevenson, Bruner, and Kumar (2000) Jour- surf, communicate­ research, and shop. , context; nal contribution, “Webpage Background The scale was tested and validated with• organizational ideas reasonable for stra- and Viewer Attitudes.” In this influential student and non-student samples. The tegic purpose of the Web site; and study, an experiment used three levels of authors believed that the inventory was• efficiently executed design for Web background complexity (black only; light useful for site designers to provide con- users. blue with the words “play the lottery”; tent and layout specific to certain motives; and light blue with blinking phases “buy for  advertisers to appeal to users with In a major study of the factors that now” and “play the lottery” and a sports different motivations; and for academicaffected the usage of the Web, usage was car racing across the screen at various scholars to better understand the reasonsmeasured in four ways: the number of intervals). users with different personalities use thehours per day spent on the Web; the per- The findings suggested that a simpler Web.centage of time spent for business pur- background positively affected the atti- User profiles were developed in Assael’sposes; the percentage of time spent for tudes toward the site, the ad, and the 2005 survey (“A Demographic and Psych-personal purposes; and the number of brand. A follow-up study examined the ographic Profile of Heavy Internet Userspurchases made on the Web (Korgaonkar impact of users’ experience with the Web and Users by Type of Internet Usage”) ofand Wolin, 1999). on their attitude and found that Web expe- more than 5,000 respondents, which cat- The study explored the impacts of rience significantly affected users’ atti- egorized Internet users into six types (Webdemographics and seven motivations on tude toward the ad though the influence generalists, downloaders, self-improvers,each usage measure among a sample of on other attitude measures was trivial entertainment seekers, traders, and social-420 consumers. Various patterns of rela- (Bruner and Kumar, 2000). izers) on the basis of the frequency theytionships were found between different Yet another investigated the impact of were engaged in each of 14 online activi-measures of the Web usage, demograph- site involvement and perceived interac- ties (i.e., reading news, playing games,ics, and motivations, indicating that con- tivity on users’ site attitude (McMillan, and trading stocks). Assael discoveredsumers used the Web for many more Hwang, and Lee, 2003). In that paper, a pattern that early adopters had morereasons than the overemphasized reason “Effects of Structural and Perceptual Fac- specialized purposes, including tradingof information seeking, and that consum- tors on Attitudes toward the Website,” stocks, using chat rooms, playing videoers saw the Web as a place in which they the authors studied 311 responses from games, and downloading. By comparison,could interact and socialize with others of users who visited one of four sites that the later adopters tended to use the Websimilar interests. varied in number of design features (low generally for emailing, seeking product This line of research continued with versus high) and creative strategies (infor- information, and making measures for the attitude toward the mational versus transformational). TheyWeb site. Chen and Wells, in their 1999 found that the uniqueness of features Profiling Online Shoppers“Attitude Toward the Site” Journal paper, such as virtual tours—not the number of Along with the growth of electronic com-developed a six-item scale from site judg- features—accounted for users’ attitude merce, the shopping behavior of Webments of 120 Internet users. This uni- toward hotel sites and that involvement users called for new research. Donthudimensional scale was tested further with with the site subject was a strong predic- and Garcia’s 1999 contribution, “Theusers’ assessment of three aspects of a tor of the attitude regardless of creative Internet Shopper,” represented one of theWeb site: entertainment, informativeness, strategies. early studies in this domain. Based on aand organization. The findings showed a The knowledge about Web users telephone survey of 2,000 households,significant relationship between the site continued­ to expand with research of the authors found that, compared withattitude and each of these three aspects. users’ motivations behind their Web use, non-Internet shoppers, Internet shoppersThe study also provided researchers with which was explored in the Rogers and were older and had higher income; werea much-needed attitude toward the site Sheldon 2002 Journal of Advertising Research more convenience-oriented, innovative,scale and facilitated many studies on Web study, “An Improved Way to Character- and impulsive; were less risk-averse; andusers. ize Internet Users.” The authors devel- had more positive attitudes toward direct The impact of the Web page background oped a Web motivation inventory that marketing and advertising. These findingson the user’s attitude was the focus of a consisted of 12 items in four categories: shed needed light on the characteristics of March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  15
  4. 4. The InternetInternet shoppers and what they soughtwhen shopping and buying online. Classic Excerpt: The Internet New concepts of channel perceptionsand shopping orientations were includedin the Li, Kuo, and Russell 1999 model of The World Wide Web as an Advertising Medium:online buying behavior. The model wastested with data from a survey of 999 U.S.Internet users, and the results indicatedthat education, convenience orientation, Toward an Understanding ofexperience orientation, channel knowl-edge, perceived distribution utility, andperceived accessibility were robust pre- Conversion Efficiencydictors of online buying status (frequent Pierre Berthon, Leyland F. Pitt, and Richard T. Watsononline buyer, occasional online buyer, ornon-online buyer). In a 2001 Journal paper, “The Global Author’s Note: This excerpt is from the first model can be used to develop research article that JAR published about the Web in propositions concerning the maximiza-Internet Shopper: Evidence From Shop- 1996. It remains relevant, even after 15 Tasks In Twelve Countries,” Lynch, tion of Web site efficiency, and usingKent, and Srinivasan explored the impacts data from real Web sites, to test these “The World Wide Web is a new mediumof shoppers’ trust, affect, and perceived propositions. For the practitioner, the which is characterized by ease of entry,site quality on the purchase intentions model provides a sequence of produc- relatively low set-up costs, globalness,and loyalty to the site among a sample of tivity measures which can be calibrated time independence, and shoppers from 12 countries in three with relative ease. As such it represents a remarkable newregions of the world. They found that the opportunity for advertisers and market- “The challenge facing both parties,impact of trust and affect was significant ers to communicate with new and exist- however, is to maximize the creativityfor both low- and high-involvement prod- ing markets in a very integrated way. that will justify advertising and market-ucts in all three regions, but site quality ing investments in a Web presence.”influenced only high-involvement prod- “Many advertisers will use it to achieveucts in some countries. hitherto undreamed of success; for Pierre Berthon, Leyland F. Pitt, Richard­ others it will be an opportunity lost and T. Watson, “The World Wide Web as anThe Web and Business Users a damp squib. We hope that the process Advertising Medium: Toward an Under-McDonald, in his “The Once and Future Web: model for assessing Web site efficiency standing of Conversion Efficiency.Scenarios For Advertisers” (1997), exam- will achieve more of the former condi- Journal of Advertising Research 36, 1ined the Web from a business perspective­ tion. From an academic perspective, the (1996): 43.and anticipated five Web advertising sce-narios: Web-site shakeout; content-pipelinealliances; new advertising-content hybrids; sophisticated databases can help advertis- greater presence in the near future, butISPs provoking privacy backlash; and ads ers but can also cause privacy concerns. advertisers were uncertain about thegetting detached from media. Many of his Bush, Bush, and Harris, in their 1998 effectiveness of Internet advertising andobservations in the Journal were proven to “Advertiser Perceptions of the Internet were concerned with security and privacybe accurate—and remain so years later— As A Marketing Communications Tool” issues. Thus, the study concluded, “Theincluding the notions that, facing payment Journal paper, investigated advertisers’ Internet appears to be a necessary partresistance from consumers, content-rich perception of the Web as an advertising of a marketing communication strategysites must find more revenue sources; medium in surveys of business executives. even though its effectiveness appears to besponsoring a site which consumers value They found that advertisers had begun to undetermined.”can help build positive association for the incorporate the Internet into their market- Bush and Bush, in 2002, comparedadvertiser’s brand; and extraordinarily ing-communications mix and anticipated advertising agencies and advertisers on16  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  5. 5. The Internettheir perceptions of the Internet to answer The studies reviewed in this section show that the Web,a basic question as to whether the chal-lenges associated with marketing on the as an advertising medium, has unique features andInternet posed a threat to the agency-advertiser relationship. The survey results that users use the Web out of different motivations.indicated that both groups were similar intheir views of important issues, so such athreat did not exist. The authors inferredthat advertising agencies were fairly 1998 revenue report (IAB, 1999). Search browser to 50 percent for a men’s apparelproactive in keeping up with marketing advertising first appeared in the IAB 2000 brand.issues and activities related to the Internet. revenue report, accounting for only one Hollis later provided further evidence, A study of business executives’ percep- percent of the Internet advertising rev- on the basis of a large number of pro-tions of important features of business-to- enues. Search advertising had grown to prietary campaign studies, that just onebusiness sites found an interaction between 47 percent in 2009, with banner/display exposure to an online ad had an impact onthe purpose of site use and site features in ads accounting for only 22 percent (IAB, purchase consideration (2005). The authorthat buyers and non-buyers weighted site 2010). Li and Leckenby (2007) reviewed argued,features differently (Chakraborty, Lala, the effectiveness of seven forms of inter-and Warren, 2003). That is, buyers pre- active advertising (banners, sponsorships, Online advertising can build the attitudi-ferred purchase-related features such as interstitials, search ads, rich media, 3-D nal equity of a brand just like traditionalprivacy/security and transaction-related visualization, and advergames). media. This brand building effect does notinteractivity, whereas non-buyers appreci- In the section below, the review focuses require the recipient of the advertisingated personalization and product informa- on issues of display advertising. exposure to have an immediate need fortion. Based on these findings, the authors the category, but, where such a need exists,suggested the adoption of a behavioral The Branding Effects the online medium creates the potentialsegmentation approach in business-to- The effectiveness of display ads (also for click-through, signaling a more directbusiness (B2B) site design. called “banner ads”) can be assessed in interest in the advertised brand. The studies reviewed in this section terms of either building brands or gen-show that the Web, as an advertising erating clicks, depending on the goals of More recently, Fulgoni and Mörn, in amedium, has unique features and that a campaign. Because of the interactive 2009 paper entitled, “Whither the Click?users use the Web out of different motiva- nature of display ads, the click-through How Online Advertising Works,” ana-tions. Thus, Web sites are more effective rate often is preferred as the de facto meas- lyzed a dataset of about 200 online adver-when they can better meet the needs of ure of effectiveness in lieu of the greater tising studies and found, among thedifferent users. branding effect. 138 studies that monitored users’ online As the Web continues to innovate with To provide a balanced view of display behavior following exposure to displaythe steady growth of broadband access, ad effectiveness, Briggs and Hollis in 1997 ads, a substantial lift in site visitation anduser-generated content, location-based published “Advertising on the Web: Is trademark search inquiries and increasesservices, and Internet-enabled mobile There Response Before Click-Through,” in both online and offline sales. This large-devices, more studies will be needed to one of the earliest studies on this sub- scale analysis evidenced the common wis-address the many newly emerging issues. ject. In a field experiment that involved dom that display ads do play an important pre- and post-exposure surveys and 1,232 branding role regardless of click-through.DISPLAY ADVERTISING visitors randomly exposed to a contentThe forms of advertising on the Web have site with a control banner or one of the Determinants of Click-through Ratesbeen in constant change over the past 15 three test banners, the authors reported in Although the click-through rate (CTR) is ayears. There were only four types of inter- the pages of the Journal that without the popular effectiveness measure, only a fewactive advertising (banner ads, sponsor- benefit of click-through, one simple ban- studies studying the methodology haveships, interstitials, and “others”) in the ner exposure increased consumer loyalty been published in advertising journals. InInteractive Advertising Bureau (IAB) scores ranging from 5 percent for a Web “Banner Advertisements Through A New March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  17
  6. 6. The InternetLens” (2001), Dahlen examined the impact An analysis of 209 display ads showed thatof brand familiarity and Internet userexperience on the effectiveness of banner ads with higher CTRs were characterized byads in terms of the CTR. In a field experi-ment similar to that of the Briggs and Hol- a larger size and absence of promotionallis 1997 study, the author found that adsfor familiar brands generated a higher incentives; in contrast, ads featuring animationCTR (0.05 percent) than ads for unfamil-iar brands (0.03 percent) and that less- and action phrases were ineffective.experienced users were significantly moreinclined to click on ads than more-experi-enced users. That is, the CTR decreased as characterized by a larger size and absence advertised. A study of individual andInternet users became more experienced. of promotional incentives; in contrast, ads brand factors explored the effects of site The influences of several design features featuring animation and action phrases reputation and content relevance on ban-on the CTR are investigated in a Chandon, were ineffective. Interestingly, long mes- ners of both low- and high-involvementChtourou, and Fortin (2003) Journal analy- sages on banners were found to be asso- products (Shamdasani, Stanaland, andsis of 1,258 placements for 75 clients of an ciated with higher CTRs (Robinson, Tan, 2001). The study found that the leveladvertising agency during the course of 1 Wysocka, and Hand, 2007). of product involvement moderated theyear. The weighted CTR of the placement effect in that, for banners of high-involve-averaged 0.9 percent, close to the market Executional and Situational Factors ment products, content relevance and siteaverage at the time of study. The result Design features such as ad size, copy reputation were important, whereas forshowed that call for action (“click here”), length, and use of incentives have been banners of low-involvement products,animation, and ad size were correlated investigated in several studies. One paper only site reputation was important, withpositively with the CTR. examined the user’s cognitive response as content relevance having little impact on Again, in the pages of the Journal, a Loh- a function of banner size and type in an the attitude toward the ad, the product,tia, Donthu, and Hershberger 2003 arti- experiment and found that animated ads and purchase intention.cle, “The Impact of Content and Design resulted in quick response time and bet- Display ads can be exposed to viewersElements on Banner Advertising Click- ter recall than non-animated ads and that in different ways. In 2001, a Cho, Lee, andThrough Rates,” examined the effect of large banner ads led to better comprehen- Tharp article, “Different Forced-Exposuredisplay-ad design features (color, emotion, sion and more clicks than small banner ads Levels to Banner Advertisements,” in theand incentive) on the CTR. An analysis (Li and Bukovac, 1999). Another manipu- Journal of Advertising Research tested fourof 8,725 ads indicated that the medium lated the animation speeds (slow versus degrees of forced exposure to display ads,level of color was better than the low or fast) and sequences (slow then fast ver- from forced exposure with no skip optionhigh level of color for both B2B and busi- sus fast then slow) in an experiment with to voluntary exposure. It was hypoth-ness-to-consumer (B2C) ads; that the use arousal being measured in skin conduct- esized that there would be a positiveof emotion and animation increased the ance levels (Sundar and Kalyanaraman relationship between the degree of forcedCTR for B2C ads but decreased the CTR (2004). The authors found that fast anima- exposure and the levels of ad perceptionfor B2B ads; and that the use of incentives tion grabbed more attention and elicited and click-through but a negative relation-decreased the CTR for both types of ads, greater physiological arousal—particu- ship with the attitude toward the banner,more significantly for B2B ads. Although larly when contrasted with slow anima- the brand, and purchase intention.the findings on the role of incentives tion—whereas slow animation enhanced The results indicated, however, thatseemed counterintuitive, it was important the overall appeal of a Web site, especially higher levels of forced exposure hadto raise the issue that design features func- when contrasted with fast animation. positive impacts on all five dependenttioned differently for different types of dis- The effectiveness of display ads also can measures. The authors attributed theplay ads. be influenced by factors beyond the dis- unexpected results to “the large amount of An analysis of 209 display ads play ads themselves, such as the sites car- attention paid to the banner ad presentedshowed that ads with higher CTRs were rying the banners, site users, and brands in the forced presentation format.” (p. 53).18  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  7. 7. The InternetIn a similar study, the degree of forced Planning,” Leckenby and Hong examined the audience’s exposure frequency. Test-exposure was defined as the degree of the estimation characteristics of existing ing results showed that the NBD modelcognitive interruption and manipulated reach/frequency models in the Web envi- performed satisfactorily in modelingby the way a banner was presented to the ronment using data from a syndicated online exposure in terms of both fit anduser (while reading an article on the Web service. Their analysis of 560 Web media; while getting a Web page for the sec- schedules ranging from 2 to 15 vehiclesond part of an article; and upon finishing and 4 to 30 insertions found that five of ELECTRONIC WORD OF MOUTHreading an article; Edwards, Li, and Lee, the six existing models performed as well If we say display ads are a primary com-2002). The experimental results showed on Internet data as they did for magazine ponent of the Web since its inception asthat ads that interrupted content pages or television data. The authors anticipated a commercial vehicle, electronic wordwere perceived as more intrusive than that, with better audience measures, Web of mouth (WOM) is more of a Web 2.0ads displayed between breaks in content vehicles could be mixed with traditional artifact. Several studies published in thepages, which led to advertising-avoidance media outlets in media plans. Journal of Advertising Research have exam-behavior; interrupting ads, however, were An analysis of Internet audience-meas- ined different aspects of this relativelyperceived to be less intrusive when they urement errors identified sources of such new form of user-generated content. Inwere more informative or entertaining. errors in measuring the number of visi- 2007, Keller presented some interesting The impact of the mode of Web use on tors, visits, page views, time spent, and statistics regarding WOM from a pro-the recall of display ads was explored repeat visits. Based on these findings, the prietary tracking service in a paper enti-by Danaher and Mullarkey in their 2003 authors of the report suggested the neces- tled, “Unleashing the Power of WordJournal study, “Factors Affecting Online sity of identifying unique visitors rather of Mouth: Creating Brand Advocacy toAdvertising Recall: A Study of Students.” than relying on IP addresses (Dreze and Drive Growth.” In a typical week, theIn a goal-directed mode, participants were Zufryden, 1998). study reported, the average Americanasked to evaluate the textual content of Instead of using existing models, Wood’s consumer participated in 121 WOM con-the site; in a surfing mode, participants 1998 “Internet Ad Buys—What Reach and versations, in which specific brand nameswere allowed to surf the entire site for a Frequency Do They Deliver?” demon- were mentioned 92 times. A comple-certain period of time. A major finding of strated new models that were found to mentary report used data from multiplethe experiment was that users in the goal- produce extremely good estimates of reach sources about 35 brands in five categoriesdirected mode were much less likely to and frequency for Web sites. She argued over a 26-week period to examine whetherrecall and recognize banner ads than users that the Internet had the ability to deliver advertising affected WOM both offlinewho were surfing a site. The effect of ad reach in addition to frequency and that the and online and whether WOM exertedposition and ad type were examined in a nature of a site determined the patterns of any influence on the brands (Graham and2010 experiment, and the results showed reach and frequency. That is, sites having Havlena, 2007). The results showed thatthat lower-page placement attracted more repeated visitors were good for frequency advertising can stimulate consumers toad attention than upper-page placement whereas sites having many new yet infre- advocate products and that online WOMand that medium rectangle ads generated quent visitors were good for reach. played a significant role in generatingbetter attention and more positive attitude In a 2006 edition of the Journal of Adver- offline brand advocacy in two (auto andthan leaderboard ads (Goodrich, 2010). tising Research, Huang and Lin’s “Mod- retail) of the five categories studied. That eling the Audience’s Banner Ad Exposure is, by disseminating brand messages inINTERACTIVE MEDIA PLANNING AND for Internet Advertising Planning” pro- media, advertisers could stimulate con-REACH/FREQUENCY ESTIMATES posed a negative binomial distribution sumers to talk about, and say good thingsTo integrate Web advertising with tra- (NBD) exposure model for estimating and about, their brands.ditional media advertising, the ways of predicting the reach and frequency of ban- Issues related to electronic WOM alsoestimating the reach and frequency lev- ner ads. Rather than using the number of were studied at the individual level. Inels of Web advertising exposures must be insertions as a measure of exposures, the 2004, the Phelps et al. “Viral Marketingestablished. authors counted visit sessions to specific or Electronic Word-of-Mouth Advertis- In their seminal 1998 Journal study, sub-domains of Web sites and used sub- ing: Examining Consumer Responses“Using Reach/Frequency For Web Media domain sessions as the unit to measure and Motivations to Pass Along Email” March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  19
  8. 8. The Internetproposed a four-step model of product- • Cross-media promotion of the Web Comparison of the Web with Traditionalrelated e-mail-sharing behavior, which • Comparison of the Web with the estab- Mediaconsisted of “receipt of pass-along email”; lished media In a 1997 issue of the Journal of Advertis-“decision point (open the message or • Synergies between the Web and other ing Research, the Philport and Arbittiernot)”; “reading the pass-along email”; media. “Advertising: Brand Communicationsand “decision point (forward the message Styles In Established Media and the Inter-to others or not).” Through three studies, Cross-media Promotion of the Web net” paper analyzed brand communica-the authors concluded that only a small Research of cross-media promotion in tion styles in the established media andgroup of users read and forwarded a large the Journal of Advertising Research started the Web by examining 2,042 unique ads fornumber of pass-along e-mails, which they with examination of the URLs in tradi- 60 brands in four media categories (televi-called “viral mavens.” tional advertising (Maddox, Mehta, and sion, consumer magazine, newspaper, and These mavens certainly were important Daubek, 1997). With focus groups and the Internet). The analysis suggested thatfor viral marketers. E-mail characteris- a sample of 410 interviews, the authors high Internet activity was driven heav-tics that stimulated forwarding behavior found that URLs in advertising were ily by innovative brands and that the Webincluded humor, fear, sadness, or inspira- noticed by both Internet users and non- addresses were used primarily for buildingtion. One study sampled 309 consumers Internet users and that the mere existence customer relations. The authors concluded,and identified eight motivations for seek- of a URL in an ad enhanced the adver-ing the opinions of others online: to reduce tiser’s image as more customer-oriented, With respect to the Internet, we may havetheir risk, because others do it, to secure responsive, informative, high-tech, the first advertising channel that is notlower prices, to get information easily, by sophisticated, and more likely to stay in only a medium in and of itself but also aaccident (unplanned), because it is “cool,” business longer. valuable extension of traditional channels.because they are stimulated by off-line These findings certainly encouraged With the increased appearance of Webinputs such as television, and to get pre- the placement of URLs in the established addresses in the established media, the con-purchase information (Goldsmith and media. Another report analyzed 464 sumer can elect to continue a brand rela-Horowitz, 2006). television commercials from four net- tionship initiated in an ad in one medium What consumers say about products, works and found that 21 percent of the (e.g., magazines) and extend it into a deeperwhat they share, and even what they 335 unique commercials featured a Web relationship on the for online have made current a address, but only 11 percent showed a“listening-led” approach to advertising toll-free or local phone number, indicat- In a 1998 Journal paper entitled “Newand marketing. The Journal of Advertis- ing the increase in cross-media promotion Media Interactive Advertising Vs. Tradi-ing Research has published several arti- of the Web (Edwards and La Ferle, 2000). tional Advertising,” Bezjian-Avery, Calder,cles (Jayanti, 2010; Rappaport, 2010a, A content analysis of 413 print ads from and Iacobucci conducted an experiment to2010b; Wiesenfeld, Bush, and Sikdar six consumer magazines documented 254 examine the effectiveness of interactive2010) on this subject. For example, one ads that featured URLs for 196 different advertising with traditional empirically demonstrated the links Web sites (Kanso and Nelson, 2004). The Using a hierarchical traversal design forbetween share of conversational voice authors of the last study (“Internet and interactive advertising and a linear flowand share of market, and share trends Magazine Advertising: Integrated Part- for traditional advertising, and controllingand sales predictions, and extended the nerships Or Not?”) also examined the con- advertising type (visual versus verbal)call for garnering from the next wave of tent of these featured sites and found they and type of consumer (visual versus ver-listening-driven innovations (Rappaport, were not well integrated with the print bal oriented), the study found that interac-2010c). ads in terms of more information and bet- tive advertising was not superior in terms ter visuals about the products advertised of purchase intention across all conditions.WEB INTEGRATION WITH TRADITIONAL in these print ads. As a result, better inte- That is, traditional advertising performedMEDIA gration of Web and traditional media was better for visual consumers whereas inter-On the relationship of the Web with other necessary. active advertising performed better formedia, studies have addressed three major verbal consumers. The study raised theissues: issue of matching between consumers’20  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  9. 9. The Internet rational consumers for fulfilling their Classic Excerpt: The Internet information needs. Yet another study compared ads in a print brochure and in Advertising on the Web: Is There a Web page in an experiment with 85 par- ticipants (Gallagher, Foster, and Parsons, Response Before Click-through? 2001). Although the attitude toward edi- torial content in the Web page was more Rex Briggs and Nigel Hollis critical, there was no difference in attitude toward the ads in both conditions. The authors’ explanation was that a person’s Author’s Note: This excerpt is from the first builds the advertised brand. Banner response to an ad was based on its mes- article the Journal of Advertising Research ads remind people of a brand’s exist- sage and presentation, not on the medium published on display advertising in 1997. It in which it appeared. A 2001 examination ence, stimulate latent or dormant brand argues for the branding effects of display ads of students’ attitudes and perceptions of associations, and can cause people beyond the click-through rate and provides a to change their attitudes toward the different media discovered that, at the balanced perspective on the role of display brand, thus increasing their likelihood to time of the study, the rank order of media advertising. purchase. as the top source of information was tel- “The Web offers unique and undeniable evision, magazine/newspaper, catalog/ advantages over other media in terms “The unique marketing power of the direct, radio, and the Web (Brackett and of targeting and direct marketing. One online environment and the established Carr, 2001). Five to 10 years later, however, such advantage is the ability of advertis- communication benefits of traditional the students’ perception was significantly ing banners to serve as gateways to an advertising combine to make the Web a different: the Web would top television as advertiser’s own Web site. powerful new advertising medium with their first source of information. real potential for brand building.” A campaign that involved both offline “But our results suggest that the ad Rex Briggs Nigel Hollis, “Advertising (television, radio, and print) and online banner is a legitimate advertising vehicle on the Web: Is there Response Before (display ads and search engine market- in its own right. This experiment shows Click-through?”, Journal of Advertising ing) media for an international social net- that banner ads on the HotWired Net- Research 37, 2 (1997): 33. work introduced a complex analysis of the work have a significant impact on their relative impact of each of the channels on viewers, an impact that demonstrably user behavior on several measures such as registration, activation, sales, and repeat sales (Pfeiffer and Zinnbauer, 2010). Onecognitive styles and advertising types for and effective for precipitating action for of the findings indicated that, althoughbetter outcomes. both short- and long-term promotional television attracted more users to the site Another study investigated business objectives; the Web was less effective, how- who filled the registration pipeline, con-executives’ perceptions of 10 attributes ever, for stimulating emotion, for incorpo- version was much weaker. In contrast,of the Web with other media (television, rating attention-getting devices, and for search-engine marketing (SEM) sent morepress, magazine, radio, outdoor, direct changing and maintaining attitudes. prospective users to the platform, whichmail, telemarketing, and point of pur- The influence of product types on the led to twice the amount of cash-affectingchase; Leong, Huang, and Stanners, 1998). choice of media was the focus of a 2001 memberships. As a result, SEM provedThe attributes included the ability to use study that included the Internet and tel- approximately three times the conversionattention-getting device; cost to teach tar- evision, radio, magazine, and newspa- success from a registration to a payingget market; communication of corporate per (Yoon and Kim, 2001). The findings membership than television ads.image; and ability to involve the audience. from 105 responses in Seoul, South Korea, Finally, the issue of potential mediaThe results suggested that, in comparison, implied that the Internet was a medium displacement­ by the Internet was raisedthe Web was a rational medium—more better suited for high-involvement­ prod- in the pages of the Journal by Tsaocost-effective, excellent for information, ucts that appealed to engaging and and Sibley­s 2004 “Displacement and ’ March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  21
  10. 10. The InternetUnlike previous stages … wherein isolated studies media mix given the different modes of media distribution. A major finding of thecould still inform on practical issues, advertising study was that the patterns of frequen- cies vary for online, print, and 2011 requires research that can discover Therefore, for brands that target the lowest television quintiles, it would be effectivethe dynamic, synergistic, and networked ways to use online ads to specifically target low television quintiles to reach the lightest tel-various forms of interactive advertising work. evision viewers. Using proprietary data from a cable tel- evision network, another study examinedRe­ nforcement Effects of the Internet and i tions formed brand attitudes through the whether the increased use of new mediaOther Media as Sources of Advertising peripheral route. was cannibalizing traditional media (EnochInformation.” Their study surveyed a In another text of synergy, a 2006 piece of and Johnson, 2010). The authors foundsample of 2,032 households. The results research compared an advertisement with that—contrary to the popular view—showed that, although Internet advertis- a product-publicity article, both online in there was no cross-media cannibalizationing provided many unique features, it had four different conditions (two features of between television and digital media. Theynot displaced most media as a source of a tennis racquet and either a same or dif- also noticed that the size of the media uni-advertising information. For consumers, ferent feature in the ad and article; Wang, verse should be growing as digital devicesInternet advertising was complementary, 2006). The experiment found that when made media use possible throughout thebased on their favorable attitudes or fre- the product feature was different in the ad day and in out-of-home locations. Thequent use of other media advertising. and the article, higher believability was authors termed this phenomenon as “new achieved among the participants toward markets of time” (p. 135).Synergistic Effects of the Web and Other the ad and that such an effect was absentMedia when the same feature was introduced in NEW CONCEPTS AND MODELS OFWeb advertising has long been integrated the ad and the article. The explanation was ADVERTISINGwith the established media in many that the varied features strengthened par- Although most studies in the Journal ofadvertising campaigns. Little research on ticipants’ perceived message believability Advertising Research have focused on dif-the subject was available, however, until toward the ad because participants might ferent aspects of the Web and associatedChang and Thorson’s “Television and be motivated to process the varied messages interactive advertising, several stud-Web Advertising Synergies” study in 2004. in the ad but might be less likely to do so ies have advanced concepts and mod-The authors conducted an experiment of when seeing the same message in the ad. els regarding the nature, processes, andeight conditions (four media conditions by A field experiment employed a combi- mechanisms of interactive advertising.two product types) designed to isolate the nation of an online panel and Web-inter- These concepts and models are essentialexistence of different synergy effects and cept sampling techniques to provide a in building our knowledge of how inter-to compare the information-processing representative sample for exposure to a active advertising works. In one of themodel of synergy with that of repetition. cross-platform package good campaign first conceptualizations of marketing onThe findings suggested that television/ involving television, print, and online the Internet, authors Hoffman and NovakWeb synergy led to significantly higher advertising (Havlena, Cardarelli, and (1996) stated that the many-to-many com-attention, higher perceived message cred- Montigny, 2007). The assumption of the munication model turned traditional prin-ibility, and a greater number of total and “Quantifying the Isolated and Synergis- ciples of mass-media advertising based onpositive thoughts than repetition. The tic Effects of Exposure Frequency for TV, the one-to-many model inside out, mak-study also revealed that people under syn- Print, and Internet Advertising” paper ing obsolete marketing and advertisingergistic conditions formed brand attitudes was that an examination of exposure fre- approaches that assumed a passive, captivethrough the central processing route, quency could generate insight into media consumer. They proposed a model of net-whereas people under repetitive condi- synergies at the individual consumer level work navigation in hyper­ edia compu- m and could suggest improvements to the ter-mediated environments, and many of22  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  11. 11. The Internetthe concepts and relationships in the model be goal-directed or just playful. Next was advertising in the Journal of Advertisinghave guided future studies of the Web and the layer of information processes involv- Research for the past 15 years. The reviewinteractive advertising. ing attention, memory, and attitude. In was written in the hope that exemplary In the advertising area, Ducoffe’s the middle of the model came advertiser- studies in the past can inspire new qual-“Advertising Value and Advertising on controlled factors, including ad types, ad ity studies of interactive advertising. As inthe Web” (1996) proposed a model of atti- formats, and ad features. And finally, the the profession of advertising itself, inno-tude toward Web advertising based on his model ended with a set of user responses vative studies are often those that enterearlier research of advertising value. The consisting of attention to ads, clicks on ads, uncharted territories, anticipate the future,model posited that Web advertising value and purchases made online. The layers explore new segments of users, adopt newwas positively affected by informativeness and elements of the model were detailed and sophisticated methods and, finally,and entertainment and negatively affected in the article, which provided a useful con- generate new insights as to how interac-by irritation and that advertising value, in ceptual map of interactive advertising. tive advertising works and how it canturn, affected attitude toward Web adver- New models were further developed achieve better outcomes.tising. Data from a survey of 318 respond- to illustrate how advertising works in the The field of interactive advertising noents who reported to be familiar with Web 2.0 age. In 2007, Rappaport’s “Les- doubt will continue to change, and newthe Web confirmed the structural model. sons From Online Practice: New Advertis- studies are necessary to advance ourInformativeness, entertainment, and irri- ing Models” observed a paradigm shift in understanding in deeper ways. Social-tation as drivers of advertising value have advertising from the interruption model to networking media have become the lat-been widely adopted in subsequent stud- models centered on relevance because of est environments in which cutting-edgeies of interactive advertising. new technologies and associated changes advertising and marketing activities take Advances of interactive advertising in consumer behavior. The on-demand place.have called for refined effectiveness con- model sees that consumers are content Unlike previous stages of interac-cepts and measures. In response, in 1997 in aggregators, filterers, schedulers, expos- tive advertising, wherein isolated stud-the pages of the Journal, Harvey expanded ers, and disposers; the media and adver- ies could still inform on practical issues,the Advertising Research Foundation’s tisers are providers of necessary platforms advertising in 2011 requires research that1961 model of the six-level advertising pro- and tools for consumers to generate their can discover the dynamic, synergistic,cess in a paper he called “The Expanded own content and customize product and networked ways various forms ofARF Model: Bridge to the Accountable information to their interests, needs, and interactive advertising work in the mar-Advertising Future.” Increasingly used tastes. Rappaport’s engagement model ket. As we have seen, the Web has beenmeasures such as recall, click-through, emphasized the high relevance of brands fully integrated with, if not yet displacedand lead generation and profits, loyal cus- to consumers and the development of an by, other media; consumers are sociallytomers, and return on investment enabled emotional connection between consumers connected closely as never before; andthe expansion of this popular model. Inte- and brands—a dynamic that is highly vis- the union of advertising with editorialgrating ideas of industry experts, Harvey ible in many successful campaigns. media and entertainment is taking placepresented a new model to include two Finally, the advertising-as-service model in many forms. These trends no doubtrenamed levels of the previous model and takes for granted the role of advertising in will continue.four new levels, increasing the new model providing consumers with information To address these changes and move ourto 10 levels. The model, he added, could be and abilities that can smooth transac- profession forward, future studies needcustomized for measuring both traditional tions or enhance brand engagement. It is to take advantage of newer approachesand interactive advertising effectiveness. evident that each of the models stresses such as neuroscience and biometric In 2000, Rodgers and Thorson devel- certain aspects of advertising and, in com- techniques, behavioral economics, net-oped a structural model that portrayed bination, these models are of the essence work analysis, and mining of massivehow users perceive and process online for advertising in today’s marketplace. data among others. The author hopes toads. The model started with the user see more groundbreaking studies in themotives of Internet use, including shop- SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Journal of Advertising Research and otherping, research, communication, and social- This paper is viewed best as a sketch of sig- advertising journals in the years to come. izing; these motives, they allowed, might nificant studies on the Web and interactive March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  23
  12. 12. The InternetAcknowledgment Hierarchy-of-Effects.” Journal of Advertising Dahlen, Micael. “Banner Advertisements Research 40, 1/2 (2000): 35–42. Through A New Lens.” Journal of AdvertisingThe author thanks Sung-Mi Lee for her assist- Research 41, 4 (2001): 23–30.ance on this project. Bush, Alan J., Victoria Bush, and Sharon Har- ris. “Advertiser Perceptions of the Internet As Danaher, Peter J., and Guy W. Mullarkey.Hairong Li is a professor of advertising at Michigan “Factors Affecting Online Advertising Recall: A Marketing Communications Tool.” Journal ofState University. His research covers theoretical A Study of Students.” Journal of Advertising Advertising Research 38, 2 (1998): 17–27.and managerial issues of advertising, media, and Research 43, 3 (2003): 252–267.branding. He has received research grants from Bush, Alan J., and Victoria D. Bush. “PotentialGoogle, WPP, Microsoft, AAA, the MSU Foundation, Challenges the Internet Brings to the Agency- Deighton, John. “The Future of Interactive Mar-and other sources in recent years. He is editor of Advertiser Relationship.” Journal of Advertising keting.” Harvard Business Review 74, 6 (1996):the Journal of Interactive Advertising and an editorial Research 40, 4 (2000): 7–16. 151–152.board member of six academic journals in the UnitedStates, Europe, and Asia and one branding magazine Donthu, Naveen, and Adriana Garcia. “The Chakraborty, Goutam, Vishal Lala, and Davidin China. Email: Internet Shopper.” Journal of Advertising Research Warren. “What Do Customers Consider Impor- 39, 3 (1999): 52–58. tant In B2B Websites?” Journal of Advertising Research 43, 1 (2003): 50–61.References Dreze, Xavier, and Fred Zufryden. “Testing­ Web Site Design and Promotional Content.” Journal of Chandon, Jean Louis, Mohamed Saber Chtourou,Assael, Henry. “A Demographic and Psycho- Advertising Research 37, 2 (1997): 77–91. and David R. Fortin. “Effects of Configurationgraphic Profile of Heavy Internet Users and and Exposure Levels on Responses to WebUsers by Type of Internet Usage.” Journal of Dreze, Xavier, and Fred Zufryden. “Is Internet­ Advertisements.” Journal of Advertising ResearchAdvertising Research 45, 1 (2005): 93–123. Advertising Ready For Prime Time?” Journal of 43, 2 (2003): 217–229. Advertising Research 38, 3 (1998): 7–18.Berthon, Pierre, Leyland F. Pitt, and Richard T. Chang, Yuhmiin, and Esther Thorson. “Televi-Watson. “The World Wide Web As an Adver- Ducoffe, Robert H. “Advertising Value and sion and Web Advertising Synergies.” Journal oftising Medium: Toward an Understanding of Advertising on the Web.” Journal of Advertising Advertising 33, 2 (2004): 75–84.Conversion Efficiency.” Journal of Advertising Research 36, 5 (1996): 21–35.Research 36, 1 (1996): 43–54. Chen, Qimei, and William D. Wells. “Attitude Edwards, Steven, and Carrie La Ferle. “CrossBezjian-Avery, Alexa Calder, Bobby Calder­ , Toward the Site.” Journal of Advertising Research Media Promotion of the Internet In Televeison­ and Dawn Iacobucci. “New Media Interactive­ 39, 5 (1999): 27–37. Commercials.” Journal of Current Issues andAdvertising Vs. Traditional Advertising.” Jour- Research In Advertising 22, 1 (2000): 1–12.nal of Advertising Research 38, 4 (1998): 23–32. Cho, Chang-Hoan, and Hyoung Koo Khang. “The State of Internet-Related Research In Com- Edwards, Steven M., Hairong Li, and Joo-HyunBrackett, Lana K., and Benjamin N. Carr Jr. munication, Marketing, and Advertising: 1994- Lee. “Forced Exposure and Psychological Reac-“Cyberspace Advertising vs. Other Media: Con- 2003.” Journal of Advertising 35, 3 (2006): 142–163. tance: Antecedents and Consequences of thesumer vs. Mature Student Attitudes.” Journal of Perceived Intrusiveness of Pop-Up Ads.” JournalAdvertising Research 41, 5 (2001): 23–32. Cho, Chang-Hwang, Jung-Gyo Lee, and Marye of Advertising 31, 3 (2002): 83–95. Tharp. “Different Forced-Exposure Levels toBriggs, Rex, and Nigel Hollis. “Advertising Banner Advertisements.” Journal of Advertising Eighmey, John. “Profiling User Responses toon the Web: Is There Response Before Click- Research 41, 4 (2001): 45–56. Commercial Web Sites.” Journal of AdvertisingThrough?” Journal of Advertising Research 37, 2 Research 37, 3 (1997): 59–66.(1997): 33–45. Coyle, James R., and Esther Thorson. “The Effects of Progressive Levels of Interactivity and Enoch, Glenn, and Kelly Johnson. “Cracking theBruner, Gordon C. II, and Anand Kumar. Vividness in Web Marketing Sites.” Journal of Cross-Media Code: How to Use Single-Source“Web Commercials and Advertising Advertising 30, 3 (2001): 65–77. Measures to Examine Media Cannibalization24  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  13. 13. The Internetand Convergence.” Journal of Advertising Research Ha, Louisa, and E. Lincoln James. “Interactivity Kanso, Ali M., and Richard Alan Nelson. “Inter-50, 2 (2010): 125–136. Reexamined: A Baseline Analysis of Early Busi- net and Magazine Advertising: Integrated Part- ness Web Sites.” Journal of Broadcasting and Elec- nerships Or Not?” Journal of Advertising Research tronic Media 42, 4 (1998): 456–474. 44, 4 (2004): 317–326.Ford, John B., and Altaf Merchant. “A Ten-YearRetrospective of Advertising Research Produc-tivity, 1997–2006.” Journal of Advertising 37, 3 Harvey, Bill. “The Expanded ARF Model: Keller, Ed. “Unleashing the Power of Word(2008): 69–94. Bridge to the Accountable Advertising Future.” of Mouth: Creating Brand Advocacy to Drive Journal of Advertising Research 37, 2 (1997): 11–20. Growth.” Journal of Advertising Research 47, 4 (2007): 448–452.Fulgoni, Gian M., and Marie Pauline Mörn. Havlena, William, Robert Cardarelli, and“Whither the Click? How Online Advertis- Michelle De Montigny. “Quantifying the Iso-ing Works.” Journal of Advertising Research 49, 2 Kim, Juran, and Sally J. Mcmillan. “Evaluation­ lated and Synergistic Effects of Exposure(2009): 134–142. of Internet Advertising Research: A Bibliometric Frequency for Television, Print, and Internet analysis of Citations From Key Sources.” Journal Advertising.” Journal of Advertising Research 47, of Advertising 37, 1 (2008): 99–112.Gallagher, Katherine, K. Dale Foster, and 3 (2007): 215–221.Jeffrey Parsons. “The Medium Is Not theMessage: Advertising Effectiveness and Con- Korgaonkar, Pradeep K., and Lori D. Wolin. “A Heeter, Carrie. “Interactivity in the Context oftent Evaluation In Print and on the Web.” Multivariate Analysis of Web Usage.” Journal of Designed Experiences.” Journal of InteraractiveJournal of Advertising Research 41, 4 (2001): Advertising Research 39, 2 (1999): 53–68. Advertising 1, 1 (2000)57–70. Leckenby, John D., and Jongpil Hong. “Using Hoffman, Donna L. , and Thomas P. Novak.Ghose, Sanjoy, and Wenyu Dou. “Interactive Reach/Frequency For Web Media Planning.” “Marketing In Hypermedia Computer-Medi-Functions and Their Impacts on the Appeal of Journal of Advertising Research 38, 1 (1998): 7–20. ated Environments: Conceptual Foundations.”Internet Presence Sites.” Journal of Advertising Journal of Marketing 60, 3 (1996): 50–68.Research 38, 2 (1998): 29–43. Leong, Elaine K. F., Xueli Huang, and Paul-John Hollis, Nigel.”Ten Years of Learning on How Stanners. “Comparing the Effectiveness of theGoldsmith, Ronald E., and David Horowitz­ . Online Advertising Builds Brands.” Journal of Web Site With Traditional Media.” Journal of“Measuring Motivations For Online Opinion Advertising Research 45, 2 (2005): 255–268. Advertising Research 38, 5 (1998): 44–51.Seeking.” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 46, 1(2006): 3–14. Li, Hairong, and Janice L. Bukovac. “Cognitive Huang, Chun-Yao, and Chen-Shun Lin. “Mod- eling the Audience’s Banner Ad Exposure For Impact of Banner Ad Characteristics: an Experi-Goodrich, Kendall. “What’s Up? Exploring Internet Advertising Planning.” Journal of Adver- mental Study.” Journalism and Mass Communica-Upper and Lower Visual Field Advertising tising 35, 2 (2006): 123–136. tion Quarterly 76, 2 (1999): 341–353.Effects.” Journal of Advertising Research 50, 1(2010): 91–106. Interactive Advertising Bureau. IAB Inter- Li, Hairong, and John D. Leckenby. Examining net Advertising Revenue Report: 1998 Full-Year the Effectiveness of Internet Advertising Formats.Graham, Jeffrey, and William Havlena. “Find- Results. 1999. In Internet Advertising: Theory and Research, D. the ‘Missing Link’: Advertising’s Impact Schumann and E. Thorson, eds. Hillsdale, NJ:on Word of Mouth, Web Searches and Site Vis- Interactive Advertising Bureau. IAB Inter- Lawrence Erlbaum, 2007.its.” Journal of Advertising Research 47, 4 (2007): net Advertising Revenue Report: 2009 Full-Year427–435. Results. 2010. Li, Hairong, Cheng Kuo, and Martha G. Rus- sell. “The Impact of Perceived Channel Utili-Ha, Louisa. “Online Advertising Research In Jayanti, Rama K. “A Netnographic Explora- ties, Shopping Orientations, and DemographicsAdvertising Journals: A Review.” Journal of Cur- tion: Listening to Online Consumer Conversa- on the Consumer’s Online Buying Behavior.”rent Issues and Research In Advertising 30, 1 (2008): tions.” Journal of Advertising Research 50, 2 (2010): Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 5, 231–48. 181–196. (1999): 1–20 March 2011 Supplement  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  25
  14. 14. The InternetLiu, Yuping. “Developing A Scale to Measure the Pfeiffer, Markus, and Markus Zinnbauer. “Can Rodgers, Shelly, and Esther Thorson. “The Inter-Interactivity of Websites.” Journal of Advertising Old Media Enhance New Media?: How Tradi- active Advertising Model: How Users PerceiveResearch 43, 2 (2003): 207–216. tional Advertising Pays off For an Online Social and Process Online Ads.” Journal of Interactive Network.” Journal of Advertising Research 50, 1 Advertising 1, 1 (2000): 42–61.Liu, Yuping, and L. J. Shrum. “What Is Interac- (2010): 42–49.tivity and Is It Always Such A Good Thing? Shamdasani, Prem N., Andrea J. S. Stanaland,Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation Phelps, Joseph E., Regina Lewis, Lynne Mobilio, and Juliana Tan. “Location, Location, Location:for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising David Perry, and Niranjan Raman. “Viral Mar- Insights For Advertising Placement on the Web.”Effectiveness.” Journal of Advertising 31, 4 (2002): keting or Electronic Word-of-Mouth Adver- Journal of Advertising Research 41, 4 (2001): 7–21.53–64. tising: Examining Consumer Responses and Motivations to Pass Along Email.” Journal of Stevenson, Julie S., Gordon C. Bruner II, andLohtia, Ritu, Naveen Donthu, and Edmund Anand Kumar. “Webpage Background and Advertising Research 44, 4 (2004): 333–348.K. Hershberger. “The Impact of Content and Viewer Attitudes.” Journal of Advertising ResearchDesign Elements on Banner Advertising Click- 40, 1/2 (2000): 29–34. Philport, Joseph C., and Jerry Arbittier. “Adver-Through Rates.” Journal of Advertising Research tising: Brand Communications Styles in Estab-43, 4 (2003): 410–418. lished Media and the Internet.” Journal of Sundar, S. Shyam, and Sriram Kalyanaraman. Advertising Research 37, 2 (1997): 68–75. “Arousal, Memory, and Impression-FormationLynch, Patrick D., Robert J. Kent, and Srini S. Srin- Effects of Animation Speed In Web Advertis-ivasan. “The Global Internet Shopper: Evidence ing.” Journal of Advertising 33, 1 (2004): 7–17.From Shopping Tasks In Twelve Countries.” Jour- Rappaport, Stephen D. “Lessons From Onlinenal of Advertising Research 41, 3 (2001): 15–23. Practice: New Advertising Models.” Journal of Tsao, James C., and Stanley D. Sibley. “Displace- Advertising Research 47, 2 (2007): 135–141. ment and Reinforcement Effects of the InternetMaddox, Lynda M., and Darshan Mehta. “The and Other Media as Sources of AdvertisingRole and Effect of Web Addresses In Advertis- Rappaport, Stephen D. “Putting Listening to Information.” Journal of Advertising Research 44,ing.” Journal of Advertising Research 37, 2 (1997): Work: The Essentials of Listening.” Journal of 1 (2004): 126–142.47–59. Advertising Research 50, 1 (2010a): 30–41. Wang, Alex. “When Synergy In MarketingMaddox, Lynda M., Darshan Mehta, and Rappaport, Stephen D. “Listening Solutions: A Communication Online Enhances AudienceHugh G. Daubek. “The Role and Effect of Web Marketer’s Guide to Software and Services.” Response: The Effects of Varying AdvertisingAddresses in Advertising.” Journal of Advertising Journal of Advertising Research 50, 2 (2010b): and Product Publicity Messages.” Journal ofResearch 37, 2 (1997): 47–59. 197–213. Advertising Research 46, 2 (2006): 160–170.McDonald, Scott C. “The Once and Future Web: Rappaport, Stephen D. “Cutting Edges: Lis- Wiesenfeld, David, Kristin Bush, and Ronjan Sik-Scenarios For Advertisers.” Journal of Advertising tening-Led Marketing Science, Media Strate- dar. “The Value of Listening: Heeding the CallResearch 37, 2 (1997): 21–28. gies, and Organizations.” Journal of Advertising of the Snuggie.” Journal of Advertising Research Research 50, 3 (2010c): 305–315. 50, 1 (2010): 16–20.Mcmillan, Sally J., and Jang-Sun Hwang. “Meas-ures of Perceived Interactivity: an Exploration ofthe Role of Direction of Communication, User Robinson, Helen, Anna Wysocka, and Chris Wood, Leslie. “Internet Ad Buys—What ReachControl, and Time In Shaping Perceptions of Hand. “Internet Advertising Effectiveness: The and Frequency Do They Deliver?” Journal ofInteractivity.” Journal of Advertising 31, 3 (2002): Effect of Design on Click-Through Rates For Advertising Research 38, 1 (1998): 21–28.29–42. Banner Ads.” International Journal of Advertising 26, 4 (2007): 527–541. Yoon, Sung-Joon, and Joo-Ho Kim. “Is the Inter-McMillan, Sally J., Jang-Sun Hwang, and Gui- net More Effective Than Traditional Media?ohk Lee. “Effects of Structural and Perceptual Rodgers, Shelly, and Kennon M. Sheldon. “An Factors Affecting the Choice of Media.”Factors on Attitudes Toward the Website.” Jour- Improved Way to Characterize Internet Users.” Journal of Advertising Research 41, 6 (2001):nal of Advertising Research 43, 4 (2003): 400–409. Journal of Advertising Research 42, 5 (2002): 85–94. 53–60.26  JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH  March 2011 Supplement
  15. 15. Copyright of Journal of Advertising Research is the property of World Advertising Research Center Limitedand its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyrightholders express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.