The Indirect Effects of Banner Advertising: How
Context Relevance Influences Brand Awareness and
Brand Attitude
By:
Wiebren J. Dijkstra
2 | P a g e
Master Thesis, Msc. Marketing Management
Faculty of Economics and Business
The Indirect Effects of Banner Advertising: How
Context Relevance Influences Brand Awareness and
Brand Attitude
By:
Wiebren J. Dijkstra
Student number: 2223392
Supervisor: Dr. K.J. Alsem
Second supervisor: Dr. Y.C. Ou
August, 2013
| Tuinbouwstraat 71a // 9717 JC // Groningen | 06 250 986 58
3 | P a g e
PREFACE
“A choice I will never regret”
In July 2010, after four years of studying the Bachelor of Commercial Economics, I was really doubting about my future: continue studying with a Pre-Master program or start working. Eventually, I started working at the Business Center of KPN in Zwolle. After a working period of eight months there, I decided to apply for the Pre-Master Marketing program at the University of Groningen. However, at that time I still doubted whether I was qualified enough for the academic level.
Now, after two years, I am writing the last words of my Master’s thesis to complete my Master Marketing Management study; an achievement that absolutely can be counted as a milestone in my life. I never expected that this continuation of my ‘student career’ would provide me so many resources, both intellectual as well as personal. Looking back at these last years as a student, I can conclude that it has been a fantastic phase in my life. Justly, I can state that it was a choice I will never regret!
Of course, these achievements and enjoyment would not be realized without some people, which I would like to thank in particular. First of all, I would like to thank my parents Jan en Jolande for offering me the possibility to study and their trust in my capabilities. Second, I would like to thank my girlfriend Manon for her love, support and patience, especially during the busy weeks of studying exams. Further, I would like to thank my friends for motivating me and for the pleasant moments we have experienced together in Groningen.
Finally, I would like to thank my supervisor dr. Karel Jan Alsem for his guidance and constructive feedback during the process. Mr. Alsem, a special thanks for your sympathy and support with regard to my accident just before the deadline. Without the time extension and help you offered me, this thesis would not have been realized.
Kind regards,
4 | P a g e
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
This study examined how the contextual relevance of banner advertisements affects brand awareness and brand attitude. Previous studies do not provide an unequivocal conclusion about the effect of banner context relevance, which is defined by the author as “the degree to which information in the banner contributes to the identification of the primary message communicated by the number of form or content qualities associated with a website”. Further, previous studies concentrated mainly on awareness and attitude towards banners, instead of awareness and attitudes towards brands. This study aimed to fill this gap and also added three new moderators (Internet usage frequency, daily Internet usage, and product involvement).
A between-group experimental design is used, consisting out of two groups that each are exposed to one online situation: a banner of the brand Loewe on the website Mediamarkt.nl (contextual relevant) vs. a banner of the brand Loewe on the website Nationalevacaturebank.nl (contextual irrelevant). First, it is found that banner context relevance does not affect consumers’ brand awareness and - attitude. Possibly, no external factors of banners affect brand awareness and - attitude, but internal factors may influence the effectiveness of online ads. Therefore, marketers should not depend their decisions concerning banner placement on contextual relevance but probably on banner characteristics, such as color and motion.
Second, this study examined a moderating effect of Internet usage frequency and daily Internet usage on the relationship between banner context relevance and both brand awareness and brand attitude. The results provided no significant evidence to support such a moderating effect. One could assume that Internet users with a low intensity are surfing more goal-oriented and therefore do not notice and process banners, while heavy Internet users ignore banners since they are confronted with them continuously. As a result, levels of brand awareness and - attitude do not differ. This means that marketers can target a wide audience with regard to Internet usage intensity of consumers.
5 | P a g e awareness towards the brand increases. Therefore, marketers should find out which relevant websites are visited by these highly involved consumers.
Hence, the results of this study provide (brand) marketers with several new insights about how to manage their banner ad placement.
6 | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION ... 8
1.1 Effects of context relevance ... 8
1.2 Effects on brand awareness ... 9
1.3 Effects on brand attitude ... 9
1.4 Moderating variables ... 10 1.5 Academic contribution ... 11 1.6 Outline of paper ... 12 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 13 2.1 Conceptual model ... 13 2.2 Banner advertising ... 14
2.2.1 Effectiveness of banner advertisements ... 14
2.2.2 Banner context relevance ... 15
2.3 Brand awareness ... 15
2.3.1 Importance of brand awareness ... 16
2.3.2 Establishing brand awareness ... 16
2.3.3 Brand awareness and context relevance ... 17
2.4 Brand attitude ... 19
2.4.1 Importance of brand attitude ... 20
2.4.2 Changing & establishing brand attitude ... 21
2.4.3 Brand attitude and context relevance ... 22
2.5 Internet usage ... 23
2.5.1 Frequency of Internet usage ... 23
2.5.2 Daily Internet usage ... 24
2.6 Product involvement ... 25
3. METHODOLOGY ... 27
3.1 Research design ... 27
3.2 Stimuli ... 27
3.3 Participants ... 28
3.4 Variables & scaling ... 29
3.5 Procedure ... 31
7 | P a g e 4. RESULTS ... 34 4.1 Demographics ... 34 4.2 Reliability analysis ... 35 4.3 Manipulation check ... 36 4.4 Multicollinearity check ... 36 4.5 Results hypotheses ... 37 4.5.1 Brand awareness ... 37 4.5.2 Brand attitude ... 38 4.5.3 Hypotheses results ... 38
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ... 41
5.1 Conclusions and evaluation ... 41
5.2 Limitations and further research ... 43
5.3 Managerial implications ... 44
REFERENCES ... 46
APPENDICES ... 55
Appendix A: Context Relevant Manipulation ... 55
Appendix B: Context Irrelevant Manipulation ... 55
Appendix C: Questionnaire ... 56
8 | P a g e
1. INTRODUCTION
You cannot miss them when surfing the World Wide Web; online advertisements. Consumers love it or hate it, but its effectiveness may even be better than traditional media. It is a form of promotion that uses the Internet for the expressed purpose of delivering marketing messages to attract customers (Kim, Park, Kwon, and Chang, 2012). Online advertising has grown rapidly since its introduction in the mid-1990s. This rapid growth is being driven by increasing Internet users, rising awareness and growing broadband subscription rate and e-commerce, which is playing a key role in this industry (Kim et al., 2012). Due to the explosive increase in the number of Internet users, the expenditures on Internet advertising have grown enormously as well. Not surprisingly, a lot of research attention has been given to online advertising, and especially to the field of banner advertising. Banner ads are defined as “short promotional messages occupying some portion of a web page” (Putrevu and Lord, 2003) and are the most prevalent form of online advertising. It is concluded that the web page on which a banner is exposed, significantly influences the effectiveness of advertisements (Cho, 2003). This has to do with the ‘context relevance’, which can be defined as the fit between a banner and the editorial environment on which the banner is exposed. Hereby, banners can be divided into two types: (1) contextually relevant banners and (2) contextually irrelevant banners, based on the context of websites.
1.1
Effects of context relevance
For online advertisers, it is critical to know whether they should advertise in a relevant context or an irrelevant context. Some research has been done about how context relevance influences the effectiveness of online ads, but the conclusions are not unequivocal. For example, Goldfarb and Tucker (2011) found that an ad that is matched to the website content, increases purchases intention and Jeong and King (2010) found that banners in a relevant context result in higher evaluation ratings and purchase intentions than banners in an irrelevant context. However, Moore, Stammerjohan, and Coulter (2005) stated that consumers pay greater attention and produce more favorable attitudes towards contextually irrelevant advertisements. What is striking about these (unequivocal) results is that most conclusions regarding context relevance are based on direct responses, like purchase intention. Though, the goal of most banner ads is twofold: (1) generating direct responses (e.g. drawing consumers into a company’s site, purchasing) and (2) obtaining brand recognition through
9 | P a g e banner exposure (CyberAtlas, 1999; Maher, 1999). A lot of research has been carried out regarding the first goal. For example, Cho (2003) investigated which variables affect the clicking of banner ads and Goldfarb and Tucker (2011) researched how online advertising can increase purchase intention. However, the second goal of banner advertising has not gained much attention yet. Therefore, this study aimed to find how banner context relevance affects brand awareness. Furthermore, the effect of context relevance on brand attitude is investigated. Although Gordon and De Lima-Turner (1997) stated that “web advertising is more effective in developing a favorable brand attitude than it is for selling”, the effects of online ads on brand attitude is a subject that is researched barely. Therefore, the main question of this study is:
How does banner context relevance affect brand awareness and brand attitude?
1.2
Effects on brand awareness
The concept of brand awareness is related to strength of the brand node or trace in memory, as reflected by consumers’ ability to recall or recognize the brand under different conditions (Keller, 2013). A long history of consumer-behavior research has shown that creating brand recall (awareness) is vital to attain behavioral objectives, such as (online) purchase. Previous literature shows that banner advertisements increase brand awareness. Studies carried out by Briggs and Hollis (1997) and Cho (2003) even suggest that banners are as effective as traditional media in stimulating brand awareness. However, the main question is to what extent banner context relevance affects brand awareness. As mentioned previously, former research do not provide an unequivocal answer at this question. Moreover, most of their conclusions are related to direct responses, such as purchase intention. Therefore, this study aimed to provide the marketing literature with a clear understanding of how brand awareness is affected by the context in which a banner is exposed.
1.3
Effects on brand attitude
10 | P a g e Next, related studies in other fields do not provide information that could lead to an unequivocal conclusion regarding the effects of banner context relevance on brand attitude. For example, Rodgers (2003/2004) found that the brand attitude of a sponsor will be higher when there is a relevant association between the sponsor and sponsee. However, Moore et al. (2005) found that consumers produce more favorable attitudes towards contextually irrelevant advertisements. The fact that the relationship between context relevance and brand attitude is undervalued in marketing literature, makes it an interesting linkage in this study.
1.4
Moderating variables
As can be derived from the main question, this paper aimed to test how the variables brand awareness and brand attitude are affected by the contextual relevance of banner advertisements. Next to this main question, it is expected that the relationship between these variables is influenced by three moderators: frequency of Internet usage, daily Internet usage, and product involvement.
From the beginning, the usage of the World Wide Web has grown dramatically. This rapid increase in number of Internet users indicates that online users are becoming more diverse regarding online behavior, like usage/experience. Therefore, it is interesting to test whether the Internet usage intensity of individuals has a moderating influence on the main relationship. This is tested by examining how often a consumers uses the Internet (Internet usage frequency) and how many time someone spends online (daily Internet usage). In general, research suggest that the more people are using the Internet, the less affective an online ad will be (Benway and Lane, 1998; Cho, 2003), while Lohse, Bellman, and Johnson (2000) found that the percentage of consumers making an online purchase raises as a function of time spent on the Internet. It can be concluded that the intensity of Internet usage may be a critical factor that contributes the effectiveness of online advertisements. Therefore, both Internet usage dimensions are tested for a moderating influence on the main relationship.
11 | P a g e effect of product involvement exists on both brand awareness and brand attitude. However, this study examined a moderating effect of product involvement on the relation between banner context relevance and brand awareness and - attitude.
1.5
Academic contribution
The purpose of this paper is to find more insights about the effects of the contextual relevance of banner ads on brand awareness and brand attitude. The theme of banner context relevance did not gain much attention yet, while the little research that is carried out in this concept resulted in a discrepancy of outcomes (e.g. Palanisamy, 2004; Moore et al., 2005). This study aimed to fill this gap and targeted to find an unequivocal conclusion about the effects of banners’ contextual relevance.
Furthermore, previous studies regarding banner advertising concentrated mainly on the direct effects of banners, like click-through rates (Cho, 2003; MediaPost, 2001; Cho and Leckenby, 2000), instead of indirect effects like brand awareness and brand attitude. Although awareness and attitude towards banners gained a lot of attention (e.g. Berger and Mitchell, 1989; Moore et al., 2005), awareness and attitudes towards brands are examined rarely. Therefore, this study aimed to provide the academic literature with unique insights about how brand awareness and brand attitude change due to the contextual relevance of banners.
Next, three new moderating variables are added in this research: frequency of Internet usage, daily Internet usage, and product involvement. These moderators can have a fundamental value in the literature of banner context relevance, since this study is the first that implemented these variables in a concept like this.
12 | P a g e
1.6
Outline of paper
13 | P a g e
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
In this chapter, the conceptual model of this study is presented first. This model is a graphical explanation of all variables and their expected relationships in this research. Hereafter, the conceptual model is explained more thorough with a theoretical framework about all individual variables.
2.1
Conceptual model
The conceptual model, which can be found in figure 1, graphically represents all variables and their relationships that are researched in this study. Banner context relevance is the independent variable of this research. It is tested what the effect of this variable is on the dependent variables brand awareness and brand attitude. The moderating variables Internet usage frequency, daily Internet usage, and product involvement are included to investigate whether they moderate the effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness and brand attitude. In the next paragraphs, the phenomenon of banner advertising is discussed and the variables are introduced. Furthermore, the hypotheses are derived in this chapter.
14 | P a g e
2.2
Banner advertising
Before diving into the subject of banner context relevance and its (expected) influence on brand awareness and brand attitude, it is important to get an understanding of the phenomenon of banner advertising. Banners are rectangular small Internet advertisements which can vary in appearance, like size, design, animation, and sound, but have a shared main function: when clicking on it, the consumer will arrive at the advertisers’ website. Although there are other ways of finding and arriving at target websites, the banner advertisement click-through is believed to be the most common way to draw consumers into a target site and engage them with a brand or product (Cho and Leckenby, 1999). There are many different forms of advertising on the web, such as buttons, text links, sponsorships, target sites, and interstitials. However, banner advertisements are the most prevalent form of online advertising (Cho, 2003). According to the Internet Advertising Bureau (2002), banner ads accounted for 36% of Internet advertising revenue in 2001.
2.2.1 Effectiveness of banner advertisements
15 | P a g e
2.2.2 Banner context relevance
Consumers are exposed to advertisements in the context of editorials or ad vehicles (websites) rather than as stand-alone messages. As already mentioned, it is concluded that the editorial environment of a vehicle significantly influences the effectiveness of advertisements placed on the vehicle (Cho, 2003). Before presenting literature about the subject of contextual relevance of online advertisements and its expected influence on brand awareness and brand attitude, it is important to get an understanding of the phenomenon of ‘context relevance’. Jeong and King (2010) stated that “contexts might refer to any number of form or content qualities associated with specific advertising mediums that are of interest to researchers”. Advertising relevancy is defined as “the degree to which information in the ad contributes to the identification of the primary message communicated by the context” (Lee and Mason, 1999). Thus, banner context relevance can be defined as the degree to which information in the banner contributes to the identification of the primary message communicated by the number of form or content qualities associated with a website. Hereby, banners can be divided into two types: (1) contextually relevant banners and (2) contextually irrelevant banners, based on the context of websites. For example, a mobile phone banner ad is contextually relevant for a website that offers mobile phones, while it is contextually irrelevant for a travel website.
2.3
Brand awareness
16 | P a g e
2.3.1 Importance of brand awareness
Creating awareness is crucial for a brand. A high level of brand awareness has three main benefits: (1) learning advantage; it influences the formation and strength of the associations that make up the brand image, (2) consideration advantage; raising brand awareness increases the likelihood that the brand will be a member of the consideration set, the handful of brands that receive serious consideration for purchase, and (3) choice advantage; brand awareness can affect choices among brands in the consideration set, even if there are essentially no other associations to those brands (Keller, 2013). For a brand to be included in a consumer’s brand consideration set, it must be comparatively easier or more salient for consumers to think of the brand when they think about the product category (Keller, 1993). In addition, even if there are no other specific brand associations, consumers would still prefer to buy a brand that is well established and familiar to them (Pae, Samiee, and Tai, 2002). This makes brand awareness as an important signal related to how consumers perceive the brand and thus can help to predict their purchase behavior (Wang and Yang, 2010).
When looking at the relative importance of brand recall and recognition, it can be concluded that it depends on the extent to which consumers make decision at the point of purchase. According to Keller (2013) brand recognition is important if many consumer decision are made at the point of purchase, where the brand name, logo, packaging, and so on will be physically present and visible. He stated that, on the other hand, “brand recall will be more important if consumer decisions are mostly made in settings away from the point of purchase”. For this reason, creating brand recall is critical for service and online brands: consumers must actively seek the brand and therefore be able to retrieve it from memory when appropriate (Keller, 2013).
2.3.2 Establishing brand awareness
17 | P a g e Combining brand awareness and banner advertising theory suggests that brand awareness increases due to banner advertisements. Cho (2003) found that a banner ad itself does a significant amount of brand enhancement even without being clicked; 96% of the boost in brand recognition was caused by banner exposure alone. Furthermore, Briggs and Hollis (1997) investigated in their study whether web banners, even without the benefit of click-through, stimulate brand awareness as effectively as more traditional advertising does. Their findings conclude that banner advertising works, with or without the added value of click-through. Advertising awareness increased from a low 12 percent (for the brand with the highest base of ad awareness) to a high 200 percent for an unadvertised men’s apparel brand. They also found that web banners may rival or surpass TV and print advertising in producing brand-linked ad awareness. This finding is supported by Cho (2003) who stated that banner advertisements are as effective as television advertisements with regard to immediate recall; that is, 40% of the respondents remembered a static online banner, compared to 41% of those who viewed a 30-seconds TV commercial. Next to that, banner advertisements are generally more cost efficient compared to TV and print media.
2.3.3 Brand awareness and context relevance
How does the relevance of the website on which a banner is exposed, influence brand awareness? With respect to the congruity principle, Osgood and Tannenbaum (1955) stated that congruent information is remembered and preferred over incongruent information. This reflects the findings of Stipp and Schiavone (1996) and Stipp (1998), who conducted telephone interviews with 479 individuals who had watched the 1992 Summer Olympics. They found that consumers who were able to recall the Olympic sponsors also perceived a strong relationship between the sponsoring brand and the Olympics. Next to that, Rodgers (2003/2004), who examined the effect of Internet sponsorships and the role of sponsor relevance in these effects, found that relevant sponsors would be remembered better than would irrelevant sponsors. These findings indicate that messages in a relevant context may improve brand awareness.
18 | P a g e purchase intentions than banners in an irrelevant context. Further, Goldfarb and Tucker (2011) found that an ad that is matched to the website content, increases the purchases intention. As already explained in paragraph 2.3.1, brand awareness increases the likelihood that a brand will be part of a consumers’ consideration set and can effect choices among brands in the consideration set (Keller, 2013). In other words, brand awareness raises the probability that a brand will be purchased. Therefore, the findings of Jeong and King (2010) and Goldfarb and Tucker (2011) may indicate that contextually targeted ads increase brand awareness as well. It is argued that consumers are willing to accept contextually targeted ads more than others ads since targeted ads potentially provide information (Goldfarb and Tucker, 2011). This insight is supported by Cho (2003), who found that the effect of advertising is believed to be maximum when the contents of the online advertising vehicle are relevant to the product categories of the banner placed on the vehicle, while the effects of banner ads are believed to be minimal when the product categories of banner ads are irrelevant to the contents of the website where the banner ads are placed. He argued that contextual relevant ads are more effective because the audiences of an advertising vehicle who are exposed to the vehicle voluntarily, are interested in the contents of the vehicle, and therefore, are more likely to read ads when the ads match with their interests.
19 | P a g e indicated that consumers pay greater attention and produce more favorable attitudes towards contextually irrelevant advertisements.
Although previous research is not conclusive, it is expected that a contextually relevant banner generates a higher brand awareness. Based on the findings of Jeong and King (2010) and Goldfarb and Tucker (2011), it is assumed that consumers involve greater awareness of a banner, and thus the brand, when a banner is exposed in a relevant context. The expectance is that such banners create an added value for consumers (e.g. in the form of extra information), and therefore result in a higher brand awareness. This assumption is supported by Aaker and Brown (1972). They found that an advertisement in a relevant context may be regarded as more valuable and less likely to interrupt the user’s primary task. These findings support the expectation that contextual relevant banners have a higher impact on brand awareness than contextual irrelevant banners. Therefore, the next hypothesis is determined;
H1: Contextual relevant banners result in higher brand awareness, compared to contextual irrelevant banners.
2.4
Brand attitude
Brand attitude is a part of the brand image phenomenon, a concept that has been recognized as an important concept in marketing for a long time (e.g., Gardner and Levy, 1955). Brand image is defined as “perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory” (Keller, 1993). According to Keller (1993) brand associations are “the other informational nodes linked to the brand node in memory and contain the meaning of the brand for consumers”. There are three types of brand associations: (1) attributes, (2) benefits, and (3) attitudes. As already mentioned, the brand association ‘attitude’ is used as a dependent variable in this research. The phenomenon of brand attitude is explained further in this paragraph.
20 | P a g e and Ajzen (1975; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) views attitudes as a multiplicative function of (1) the salient beliefs a consumer has about the product or service (i.e., the extent to which consumers think the brand has certain attributes or benefits) and (2) the evaluative judgment of those beliefs (i.e., how good or bad it is that the brand has those attributes or benefits). Brand attitudes can be related to beliefs about product-related attributes and the functional and experiential benefits, consistent with work on perceived quality (Zeithaml, 1988). Brand attitudes can also be related to beliefs about non-product-related attributes and symbolic benefits (Rossiter and Percy, 1987), consistent with the functional theory of attitudes (Katz, 1960; Lutz, 1991), which involves that attitudes can serve a "value-expressive" function by allowing individuals to express their self-concepts (Keller, 1993). Moreover, research from Chaiken (1986) and Petty and Cacioppo (1986) also has concluded that attitudes can be formed by less thoughtful decision making, for example, on the basis of simple heuristics and decision rules. If consumers lack either the motivation or ability to evaluate the product or service, they may use signals or "extrinsic cues" (Olson and Jacoby, 1972) to infer product or service quality on the basis of what they do know about the brand (e.g., product appearance such as color or scent).
2.4.1 Importance of brand attitude
21 | P a g e
2.4.2 Changing & establishing brand attitude
In general, attitudes can be stable evaluations (attitudes for a long time) and attitudes can be formed and influenced by situational factors. Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann (1983) suggested that social and consumer psychology theories emphasize one of two distinct routes to attitude change: One, called the ‘central route’, views attitude change as resulting from a person's diligent consideration of information that (s)he feels is central to the true merits of a particular attitudinal position. A second group of theoretical approaches to persuasion emphasizes a more ‘peripheral route’ to attitude change. Attitude changes that occur via the peripheral route do not occur because an individual has personally considered the pros and cons of the issue, but because the attitude issue or object is associated with positive or negative cues, or because the person makes a simple inference about the merits of the advocated position based on various simple cues in the persuasion context.
22 | P a g e unfamiliar brands. For brands that are unfamiliar to consumers, multiple banner impressions result in a U-shaped pattern. Brand attitude changes most positively at one and five or more banner exposures, while at three exposures brand attitude is even lower than the base level.
2.4.3 Brand attitude and context relevance
The effects of the context relevance of advertisements on brand attitude is a linkage that did not get much attention yet. However, some researchers have investigated how brand attitude changes due to the relevance of the context in which an (online) advertisement is exposed. In general, information that is consistent with existing brand associations should be more easily learned and remembered compared to unrelated information (Keller, 2013). This is supported by Palanisamy (2004) who stated that advertising should be placed in a relevant website to make the proper impact on consumers. Jeong and King (2010) found that banners in a relevant context result in higher evaluation ratings. This may involve that contextual relevant banners will improve brand attitude. Cho and Cheon (2003), Edwards, Li, and Lee (2002), and Wang, Chen, and Chang (2008) support this suggestion. They found that targeted ads have a relatively high consumer tolerance because the information is perceived as useful. Furthermore, Rodgers (2003/2004) found that the attitude towards an internet sponsor will be higher for a relevant than an irrelevant sponsorship linkage. In other words, the brand attitude of a sponsor will be higher when there is a relevant association between the sponsor and sponsee. This finding is supported by Becker-Olsen (1998). She manipulated pro-social news clippings as having either logical or illogical sponsorship linkages. The outcomes inferred that attitudes were more positive toward all but one of the logical sponsorships, probably since the sponsor-sponsee link is perceived to be relevant.
23 | P a g e As previous research did not provide an unequivocal understanding about how context relevance influences brand attitude, the next hypothesis is partly based on common sense. The expectance is that, in general, a contextual relevant banner has a stronger effect on the relationship between banner advertising and brand attitude, compared to a contextual irrelevant banner. This expectation is based on the findings of Jeong and King (2010); Rodgers (2003/2004); and Becker-Olsen (1998), who investigated that relevant associations improve brand attitude. In conclusion, the next hypothesis is determined;
H2: Contextual relevant banners result in higher brand attitude, compared to contextual irrelevant banners.
2.5
Internet usage
The remarkable growth in Internet access has increased the number of users dramatically since its introduction. Prior to 1995, when the Internet began to permeate the society, less than 20 million individuals worldwide used the Internet regularly (Weiser, 2000). However, in the year 2000, about 200 million people worldwide were using the Internet (Weiser, 2000). This rapid increase in the number of Internet users indicates that online users are becoming more diverse regarding online behavior, like usage/experience. Therefore, it is interesting to test whether the effectiveness of banners, and in particular the contextual relevance of banners, differs among the level of Internet usage of individuals. According to Teo, Lim, and Lai (1999), previous research on computer usage derived three indicators of Internet usage. Two of them were used in this study, namely (1) frequency of Internet usage, and (2) daily Internet usage. These indicators are used as separate moderating variables in this study.
2.5.1 Frequency of Internet usage
24 | P a g e unexpected stimuli (Dahlén, 1997; Bruner and Kumar, 2000), such as banners. This tendency results in the finding that unexperienced users exhibit increased brand awareness and brand attitude than experienced users (Dahlén 2001).
Building on these studies, it can be assumed that banner advertisements result in a higher brand awareness and brand attitude for low Internet users than for heavy Internet users. Therefore, it is expected that the higher the frequency of consumers’ Internet usage, the less banner context relevance will affect brand awareness and brand attitude. From this expectations, the next hypotheses are derived:
H3a: The higher the frequency of Internet usage, the lower the effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness.
H3b: The higher the frequency of Internet usage, the lower the effect of banner context relevance on brand attitude.
2.5.2 Daily Internet usage
Mohammed and Alkubise (2012) stated that “Internet usage intensity per day is a critical factor that contributes the effectiveness of online advertisements”. Although it is assumed that a higher Internet usage frequency, decreases both brand awareness and brand attitude, they found that Internet skills and Internet usage per day naturally affects users’ acceptance for online ads and hence affect their purchase intention. Thus, the more individuals use the Internet per day, the higher the probability that (s)he will be influenced by online ads. Furthermore, Lohse, Bellman, and Johnson (2000) found that the percentage of consumers making an online purchase raises as a function of time spent on the Internet. In other words, the longer a person spends time online, the greater the likelihood of making an Internet purchase. Banners aim to create both (online) purchases and brand recognition. As the change of making online purchases increases when consumers spent more time online, it can be assumed that brand awareness and brand attitude increase as well when the Internet usage intensity per day grows.
25 | P a g e This is translated into the next hypotheses:
H3c: The higher the daily Internet usage, the higher the effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness.
H3d: The higher the daily Internet usage, the higher the effect of banner context relevance on brand attitude.
2.6
Product involvement
Several involvement constructs are conceptualized and operationalized in consumer research (Muehling, Laczniak, and Andrews, 1993). For example, Batra and Ray (1983) stated that the term involvement is mostly used to describe one of two phenomena: involvement with a product class (Zaichkowsky, 1985), or involvement with an advertising message (Greenwald and Leavitt, 1984; Petty et al., 1983). In both concepts, personal relevance seems to be a crucial factor to determine consumers’ involvement level with products and/or advertisements (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986). Although involvement can be used in several concepts, Zaichkowsky (1985) developed one general definition of involvement that recognizes past definitions of involvement: “A person’s perceived relevance of the object based on inherent needs, values, and interests”. Or, as O’Cass (2000) more recently defined “involvement can be viewed as a construct linked to the interaction between an individual and an object”, and it refers to the relative strength of a consumer’s believe concerning the product. When looking at consumers’ involvement of a product in particular, Taylor (1981) identifies product involvement as the identification of a particular product category to be “more or less central to peoples’ lives, their sense of identity, and their relationship with the rest of the world”.
26 | P a g e Cauberghe and De Pelsmacker (2010) who stated that consumers devote more attention and spend more effort to search and process information for high-involvement products compared to low-involvement products.
When combining the product involvement concept with online advertising, it is found that product involvement affects consumers’ recall, attitude, and click-through of online ads. For example, research suggests that high-involvement products are recalled better compared to low-involvement products in online advertisements (Briggs and Hollis, 1997). Furthermore, Cho and Leckenby (2000) found that consumers with a high level of product involvement, compared to those with low product involvement, are more likely to click through banners, which, in turn, result in more favorable attitudes towards the banner ad and brand. These findings are supported by Cho (2003), who state that “when consumers are highly involved with a product, they tend to be very receptive to most information related to that product and thus pay more attention to the content of that product’s ads”. This may even suggest that product involvement has a higher moderating effect in a contextual relevant situation.
Based on this discussion, it is suggested that product involvement moderates the relationship between the independent variable banner context relevance and both dependent variables brand awareness and brand attitude. In particular, it is expected that higher product involvement strengthens the effect of context relevance on brand awareness and brand attitude. Therefore, this assumption is hypothesized as follows:
H4a: The higher the level of product involvement, the higher the effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness.
27 | P a g e
3. METHODOLOGY
This chapter is about the method of data collection and analysis. Paragraph 3.1 contains the design of the research. Hereafter, the stimuli are described in paragraph 3.2. In paragraph 3.3 the participants of this study are described. Paragraph 3.4 gives an explanation about the variables and scaling that are used in this study, and paragraph 3.5 explains the procedure of this research. Finally, the analysis is presented in paragraph 3.6.
3.1
Research design
The hypotheses are tested with a web experiment in which the participants are exposed to a web page on which a banner ad is displayed. An experiment is the process of manipulating one or more independent variables and measuring their effect on one or more dependent variables, while controlling for the extraneous variables (Malhotra, 2010). In this study, a between-group experimental design is used. The experiment existed out of two experimental groups, who both are exposed to a different threatment of the independent variable. Herefore, the independent variable ‘banner context relevance’ is manipulated by showing one group a banner in a contextual relevant setting and the second group the same banner in a context which is irrelevant. This type of research is chosen since it is aimed to find differences between two levels of contextual relevance by giving various experimental treatments to different groups. This between-group experiment is developed by using the online software of Qualtrics, which is offered by the University of Groningen.
3.2
Stimuli
28 | P a g e concluded that the electronic brand Loewe has a low to medium awareness. Therefore, the Loewe brand is used in this experiment and a banner advertisement of this brand is selected (see figure 2).
FIGURE 2: Banner advertisement Loewe brand
The independent variable contextual relevance is manipulated by using a web page that is extremely relevant to the banner ad and a web page that is extremely irrelevant to the banner ad. From the pre-test can be derived that the web page Mediamarkt.nl is perceived to be very relevant to the Loewe banner, while the web page Nationalevacaturebank.nl is perceived to be very irrelevant to Loewe’s banner advertisement. Therefore, these two web pages are used in this experiment. In order to control for ‘position’ effects, the Loewe banner was placed on a quite similar position at both web pages. Each participant was randomly assigned to one of the
two web pages with the Loewe banner. In Appedix A and Appendix B, a graphical
representation of both web pages including banner are displayed.
3.3
Participants
29 | P a g e
3.4
Variables & scaling
An overview of all variables that are used in this research is presented in table 1. Furthermore, a more detailed explaination of all constructs is given in this paragraph.
TABLE 1: Constructs
Construct & Items Source
Context relevance
How relevant is the brand in the banner advertisement to the content of the website?
How appropriate is the brand in the banner advertisement to the content of the website?
Miniard, Bhatla, Lord, Dickson, and Unnava (1991)
Brand awareness
I can recognize X among other competing brands I am aware of X
When thinking about this product, X is the first brand that comes to my mind
I know what this brand stands for I have an opinion about this brand
Yoo and Donthu (2001)
Aaker (1996)
Brand attitude
My attitude towards brand X is: - Bad – Good
- Unfavorable – Favorable - Negative – Positive
The decision to buy X is foolish
Buying X is a good decision I think X is a satisfactory brand
I think X has a lot of beneficial characteristics I have a favorable opinion of X
Muehling and Laczniak (1988)
Putrevu and Lord (1994)
Internet usage
Internet usage frequency:
On average, how frequently do you use the Internet?
30 | P a g e TABLE 1: Constructs (continued)
Internet usage
Daily Internet usage:
On average, how much time is spent on the Internet?
Teo et al. (1999)
Product Involvement
To me (object to be judged) is:
(1) important-unimportant, (2) boring-interesting, (3) relevant-irrelevant, (4) exciting-unexciting (5) means nothing-means a lot to me, (6) ) appealing-unappealing, (7) fascinating-mundane, (8) worthless-valuable, (9) involving-uninvolving, (10) not needed-needed.
Zaichkowsky (1994)
Context relevance
The perceived contextual relevance of the stimuli is measured by using the scales of Miniard et al. (1991). They used a two item seven-point Likert scale, using the following questions: (1) ‘How relevant is the brand in the banner advertisement to the content of the website’, and (2) ‘How appropriate is the brand in the banner advertisement to the content of the website’.
Brand awareness
To measure the first dependent variable brand awareness, scales of Yoo and Donthu (2001) and Aaker (1996) are used. Yoo and Donthu (2001) developed a generizable measure of brand equity, comprising 10 items that represent the three dimensions of brand loyalty: perceived quality, and brand awareness/associations. The three items of the brand awareness dimension are measured on a 7-point Likert scale. In the research of Aaker (1996), brand equity measures have been developed as well. Two out of four items of his research are added in this study as well to measure the dependent variable brand awareness. These two items, ‘I know what this brand stands for’ and ‘I have an opinion about this brand’ are also measured on a 7-point Likert scale.
Brand attitude
31 | P a g e The second scale (Putrevu and Lord, 1994) consists out of five statements on a 7-point Likert scale: (1) ‘The decision to buy X is foolish’, (2) ‘Buying X is a good decision’, (3) ‘I think X is a satisfactory brand’, (4) I think X has a lot of beneficial characteristics’, (5) ‘I have a favorable opinion of X’.
Internet usage
Following Teo et al. (1999), two indicators are implemented that measure both Internet usage dimensions, frequency of Internet usage and daily Internet usage. Both single-item variables are measured on a 6-point Likert scale. Frequency of Internet usage is tested by asking “on average, how frequently do you use the Internet?” ranging ‘never/almost never’-‘several times a day’. Daily Internet usage is tested with the question “on average, how much time is spent on the Internet?” ranging ‘never/almost never-more than 3 hours’. The use of single-item measures has received a lot of critisicm in scientific literature because of its (potential) lack of validity. However, several psychological researchers emphasized that it is important to make measurements more efficient, by either reducing the length of scales or by using single-item measures instead of multi-item measures (Russell, Spitzmüller, Lin, Stanton, Smith, and Ironson, 2004). Furthermore, Pomeroy, Clark, and Philip (2001) stated that single-item measures offer important advantages since they are short, flexible, and easy to administer. Because of these arguments, the single-item constructs of Teo et al. (1999) are applied in this research.
Product involvement
The moderating variable product involvement is measured by the construct of Zaichkowsky (1994). In this construct, measuring involvement is based on 10 items on a 7-point semantic scale, 1 meaning ‘strongly disagree’ and 7 meaning ‘strongly agree’.
3.5
Procedure
32 | P a g e First, a scenario was presented to the subjects. For the experimental group that is assigned to the contextual relevant situation, the subjects were asked to imagine they intend to buy a tablet and therefore visit the exposed web page (Mediamarkt.nl). For the experimental group that is assigned to the contextual irrelevant situation, the subjects were asked to imagine they are looking for a new job and a friend recommended to visit the exposed web page (Nationalevacaturebank.nl). Both experimental groups were asked to look concentrated to the web page and to take their time to observe it. Danaher and Mullarkey (2003) found in their research that the longer a person is exposed to a web page which contains a banner ad, the more likely they are to remember that banner ad. It was therefore decided not to set a time to how long the participant could be exposed to the web page.
After seeing the stimuli, all participants are first guided to the items regarding Internet usage, in which information about their frequency of Internet usage and daily Internet usage was asked. Next, the participants of both experimental groups were requested to solve a puzzle. This puzzle is meant to distract participants from their impressions of the web page and the goal of the research. After all, individuals are in practice distracted as well while surfing the Internet. When the subjects of both experimental groups solved the puzzle, they are directed to the questions in which brand awareness is measured.
Before the participants of both groups are directed to the brand attitude scale, they are (again) confronted with the stimuli. This is shown again because participants of the experimental groups could have ‘missed’ the banner, and therefore are possibly not able to form attitudes towards the Loewe brand.
After answering the questions regarding brand attitude, the participants of both experimental groups are asked to indicate to what degree they think the banner is (ir)relevant to the web page. This serves as a manipulation check for the variable context relevance.
Finally, all participants are asked to provide background information about their selves: gender, age, occupation, and level of education.
The questionnaire for the contextual relevant group is presented in appendix C.
3.6
Analysis
33 | P a g e computed for all constructs. Third, although a pre-test has been conducted already, a (second) manipulation check is carried out to test whether the variable context relevance is manipulated well. The construct of Miniard et al. (1991) is used for measuring (perceived) contextual relevance, which is already described previously.
The research hypotheses are tested by performing two multiple regression analyses, one regression for the dependent variable brand awareness and one regression for the dependent variable brand attitude. The input of both regressions consists of the independent variable banner context relevance and the moderating variables Internet usage frequency, daily Internet usage, and
product involvement. This resulted in the following regression models, derived from the basic
moderation equation Ŷ = b0 + b1X + b2Z + b3X*Z + ε.: Hypothesis 1: 𝐵𝐴𝑊 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 2: 𝐵𝐴𝑇 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 3a: 𝐵𝐴𝑊 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝐵2(𝐼𝑈𝐹) + 𝐵4(𝐶𝑅 ∗ 𝐼𝑈𝐹) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 3b: 𝐵𝐴𝑇 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝐵2(𝐼𝑈𝐹) + 𝐵4(𝐶𝑅 ∗ 𝐼𝑈𝐹) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 3c: 𝐵𝐴𝑊 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝐵3(𝐷𝐼𝑈) + 𝐵5(𝐶𝑅 ∗ 𝐷𝐼𝑈) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 3d: 𝐵𝐴𝑇 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝐵3(𝐷𝐼𝑈) + 𝐵5(𝐶𝑅 ∗ 𝐷𝐼𝑈) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 4a: 𝐵𝐴𝑊 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝐵4(𝑃𝐼) + 𝐵6(𝐶𝑅 ∗ 𝑃𝐼) + 𝜀 Hypothesis 4b: 𝐵𝐴𝑇 = 𝐵0+ 𝐵1(𝐶𝑅) + 𝐵4(𝑃𝐼) + 𝐵6(𝐶𝑅 ∗ 𝑃𝐼) + 𝜀
TABLE 2: Regression model: meaning of variables
Term Factor Scale
CR Contextual relevance (dependent variable) 1 – 7
BAW Brand awareness (independent variable) 1 – 7
BAT Brand attitude (independent variable) 1 – 7
IUF Internet usage frequency (moderating variable) 1 – 6
DIU Daily Internet usage (moderating variable) 1 – 6
34 | P a g e
4. RESULTS
In this chapter the results of this study are presented. First, the demographics of all participants are presented and it is tested whether demographical differences between the groups exist. Next, a reliability analysis explains how the internal consistency of every scale is. Further, results of the manipulation check show whether the stimuli are manipulated correctly and hereafter, results of the multicollinearity check are presented. Finally, outcomes of the regression analysis are presented and show whether the hypotheses can be accepted.
4.1
Demographics
A total of 147 respondents participated in this research. Due to incomplete participation 35 cases are deleted, resulting in 112 respondents that are used to test the hypotheses. In order to check whether the demographics of the two experimental groups are fairly similar, first, an overview of descriptives per group is made (table 3).
TABLE 3: Demographics per group
Relevant group Irrelevant group
35 | P a g e Second, an ANOVA analysis is performed in order to test whether or not differences in age, occupation, and education exist between the groups. In this case, the null hypothesis stated that there are no demographical differences between the groups (p > .05). The outcomes of ANOVA accept this null hypothesis, since no differences between the groups exist in age (F = .398; p = .530), occupation (F = .029; p = .866), and education (F = .003; p = .959). In conclusion, the results are perceived to be representative and applicable in this study since no significant differences between both groups are found.
4.2
Reliability analysis
To check the reliability of the internal scale consistency, Cronbach’s Alpha is computed over the total sample (N = 147). Cronbach’s Alpha will generally increase as the inter correlations among test items increase and is known as an internal consistency estimate of reliability of test scores. An overview of the reliability scores of all constructs is presented in table 4.
TABLE 4: Reliability scores
Construct Source Cronbach’s Alpha
Context Relevance Miniard et al. (1991) α = 0.818 Brand Awareness Yoo and Donthu (2001); Aaker (1996) α = 0.895 Brand Attitude Muehling and Laczniak (1988)
Putrevu and Lord (1994)
α = 0.889 α = 0.595 Internet Usage Frequency Daily Teo et al. (1999) Not applicable* Not applicable* Product Involvement Zaichkowski (1994) α = 0.952 *Cronbach’s Alpha analysis could not be performed since both variables have a single-item scale
36 | P a g e Cronbach’s Alpha analysis could not be applied to measure scale reliability. Since Internet usage is a factual construct, multi-item scales are not necessary. Finally, internal consistency is proven in Zaichkowski’s (1994) scale for measuring product involvement (α = 0.952).
4.3
Manipulation check
A manipulation check is carried out in order to test whether the stimuli that are used in this research are manipulated correctly. An ANOVA test showed that participants of both groups experienced significant differences in the contextual relevance between the banner and the web page on which it is shown. Based on the findings presented in table 5, it can be concluded that context relevance is manipulated correctly in this research.
TABLE 5: Manipulation check
Relevance N Mean Relevance Standard deviation F-value Sig.
Context Relevant 50 4,5588 1,24357
67,422 .000
Context Irrelevant 62 2,5726 1,30838
4.4
Multicollinearity check
Before analysing the results of the regression, a multicollinearity check is carried out to find whether independent - and moderating variables are highly correlating with each other in the regression model. In this check, the individual parameters are examined regarding their Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) levels. The outcomes, which are presented in table 6, show that initial outcomes of the regression incurred high levels of VIF. Therefore, both the independent variable and moderating variables are mean centered, which reduces their VIF levels (see table 6).
TABLE 6: VIF levels
Initial VIF VIF (after
mean centered)
Contextual relevance 91.110 5.561
Contextual relevance * Internet usage frequency 115.287 1.137
Contextual relevance * Daily Internet usage 22.186 6.106
37 | P a g e TABLE 6: VIF levels (continued)
Initial VIF VIF (after
mean centered)
Internet usage frequency 9.125 1.481
Daily Internet usage 6.781 1,538
Product involvement 6.591 1.184
4.5
Results hypotheses
This section describes the outcomes of both the regression of the dependent variable brand awareness as well as the regression of the dependent variable brand attitude. The starting point in all hypotheses is the comparison of outcomes on reported brand awareness and brand attitude depending on the level of contextual relevance. Furthermore, the moderating effect of Internet usage frequency, daily Internet usage, and product involvement is measured.
4.5.1 Brand awareness
A regression model is constructed in order to test the hypotheses that are related to the dependent variable brand awareness. The overall significance of the model is .093, which means that the model is marginally significant (p < .10). Furthermore, the adjusted R² of .049 indicated that 4.9% of the total variance of reported brand awareness is explained by the variables context relevance, frequency of Internet usage, daily Internet usage, and product involvement. Outcomes of the regression are presented in table 7.
TABLE 7: Regression model brand awareness
Beta t-value Sig. VIF
(constant) 11.458 .000
H1 Contextual relevance .057 .274 .784 5.561
H3a Contextual relevance *
Internet usage frequency .018 .116 .908 1.137
H3c Contextual relevance *
Daily Internet usage -.005 -.418 .677 6.106
H4a Contextual relevance *
Product involvement .154 1.996 .049** 1.238
Product involvement .288 2.585 .011** 1.184
38 | P a g e
4.5.2 Brand attitude
Effects of the independent variable banner context relevance and the three moderating variables on brand attitude are measured in a second, separate regression model. Again, the overall model is marginally significant (p = .058) and has an adjusted R² of .061. This means that 6.1% of the total variance in brand attitude is explained by the variables that are used in the regression model. The results of the regression model are displayed in table 8.
TABLE 8: Regression brand attitude
Beta t-value Sig. VIF
(constant) 37.109 .000
H2 Contextual relevance -.093 -.740 .461 5.561
H3b Contextual relevance *
Internet usage frequency .044 .474 .637 1.137
H3d Contextual relevance *
Daily Internet usage .010 1.343 .182 6.106
H4b Contextual relevance *
Product involvement -.004 -.096 .924 1.238
Product involvement .156 2.305 .023** 1.184
**Accepted at p < .05
4.5.3 Hypotheses results
This section describes whether the outcomes of the regression models are consistent to what is hypothesized previously.
H1: Contextual relevance – brand awareness
It is hypothesized that contextual relevant banners result in higher brand awareness, compared to contextual irrelevant banners. However, the regression analysis showed that no effect exists between context relevance and brand awareness (t = .274; p = .784). Therefore, it is not accepted that exposure to the relevant context stimulus result in higher brand awareness than exposure to the irrelevant context stimulus.
39 | P a g e
H2: Contextual relevance – brand attitude
Considering the second hypothesis, it is assumed that contextual relevant banners result in higher brand attitude, compared to contextual irrelevant banners. The outcomes of the regression analysis concluded that this hypothesis should be rejected (t = -.740; p = .461). This means that no significant evidence is found that contextual relevant banner, compared to irrelevant ones, create higher brand attitude.
H3a: Internet usage frequency – brand awareness
Frequency of Internet usage is assumed to moderate the effect between banner context relevance on brand awareness, which is hypothesized in hypotheses 3a. Specifically, the expectancy is that the higher the Internet usage frequency is, the lower the effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness will be. Considering the regression analysis, it can be concluded that no significant evidence is found for this hypothesis (t = .116; p = .908). Therefore, hypothesis 3a is rejected.
H3b: Internet usage frequency – brand attitude
The variable Internet usage frequency is as well expected to affect reported brand attitude depending on banner context relevance. Though, no moderating effect of this variable is found in the regression analysis (t = .474; p = .637). Thus, it is rejected that a higher frequency of Internet usage, compared to a lower frequency of Internet usage, results in a lower effect of context relevance on brand attitude.
H3c: Daily Internet usage – brand awareness
The second dimension of Internet usage, daily Internet usage, is also assumed to influence both brand awareness and attitude, depending on banner context relevance. Hypothesis 3c proposed that a higher daily Internet usage, compared to a lower daily Internet usage, leads to a higher effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness. However, this hypothesis is not accepted since insignificant evidence was found for this effect (t = -.418; p = .677).
H3d: Daily Internet usage – brand attitude
40 | P a g e
H4a: Product involvement – brand awareness
Hypothesis 4 explains the moderating effect of product involvement. In particular, it is hypothesized in hypothesis 4a that a higher level of product involvement results in a higher effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness. The results of the regression analysis provide significant support for the hypothesis (β = .154; t = 1.996; p = .049). Hence, a higher level of product involvement should result in a higher effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness. Specifically, when the level of product involvement and context relevance increase with one entity, brand awareness increases with 0.154.
H4b: Product involvement – brand attitude
It is hypothesized that product involvement increases brand attitude as well, depending on the level of banner context relevance. However, the results of the regression analysis do not provide significant support for the hypothesis (t = -.096; p = .924). This concludes that hypothesis 4b is not accepted.
Product involvement – brand awareness (not hypothesized)
However not hypothesized, it is found that the level of product involvement, besides having a moderating influence on brand awareness, also has a direct effect on the awareness of a brand (β = .288; t = 2.585; p = .011). This result indicates that brand awareness increases with 0.288 when a consumers’ level of product involvement grows with one entity.
Product involvement - brand attitude (not hypothesized)
41 | P a g e
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter describes what can be concluded from the results of this study. In paragraph 5.1 conclusions and evaluations regarding the research results are presented. Hereafter, the limitations of this study are described and suggestions for further research are made. Finally, the managerial implications are presented.
5.1
Conclusions and evaluation
42 | P a g e context. As a result, the context in which a banner is placed may not influence respondents’ level of awareness and attitude towards the brand.
Internet usage, in particular frequency of Internet usage and daily Internet usage, is expected to influence the relationship between banner context relevance and both brand awareness and brand attitude. With respect to the Internet usage frequency variable, no effect on the main relationship is found. This finding indicate that consumers’ frequency of Internet usage does not affect brand awareness and brand attitude, depending on the level of context relevance. A possible explanation for this finding is that less experienced users are more focused on their Internet task and therefore do not notice and process banner advertisements, while more experienced Internet users pay no attention (anymore) to banner advertisements since they are constantly confronted with online ads. As a result, levels of brand awareness and brand attitude do not differ for consumers’ frequency of Internet usage.
Furthermore, no effect of daily Internet usage on the main relation is found. This means that it can not be concluded that a higher level of daily Internet usage results in a higher effect of banner context relevance on brand awareness and brand attitude. Consumers with a low daily Internet usage duration may be influenced less by banner ads since they are surfing very targeted because of their short moments of Internet usage. However, people who are using the Internet heavily each day, may not be influenced seriously as well, because they are confronted with banner ads continuously, and therefore ignore them. This is supported by the findings of Benway and Lane (1998), Pagendarm and Schaumburg (2001), Norman (1999), and Bayles (2000), who found that ‘banner blindness’ especially exists among heavy Internet users and is becoming an important issue in the industry of web advertising.
With respect to not having found a moderating effect of both Internet usage dimensions, it need to be mentioned that most respondents have a high Internet usage intensity. Many respondents indicated that they use the Internet very frequent, while their daily Internet duration is high as well. This may be a reason for not having found a moderating influence of both frequency of Internet usage as well as daily Internet usage on the relationship between banner context relevance and brand awareness and - attitude.
