The Effect of Involvement, Arousal, and Pace on Claim and Non-claim Components of Attitude toward the Ad

Yoon, Kak; Bolls, Paul D.; Muehling, Darrel D.

doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0104_3

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For each participant, we ranked the ads they viewed in ascending order of viewing angle, and averaged the dependent variables across the top and bottom halves (four ads in each half for viewers who watched the Full Sitcom, see below; two ads in each half for the Short Extract) to create two repeated measures for each participant (cf. Yoon, Bolls, & Muehling, 1999): the average for ads seen with a narrow Viewing Angle (from further away) and the average for ads seen with a wider Viewing Angle (from closer in). Within subjects, there were significant differences between the average Viewing Angles for these two groups of ads on every Screen Type except the TV (Table 1), mainly because only 16% of TV viewers (18 of 110) watched ads from noticeably different distances compared to 87% of PC viewers (90 of 103) and 100% of (all 107) iPod viewers (χ 2 (2) = 200.19, p < .001).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Viewing Angle Matters-Screen Type Does Not

Bellman

Schweda

Varan

2009

Journal of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly, television content is available to viewers across 3 different screen types: TVs, personal computers (PCs), and portable devices such as mobile phones and iPods. The purpose of this study was to see what effect physical and apparent screen size has upon ad effectiveness. Using a sample of 320 members of the Australian public, we found that TV ads can be just as effective on PCs and iPods. However, controlling for screen type, ads viewed from a closer distance (i.e. with a wider viewing angle) were more likely to be recalled the next day, and were associated with more favorable brand attitudes. Shorter programs, product relevance, and use of close-ups and detailed images made no difference to this general viewing-angle effect.On October 12, 2005, Apple's CEO Steve Jobs launched the video iPod, holding it up to show how it could play episodes of top-rated ABC network TV shows such as Desperate Housewives, which viewers could download for just $1.99 (Wingfield & Smith, 2005, B.1). Six months later, in April 2006, Disney began making many of these same TV shows downloadable for free to iPods and personal computers (PCs) by including ads inserted in the content, which viewers were unable to skip through (Fleetwood, 2006). Today, watching video on these other screens -the PC and the ''third screen '' (Balaji, Landers, Kates, & Moritz, 2005), mobile devices like the cell phone and the video iPod -has become an essential part of everyday life for many people (O'Hara, Mitchell, & Vorbau, 2007). In TV's new landscape, advertisers will increasingly need to follow their audiences onto these other screens to ensure they reach their target markets with effective levels of exposure. In order to plan their media schedules in a new world of multiple screens, it is important for advertisers to better understand the likely impact of TV ads when they are not seen on a TV screen. This study set out to answer the question: ''Are ads seen on an iPod or a PC as effective as ads seen on a TV?''Little is known about the different effects of TV ads when seen across PC, iPod, and smaller mobile phone screens, compared to viewing them on a normal TV screen.What research has been carried out has either investigated the feasibility of showing video on these devices, rather than its effects (e.g. Heppner, Benkofske, & Moritz, 2004;Knoche, McCarthy, & Sasse, 2005), or the difficulties of creating content for portable devices, which vary so widely in operating systems and capabilities (Rondeau, 2005). Other research has compared the effects of different types of content, such as video versus still pictures, when seen on portable screens (e.g. Nasco & Bruner, 2007;Ravaja, 2004). Only a few studies have compared video content seen on small screens with the same content seen on larger screens, such as a domestic TV set (e.g. Bracken & Pettey, 2007;Kelley, 2007;Reeves, Lang, Kim, & Tatar, 1999). Those studies have compared programs rather than ads, specifically. The unique contribution of this study is that it is the first to compare ad...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Viewing Angle Matters-Screen Type Does Not

Bellman

Schweda

Varan

2009

Journal of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Past this point, both emotional experiences and memory can deteriorate, as the individual is faced with too much to effectively or enjoyably process. In sum, moderately increasing the number of elements in a message can increase the extent to which the message is cognitively processed, which corresponds with increased involvement or interest in the message (Lang, 2000;Yoon, Bolls, & Muehling, 1999).…”

Section: Music Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovating Radio News: Effects of Background Music Complexity on Processing and Enjoyment

Carpentier

2010

Journal of Radio & Audio Media

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although viewers can actively control attention to stimuli based on their goals, interests, and intentions, formal or structural features of messages trigger automatic (unconscious) attentional processes. Structural features include cuts, edits, pacing, camera movement, scene changes, and narrative structure as well as video graphics (Geiger & Reeves, 1993;Yoon, Bolls, & Muehling, 1999). Content features, on the other hand, include the story, its characters, the plot, and the actions featured in the story (Geiger & Reeves, 1993;.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations Between Message Features and Subjective Evaluations of the Sensation Value of Antidrug Public Service Announcements

Morgan

Palmgreen

Stephenson

et al. 2003

Journal of Communication

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effective targeting of high sensation-seeking adolescents, who are most at risk for drug abuse, requires the creation of high sensation value messages. Whereas previous research has focused on subjective reactions of receivers as the primary way to define message sensation value (MSV), we conceptualize message sensation value as the formal and content features (audio, visual, and format) of a message that contribute to subjective message sensation evaluations. The three objectives of this study were (a) to identify message design features that would aid in the development of effective prevention messages targeting high sensation seekers, (b) to develop an objective measure of message sensation value based on formal and content features of messages, and (c) to determine whether high message sensation value messages were associated with higher subjective evaluations of message sensation value. In the present study, 418 undergraduates each viewed 10 PSAs selected at random from a pool of 109 PSAs that had been previously coded for message sensation value. Analyses provide support for the central hypothesis of the study, indicating that perceived message sensation value is at least in part a product of the formal and content features of a PSA.In 1998, the U.S. Congress stepped up the nation's focus on drug and alcohol abuse by allocating $1 billion to the Office of National Drug Control Policy for mass media-based prevention campaigns and evaluations. We now know some of the key elements of effective media-based antidrug campaigns, including effec-

show abstract

The Effect of Involvement, Arousal, and Pace on Claim and Non-claim Components of Attitude toward the Ad

Cited by 21 publications

References 43 publications

Viewing Angle Matters-Screen Type Does Not

Viewing Angle Matters-Screen Type Does Not

Innovating Radio News: Effects of Background Music Complexity on Processing and Enjoyment

Associations Between Message Features and Subjective Evaluations of the Sensation Value of Antidrug Public Service Announcements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About