Accessible Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton April 15, 2020

Epistemological and methodical challenges in the research on embedded advertising formats: A constructivist interjection

Nils S. Borchers and Jens Woelke
From the journal Communications

Abstract

Advertisers’ increasing use of embedded advertising formats makes it more difficult for consumers to identify persuasive intents in advertiser messages. However, only if consumers identify these intents and categorize messages as advertising, can they activate advertising-specific reception strategies which might result in lessened persuasion effects. The fact that consumers regularly miss persuasive intents in non-traditional advertising environments, we suggest in this article, carries epistemological and methodical implications. To better appreciate these implications, we argue for a more systematic adoption of a constructivist approach in advertising research. Some established concepts in advertising research such as the persuasion knowledge model and advertising literacy already implicitly follow a constructivist rationale. However, to more fully exploit the potential of a constructivist approach, we review communication concepts that inform advertising research, clarify why a constructivist approach increases the explanatory power of advertising research, and discuss challenges for research designs.

References

Allen, C., Fournier, S., & Miller, F. (2008). Brands and their meaning makers. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. Herr, & F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 781–822). New York: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Amazeen, M. A., & Muddiman, A. R. (2017). Saving media or trading on trust: The effects of native advertising on audience perceptions of legacy and online news publishers. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 176–195.Search in Google Scholar

Austin, P. C. (2011). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 399–424.Search in Google Scholar

Axelrod, R. (1973). Schema theory: An information processing model of perception and cognition. American Political Science Review, 67, 1248–1266.Search in Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Search in Google Scholar

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.Search in Google Scholar

Beattie, A. E., & Mitchell, A. A. (1985). The relationship between advertising recall and persuasion: An experimental investigation. In L. F. Alwitt, & A. A. Mitchell (Eds.), Psychological process and advertising effectiveness: Theory, research, and application (pp. 129–155). Hillsdale: LEA.Search in Google Scholar

Belch, G. E., & Belch, M. A. (2012). Advertising and promotion: An integrated marketing communications perspective. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.Search in Google Scholar

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City: Doubleday.Search in Google Scholar

Bergmann, J. R., & Luckmann, T. (1995). Reconstructive genres of everyday communication. In U. Quasthoff (Ed.), Aspects of oral communication (pp. 289–304). Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Boerman, S. C., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2014). Using eye tracking to understand the effects of brand placement disclosure types in television programs. Journal of Advertising, 44(4), 196–207.Search in Google Scholar

Borchers, N. S. (2014). Werbekommunikation: Entwurf einer kommunikationswissenschaftlichen Theorie der Werbung [ Advertising communication: Developing a communications theory of advertising]. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Search in Google Scholar

Borchers, N. S. (2017). Crossing the borders: A theory of hybrid advertising formats. In J. F. Hamilton, R. Bodle, & E. Korin (Eds.), Explorations in critical studies of advertising (pp. 195–207). New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Boush, D. M., Friestad, M., & Rose, G. M. (1994). Adolescent skepticism toward TV advertising and knowledge of advertiser tactics. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 165–175.Search in Google Scholar

Buijzen, M. (2007). Reducing children’s susceptibility to commercials: Mechanisms of factual and evaluative advertising interventions. Media Psychology, 9, 411–430.Search in Google Scholar

Buijzen, M., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Owen, L. H. (2010). Introducing the PCMC model: An investigative framework for young people’s processing of commercialized media content. Communication Theory, 20(4), 427–450.Search in Google Scholar

Buttle, F. A. (1991). What do people do with advertising? International Journal of Advertising, 10(2), 95–110.Search in Google Scholar

Buttle, F. A. (1995). Marketing communication theory: What do the texts teach our students? International Journal of Advertising, 14, 297–313.Search in Google Scholar

Calder, B. J., & Sternthal, B. (1980). Television commercial wearout: An information processing view. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(2), 1731–1786.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, M. C., & Kirmani, A. (2008). I know what you’re doing and why you’re doing it: The use of the persuasion knowledge model in consumer research. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. Herr, & F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 549–572). New York, NY: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Cornish, L. S. (2014). ‘Mum, can I play on the internet?’ Parents’ understanding, perception and responses to online advertising designed for children. International Journal of Advertising, 33(3), 437–473.Search in Google Scholar

Delia, J. G. (1977). Constructivism and the study of human communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 63(1), 66–83.Search in Google Scholar

Dervin, B. (2003). Information as non-sense; information as sense: The communication technology connection. In B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet, & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-making methodology reader: Selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 293–308). Cresskill: Hampton.Search in Google Scholar

Donohue, T. R., Meyer, T. P., & Henke, L. L. (1978). Black and white children: Perceptions of TV commercials. Journal of Marketing, 42(4), 34–40.Search in Google Scholar

Elliott, M. T., & Speck, P. S. (1998). Consumer perceptions of advertising clutter and its impact across various media. Journal of Advertising Research, 38(1), 29–41.Search in Google Scholar

Evans, N. J., & Park, D. (2015). Rethinking the Persuasion Knowledge Model: Schematic antecedents and associative outcomes of persuasion knowledge activation for covert advertising. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 36(2), 157–176.Search in Google Scholar

Finne, Å., & Grönroos, C. (2009). Rethinking marketing communication: From integrated marketing communication to relationship communication. Journal of Marketing Communications, 15(2–3), 179–195.Search in Google Scholar

Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1–31.Search in Google Scholar

Glasersfeld, E. v. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Hackley, C. E. (1999). An epistemological odyssey: Towards social construction of the advertising process. Journal of Marketing Communications, 5, 157–168.Search in Google Scholar

Ham, C.-D., Nelson, M. R., & Das, S. (2015). How to measure persuasion knowledge. International Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 17–53.Search in Google Scholar

Hastie, R., & Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line. Psychological Review, 93, 258–268.Search in Google Scholar

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford.Search in Google Scholar

Hippler, H. J., Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (Eds.) (1987). Social information processing and survey methodology. New York: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Isaac, M. S., & Grayson, K. (2017). Beyond skepticism: Can accessing persuasion knowledge bolster credibility? Journal of Consumer Research, 43, 895–912.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, M., McKay, B. A., Richards, J. I., & Snyder, W. (2017). Now you see me, but you don’t know: Consumer processing of native advertisements in online news sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 17(2), 92–108.Search in Google Scholar

Kim, B.-H., Pasadeos, Y., & Barban, A. (2001). On the deceptive effectiveness of labeled and unlabeled advertorial formats. Mass Communication & Society, 4(3), 265–281.Search in Google Scholar

Kirmani, A., & Campbell, M. C. (2004). Goal seeker and persuasion sentry: How consumer targets respond to interpersonal marketing persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 573–582.Search in Google Scholar

Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Harris, L. C., & Piercy, N. (2013). Principles of marketing (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

Krallmann, D., Scheerer, R. C., & Strahl, C. (1997). Werbung als kommunikative Gattung [Advertising as communicative genre]. Sociologia Internationalis, 2, 195–216.Search in Google Scholar

Krippendorff, K. (1994). A recursive theory of communication. In D. J. Crowley, & D. Mitchell (Eds.), Communication theory today (pp. 78–104). Cambridge: Polity.Search in Google Scholar

Kunkel, D. (2010). Mismeasurement of children’s understanding of the persuasive intent of advertising. Journal of Children and Media, 4(1), 109–117.Search in Google Scholar

Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas (pp. 37–51). New York: Harper.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (1979). Activity types and language. Linguistics, 17, 365–399.Search in Google Scholar

Livingstone, S. (2009). Debating children’s susceptibility to persuasion – Where does fairness come in? A commentary on the Nairn and Fine versus Ambler debate. International Journal of Advertising, 28(1), 170–174.Search in Google Scholar

Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2006). Does advertising literacy mediate the effects of advertising on children? A critical examination of two linked research literatures in relation to obesity and food choice. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 560–584.Search in Google Scholar

Lüders, M., Prøitz, L., & Rasmussen, T. (2010). Emerging personal media genres. New Media & Society, 12(6), 947–963.Search in Google Scholar

Matthes, J., Schemer, C., & Wirth, W. (2007). More than meets the eye: Investigating the hidden impact of brand placements in television magazines. International Journal of Advertising, 26, 477–503.Search in Google Scholar

Matthes, J., Wirth, W., Schemer, C., & Kissling, A.-K. (2011). I see what you don’t see: The role of individual differences in field dependence-independence as a predictor of product placement recall and brand liking. Journal of Advertising, 40(4), 85–100.Search in Google Scholar

McCracken, G. (1987). Advertising: Meaning or information? Advances in Consumer Research, 14(1), 121–124.Search in Google Scholar

Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167.Search in Google Scholar

Nairn, A., & Fine, C. (2008). Who’s messing with my mind? The implications of dual-process models for the ethics of advertising to children. International Journal of Advertising, 27(3), 447–470.Search in Google Scholar

Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. San Franciso: Freeeman.Search in Google Scholar

Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159–186.Search in Google Scholar

Pateman, T. (1983). How is understanding an advertisement possible? In H. Davis, & P. Walton (Eds.), Language, image, media (pp. 187–203). New York: St. Martin’s.Search in Google Scholar

Pauly, J. (1977). The case for a new model of business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 14(4), 11–23.Search in Google Scholar

Puntoni, S., Schroeder, J. E., & Ritson, M. (2010). Meaning matters: Polysemy in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 39(2), 51–64.Search in Google Scholar

Redondo, I. (2012). The behavioral effects of negative product placements in movies. Psychology & Marketing, 29(8), 622–635.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, J. I., & Curran, C. M. (2002). Oracles on “advertising”: Searching for a definition. Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 63–77.Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, D. F. (1983). Children and commercials. Prevention in Human Services, 2(1–2), 19–35.Search in Google Scholar

Rozendaal, E., Lapierre, M. A., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Buijzen, M. (2011). Reconsidering advertising literacy as a defense against advertising effects. Media Psychology, 14, 333–354.Search in Google Scholar

Schmidt, S. J. (1987). Towards a constructivist theory of media genre. Poetics, 16, 371–395.Search in Google Scholar

Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news: A social history of American newspapers. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Schultz, D. E. (1995). What is direct marketing? Journal of Direct Marketing, 9, 5–9.Search in Google Scholar

Schwarz, N., Kumpf, M., & Bussmann, W. (1986). Resistance to persuasion as a consequence of influence attempts in advertising and non-advertising communications. Psychology, 23, 72–76.Search in Google Scholar

Shankar, A. (1999). Advertising’s imbroglio. Journal of Marketing Communications, 5(1), 1–15.Search in Google Scholar

Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois.Search in Google Scholar

Shapiro, M. E. (1994). Signal detection measures of recognition memory. In A. Lang (Ed.), Measuring psychological responses to media (pp. 133–148). Hillsdale: LEA.Search in Google Scholar

Speck, P. S., & Elliott, M. T. (1997). Predictors of advertising avoidance in print and broadcast media. Journal of Advertising, 26(3), 61–76.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, D. V., & Hamilton, R. W. (2006). The effects of information processing mode on consumers’ responses to comparative advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 530–540.Search in Google Scholar

Tutaj, K., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2012). Effects of online advertising format and persuasion knowledge on audience reactions. Journal of Marketing Communications, 18(1), 5–18.Search in Google Scholar

van Reijmersdal, E. A., Lammers, N., Rozendaal, E., & Buijzen, M. (2015). Disclosing the persuasive nature of advergames: Moderation effects of mood on brand responses via persuasion knowledge. International Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 70–84.Search in Google Scholar

Varey, R. J. (2000). A critical review of conceptions of communication evident in contemporary business and management literature. Journal of Communication Management, 4(4), 328–340.Search in Google Scholar

Waiguny, M. K., Nelson, M. R., & Terlutter, R. (2014). The relationship of persuasion knowledge, identification of commercial intent and persuasion outcomes in advergames: The role of media context and presence. Journal of Consumer Policy, 37(2), 257–277.Search in Google Scholar

Warlaumont, H. G. (1997). Appropriate reality: Consumers’ perceptions of schema-inconsistent advertising. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(1), 39–54.Search in Google Scholar

Wei, M.-L., Fischer, E., & Main, K. J. (2008). An examination of the effects of activating persuasion knowledge on consumer response to brands engaging in covert marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 27(1), 34–44.Search in Google Scholar

Wiman, A. R. (1983). Parental influence and children’s responses to television advertising. Journal of Advertising, 12(1), 12–18.Search in Google Scholar

Woelke, J. (2004). Durch Rezeption zur Werbung: Kommunikative Abgrenzung von Fernsehgattungen [Via reception to advertising: Communicative definition of TV genres]. Köln: Halem.Search in Google Scholar

Woelke, J. (2008). Nicht alle, aber einige mehr. Werbewirkungen unter dynamisch-transaktionaler Perspektive [Not all of them do but a few more. Advertising effects from a dynamic-transactional perspective]. In C. Wünsch, W. Früh, & V. Gehrau (Eds.), Integrative Modelle in der Rezeptions- und Wirkungsforschung: Dynamische und transaktionale Perspektiven (pp. 81–106). München: Fischer.Search in Google Scholar

Woelke, J., & Kolb, S. (2013). Wenn Mediendarbietungen Antwortleistung und Antwortdisposition gleichzeitig bestimmen. Ursache-Wirkungs-Konvergenz als Problem der medien- und werbepsychologischen Forschung und Item-Response-Analyse als ein Lösungsvorschlag [When media presentations determine discrimination and response bias at the same time. Cause-effect-convergence as problem of the research on media and advertising psychology, and item-response-analysis as proposed solution]. Journal of Business and Media Psychology, 4(1), 53–64.Search in Google Scholar

Woelke, J., & Pelzer, E. (2017). Think-aloud method and thought-listing technique. In J. Matthes, R. Potter, & C. S. Davis (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods (pp. 1-9). New York: Wiley & Sons.Search in Google Scholar

Wojdynski, B. W., & Evans, N. J. (2016). Going native: Effects of disclosure position and language on the recognition and evaluation of online native advertising. Journal of Advertising, 45(2), 157–168.Search in Google Scholar

Yoo, C. Y. (2009). The effects of persuasion knowledge on click-through of keyword search ads: Moderating role of search task and perceived fairness. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(2), 401–418.Search in Google Scholar

Zerfaß, A. (2009). Kommunikation als konstitutives Element im Innovationsmanagement [Communication as constitutive element in innovation management]. In A. Zerfaß, & K. M. Möslein (Eds.), Kommunikation als Erfolgsfaktor im Innovationsmanagement: Strategien im Zeitalter der Open Innovation (pp. 23–55). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-04-15
Published in Print: 2020-09-25

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston