While several studies have focused on native advertisements’ disclosures, little research has been conducted on native advertisement’s content. Therefore, this experimental study investigated the influence of both disclosures and brand presence (as a content factor) on readers’ persuasion knowledge (PK) and subsequent evaluations. Online news readers (N = 290) were shown a native advertisement with either a top-, middle, or top-and-middle positioned disclosure and either high or low brand presence. Results showed that middle-positioned disclosures were most often recognized, resulting in higher conceptual PK. Yet, disclosure recognition did not affect attitudinal PK and evaluations. Conversely, high brand presence did not increase readers’ conceptual PK, but it did increase attitudinal PK, which subsequently decreased readers’ evaluations of the ad, brand and news medium. These findings have important implications to both news media and advertisers.

1. TO DISGUISE, OR DISCLOSE?
The influence of disclosure recognition and brand presence
on readers’ responses towards native advertisements
in online news media.
Simone Krouwer, Karolien Poels & Steve Paulussen
University of Antwerp
Simone.krouwer@uantwerpen.be
Twitter: @SimoneKrouwer

2. Suffers from “Banner Blindness”
AN AVERAGE ONLINE NEWS READER…
Doesn’t pay
anything for
online news
(BE: 88%)
Uses an
AD blocker
(BE: 23%)

3.  Non-disruptive advertising
 Look and feel of news article
 Federal Trade Commission:
“A disclosure may be necessary
to prevent deception”
NATIVE ADVERTISING
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

4. STATE OF THE ART: DISCLOSURES Sponsored
by science
Can increase ad recognition (conceptual PK)
(e.g. Van Reijmersdal, 2016)
Can subsequently lead to negative attitudinal responses
 Attitudinal PK  Skeptical processing
(Boerman et al., 2012)
Can lower evaluations of the advertisement and advertiser
 Decrease in credibility (Wojdynski, 2015)
No studies yet on impact on news website
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

5. Persuasion Knowledge:
Conceptual PK  Ad recognition
Attitudinal PK  Critial / skeptical processing
WE DON’T WANT TO BE MANIPULATED…
(e.g. Boerman, 2014)

6. HOWEVER…
Readers often don’t recognize disclosures! (less dan 25%)
 Highest disclosure recognition when they are middle-positioned
(Wojdynski, 2015)
Disclosure (and subsequently ad) recognition does not always lead to
negative evaluations of the ad and context…
 (E.g. Becker-Olsen, 2003; Carr and Hayes, 2014)
 Other factors may play a moderating role
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

7. WHAT ABOUT THE CONTENT?
Case study: “Negative evaluation of native ad cannot be explained by disclosure”.
(Carlson, 2015)
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

8. BRAND PRESENCE
High brand presence can increase suspicion
Information Utility & Inferences of Manipulative Intent
Increase in value for reader = 
Advertisement mainly benefits the advertiser = 
(e.g. Campbell, 1995; Sweetser, 2016)
High brand presence  less benefits  lower attitude
towards the ad. (e.g. Wentzel, Tomczak, & Herrmann,2010)
Negative advertising experiences may spill-over on the
context. (Yang and Oliver, 2004; Ha and Litman; 1997)
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

9. EXPECTATIONS
Disclosure position and recognition
H: A middle-positioned disclosure will be more often recognized than a top-
positoned disclosure
RQ: Will a top-positioned disclosure combined with a middle-positioned
disclosure significantly increase disclosure recognition?
H: Both disclosure recognition and high brand presence will:
Increase conceptual PK
Increase attitudinal PK
Decrease attitude towards the ad and advertiser,
mediated by increased attitudinal PK
Negatively influence news website credibility,
mediated by increased attitudinal PK
H: Brand presence will moderate the effects of disclosure recognition:
 High brand presence will increase the negative effects.
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

10. Disclosure position
Conceptual
PK
Attitudinal
PK
AadAb
News website
credibility
High Low
Brand presence
Disclosure
recognition
Involvement
News website
experience
3 X 2 EXPERIMENT
Top Middle Top + Middle
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp
+
+
+
+
- - -

11. THREE DISCLOSURE CONDITIONS

12. 2 BRAND PRESENCE CONDITIONS

13. 46,9% Male
53,1% Female
290 ONLINE NEWS READERS
Average age:
42 years
Min. age = 18
Max. age = 66
73%
Visits more than
once a week the
news website
 Binary Logistic
Regression
 ANCOVA analysis
 Preacher & Hayes
mediation analysis
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

14. DISCLOSURE RECOGNITION
 Middle - positioned disclosure
sig. more often recognized
(22.8% VS 11.2%)
X No added value of top- and
middle-positioned disclosure
(26.7% VS 22.8%)
X Attitudinal PK
X Aad
 Conceptual PK
F(1, 285) = 8.81, p = .004)
Disclosure recognition
X Ab
X News website
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp
+
+
-
-
-

15. BRAND PRESENCE
X Conceptual PK
 Attitudinal PK
(F(1, 283) = 139.24, p < .001)
High Low
Brand presence
News website
(B = -.36, SE = .08; 95%
CI = -.543 to -.200).
 Ab
(B = -.23, SE = .08; 95%
CI = -.397 – -.079).
 Aad
(B = -.69, SE = .12; 95%
CI = -.960 to -.472).
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp
• All effects controlled for news website experience and involvement
• News website, Ab and Aad mediated by attitudinal PK
-
-
-
+
+

16. Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp
DISCLOSURE RECOGNITION BRAND PRESENCE

17. CONCLUSION
Disclose! But disguise the brand…
1. No influence of disclosures on readers’ attitudinal PK & evaluations…
 VS other studies?  Different disclosures, different contexts…
2. Influence of brand presence on all evaluations, mediated by attitudinal PK
 Important to focus more on brand presence, and other content factors?
 Focus more on attitudinal parts of PK!
3. Especially important for news media’s credibility
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

18. LIMITATIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH
Limitations
 Self-reported disclosure recognition
 Existing, well-known brand
 Only short-term effects for news media
Future research
 Other content characteristics, e.g. two-sided information (Eisend, 2007)
 Different types of brands (also fictive brands)
 Long-term effects for advertisers and news media
 More direct measurements of attitudes and behavior
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

19. THANKS!
ANY QUESTIONS? 
Simone Krouwer, Karolien Poels & Steve Paulussen
University of Antwerp
Simone.krouwer@uantwerpen.be
@SimoneKrouwer

21. BACK-UP
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

22. DISCLOSURE RECOGNITION BRAND PRESENCE
X There was no significant
influence on conceptual PK
 A disclosure positioned at the middle
of a page was more often recognized
 This disclosure recognition increased
Conceptual PK
X Disclosure recognition did not
increase attitudinal PK
 High brand presence did
increase attitudinal PK
X Disclosure recognition did not
decrease Aad, Ab & evaluation of the
news website
 Which subsequently sig. decreased
Aad, Ab & News website evaluation
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp

23. 2. DISCLOSURE POSITION AND RECOGNITION
Top-positioned
disclosure
Middle-positioned
disclosire
Top-and-midle
positioned
disclosure
Yes 11,1% 22,8% 26,7%
No 88,9% 77,2% 73,3%
The text contained the label: “aangeboden door Samsung”.
Have you seen this label?

24. BRAND PRESENCE
High Low Significantie
Conceptual PK 4.49 4.23 p = .120.
Attitudinal PK 4.40* 3.28* p < .001.
Aad 5.08* 4.54* p < .001.
Ab 4.26* 4.41* p = .043.
News website 4.28* 4.70* p = .001.
* = significantly different

25. DISCLOSURE RECOGNITION
Yes No Significantie
Conceptual PK 4.75* 4.27* p = .004
Attitudinal PK 3.95 3.96 p = .960
Aad 4.63 4.82 p = .971
Ab 4.43 4.31 p = .362
News website 4.40 4.50 p = .196
* = significantly different

26. 5 EXPLAINING THE NEGATIVE EFFECT OF HIGH BRAND PRESENCE
Degree to which readers felt manipulated by the text
1 = Not al all, 4 = neutral, 7 = Very strong
In low brand prominence
conditions
3.28 4.40
In high brand prominence
conditions