IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elcore/v23y2023i3d10.1007_s10660-021-09523-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The processing of native advertising compared to banner advertising: an eye-tracking experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Freya De Keyzer

    (KU Leuven
    University of Antwerp)

  • Nathalie Dens

    (Antwerp Management School)

  • Patrick De Pelsmacker

    (University of Antwerp
    Ghent Univerisity)

Abstract

This paper aims to better understand the effect of visual attention on the processing of banner and native advertisements on Facebook and consequently on brand recognition and brand attitude. Using an eye-tracking experiment (N = 90), we show that a native advertisement attracts more and longer visual attention (i.e., total fixation duration, fixation count, and average visit duration) compared to a banner advertisement. Moreover, we show that longer visual attention (i.e., total fixation duration and average visit duration) increases persuasion knowledge and the recognition of an advertisement, which in turn leads to better brand recognition. Second, we show that neither conceptual persuasion knowledge nor critical processing mediates the effect of visual attention on brand attitude.

Suggested Citation

  • Freya De Keyzer & Nathalie Dens & Patrick De Pelsmacker, 2023. "The processing of native advertising compared to banner advertising: an eye-tracking experiment," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1921-1940, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elcore:v:23:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10660-021-09523-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10660-021-09523-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10660-021-09523-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10660-021-09523-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Campbell, Margaret C & Kirmani, Amna, 2000. "Consumers' Use of Persuasion Knowledge: The Effects of Accessibility and Cognitive Capacity on Perceptions of an Influence Agent," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 69-83, June.
    2. Friestad, Marian & Wright, Peter, 1994. "The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, June.
    3. Jean Pfiffelmann & Nathalie Dens & Sébastien Soulez, 2020. "Personalized advertisements with integration of names and photographs: An eye-tracking experiment," Post-Print hal-02004907, HAL.
    4. Campbell, Colin & Evans, Nathaniel J., 2018. "The Role of a Companion Banner and Sponsorship Transparency in Recognizing and Evaluating Article-style Native Advertising," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 17-32.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zofia Saternus & Cristina Mihale-Wilson & Oliver Hinz, 2024. "Influencer marketing on Instagram—The optimal disclosure strategy from influencers’ and marketers’ perspectives," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 34(1), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Suwelack, Thomas & Hogreve, Jens & Hoyer, Wayne D., 2011. "Understanding Money-Back Guarantees: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Outcomes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 462-478.
    3. Skarmeas, Dionysis & Leonidou, Constantinos N., 2013. "When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1831-1838.
    4. Caldieraro, Fabio & Cunha, Marcus, 2022. "Consumers’ response to weak unique selling propositions: Implications for optimal product recommendation strategy," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 724-744.
    5. Joëlle Vanhamme & Valérie Swaen & Guido Berens & Catherine Janssen, 2015. "Playing with fire: aggravating and buffering effects of ex ante CSR communication campaigns for companies facing allegations of social irresponsibility," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 565-578, December.
    6. Zhuang, Mengzhou & Cui, Geng & Peng, Ling, 2018. "Manufactured opinions: The effect of manipulating online product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 24-35.
    7. Anand Jhawar & Sanjeev Varshney & Prashant Kumar, 2024. "Sponsorship Disclosure on social media: literature review and future research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 1589-1617, September.
    8. Mehdi Hossain & Ritesh Saini, 2014. "Suckers in the morning, skeptics in the evening: Time-of-Day effects on consumers’ vigilance against manipulation," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 109-121, June.
    9. Jones, Michael A. & Taylor, Valerie A., 2018. "Marketer requests for positive post-purchase satisfaction evaluations: Consumer depth interview findings," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 218-226.
    10. Avramova, Yana R. & Dens, Nathalie & De Pelsmacker, Patrick, 2021. "Brand placement across media: The interaction of placement modality and frequency in film versus text," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 20-30.
    11. Golovacheva, E., 2016. "When consumers activate persuasion knowledge: Review of antecedents and consequences," Working Papers 6440, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    12. J?rg Tropp & Corinna Beuthner, 2018. "Customers¡¯ Understanding of Engagement Advertising," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 6(2), pages 57-76, December.
    13. James J. Zboja & Ronald A. Clark & Diana L. Haytko, 2016. "An offer you can’t refuse: consumer perceptions of sales pressure," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 806-821, November.
    14. Yann Verhellen & Caroline Oates & Patrick Pelsmacker & Nathalie Dens, 2014. "Children’s Responses to Traditional Versus Hybrid Advertising Formats: The Moderating Role of Persuasion Knowledge," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 235-255, June.
    15. Hamby, Anne & Daniloski, Kim & Brinberg, David, 2015. "How consumer reviews persuade through narratives," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1242-1250.
    16. Nora Moran, 2020. "Illusion of safety: How consumers underestimate manipulation and deception in online (vs. offline) shopping contexts," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 890-911, September.
    17. Kachersky, Luke, 2011. "Reduce Content or Raise Price? The Impact of Persuasion Knowledge and Unit Price Increase Tactics on Retailer and Product Brand Attitudes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 479-488.
    18. Grant, Adam M. & Hofmann, David A., 2011. "Outsourcing inspiration: The performance effects of ideological messages from leaders and beneficiaries," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 173-187.
    19. Yana R. Avramova & Patrick De Pelsmacker & Nathalie Dens, 2018. "How reading in a foreign versus native language moderates the impact of repetition-induced brand placement prominence on placement responses," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(6), pages 500-518, November.
    20. Matthews, Lynn & Eilert, Meike & Carlson, Les & Gentry, Jim, 2020. "When and how frontline service employee authenticity influences purchase intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 111-123.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:elcore:v:23:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10660-021-09523-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.