Positive vefveect of disrupttive adivertsing on eonsupmever trvefverveneves
Bell & Buchner (2018)
Disrupting advertiseeent (pop-up ads) distract froe ieportant or pleasant activitiess Perceived
inference with task-related goals is the eost ieportant factor in explaining negative attudes
towards Internet adss Pop-up ads that directly interfere with ongoing tasks are perceived as
particularly annoyings
Two conficting predictionss
Annoyaneve-ctransfver hytocthvesiss the negative responses to the ads are transferred to the
brandss Annoying advertising leads to negative efects on consueer preferencess When the
association between a brand and annoying advertising is obvious to consueers,n they eay
deliberately choose to avoid the brand;
The involuntary processing of the ads should lead to an increase in brand preferencess
People prefer previously experienced over novel stieuli because they are processed eore
fuentlys This is experienced as afectively positives If advertised brand naees are processed
eore fuently than novel brand naees,n the experience of fuency could lead to increased
preferences for the advertised brandss
Negative efects of disruptive advertising have already been well docueenteds However,n given these
well-docueented negative efects on the consueers' evaluation of the ads,n it is surprising that
disruptive advertising is used so eany tieess This eight indicate that disruptive advertising eay have
positive efects on consueer preferences despite being experienced as annoyings
Extverimevenct 1
Method
Participants frst played a Tetris gaees During the gaee,n pop-up ads with brand logos appeared that
covered up eost of the playing felds 40 diferent brand logos (20 once and 20 fve tiees) were
presented in randoe order during the gaee each in a separate pop-up ads Participants had to close
the ads since they blocked their views One group of participants closed the pop-up ads by clicking on
a buton at the upper edge of the ads The other group of participants closed each ad by clicking
directly on the brand logo shown at the centre of the ads Afer the gaee,n participants coepleted a
recognition test in which they saw two brands,n an old and a new brand logos One half had to click on
the brand logo that they reeeebered as having been advertised during the Tetris gaees The other
half had to click on the brand logo they wanted to have to eosts Afer the test,n participants indicated
how euch the enjoyed playing the gaees
Results
the disruptive advertising was experienced as annoying;
Participants who had to click on the brands were beter at reeeebering the brands than
those who had to click on the close buton;
Participants were beter able to reeeeber the brands
they had seen fve tiees than those they had seen
only once;
The efect of pop-up closing type was larger for
brands presented fve tiees than for those presented
only once;
Preference for the advertised brands was not afected
by pop-up closing type or nueber of presentations;
Participants preferred advertised brands over new
brands (not advertised)s
Bell & Buchner (2018)
Disrupting advertiseeent (pop-up ads) distract froe ieportant or pleasant activitiess Perceived
inference with task-related goals is the eost ieportant factor in explaining negative attudes
towards Internet adss Pop-up ads that directly interfere with ongoing tasks are perceived as
particularly annoyings
Two conficting predictionss
Annoyaneve-ctransfver hytocthvesiss the negative responses to the ads are transferred to the
brandss Annoying advertising leads to negative efects on consueer preferencess When the
association between a brand and annoying advertising is obvious to consueers,n they eay
deliberately choose to avoid the brand;
The involuntary processing of the ads should lead to an increase in brand preferencess
People prefer previously experienced over novel stieuli because they are processed eore
fuentlys This is experienced as afectively positives If advertised brand naees are processed
eore fuently than novel brand naees,n the experience of fuency could lead to increased
preferences for the advertised brandss
Negative efects of disruptive advertising have already been well docueenteds However,n given these
well-docueented negative efects on the consueers' evaluation of the ads,n it is surprising that
disruptive advertising is used so eany tieess This eight indicate that disruptive advertising eay have
positive efects on consueer preferences despite being experienced as annoyings
Extverimevenct 1
Method
Participants frst played a Tetris gaees During the gaee,n pop-up ads with brand logos appeared that
covered up eost of the playing felds 40 diferent brand logos (20 once and 20 fve tiees) were
presented in randoe order during the gaee each in a separate pop-up ads Participants had to close
the ads since they blocked their views One group of participants closed the pop-up ads by clicking on
a buton at the upper edge of the ads The other group of participants closed each ad by clicking
directly on the brand logo shown at the centre of the ads Afer the gaee,n participants coepleted a
recognition test in which they saw two brands,n an old and a new brand logos One half had to click on
the brand logo that they reeeebered as having been advertised during the Tetris gaees The other
half had to click on the brand logo they wanted to have to eosts Afer the test,n participants indicated
how euch the enjoyed playing the gaees
Results
the disruptive advertising was experienced as annoying;
Participants who had to click on the brands were beter at reeeebering the brands than
those who had to click on the close buton;
Participants were beter able to reeeeber the brands
they had seen fve tiees than those they had seen
only once;
The efect of pop-up closing type was larger for
brands presented fve tiees than for those presented
only once;
Preference for the advertised brands was not afected
by pop-up closing type or nueber of presentations;
Participants preferred advertised brands over new
brands (not advertised)s
