A Short-Term Twofold Impact on Banner Ads

  • Harald KindermannEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9751)


In light of the situation that banner ads are normally ignored by the target group, the question arises of whether the placement of such ads is reasonable. Referring to the mere exposure effect and priming mechanism, some impact can be derived, however, not always as desired. Depending on existing positive or negative predispositions toward a specific brand, the effect of such a banner can be either positive or negative. It seems that a banner from a negatively perceived brand triggers negative predisposition, hence leading to decreased brand choice.


Mere exposure effect Banner blindness Priming Implicit memory Inattentional blindness 


  1. 1.
    Robinson, H., Wysocka, A., Hand, C.: Internet advertising effectiveness: the effect of design on click-through rates for banner ads. Int. J. Advertising 26, 527–541 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lohtia, R., Donthu, N., Hershberger, E.K.: The impact of content and design elements on banner advertising click-through rates. J. Advertising Res. 43, 410–418 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yoo, C.Y.: Unconscious processing of web advertising: effects on implicit memory, attitude toward the brand, and consideration set. J. Interact. Mark. 22, 2–18 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee, J., Ahn, J.-H.: Attention to banner ads and their effectiveness: an eye-tracking approach. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 17, 119–137 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cho, C.-H.: Why do people avoid advertising on the internet? J. Advertising 33, 89–97 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mack, A., Rock, I.: Inattentional Blindness. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benway, J.P.: Banner blindness: the irony of attention grabbing on the World Wide Web. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 42, pp. 463–467 (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pagendarm, M., Schaumburg, H.: Why are users banner-blind? The impact of navigation style on the perception of web banners. J. Digital Inf. 2 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heath, R.: Low involvement processing—a new model of brands and advertising. Int. J. Advertising 19, 287–298 (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heath, R., Brandt, D., Nairn, A.: Brand relationships: strengthened by emotion, weakened by attention. J. Advertising Res. 46, 410–419 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee, A.Y.: Effects of implicit memory on memory-based versus stimulus-based brand choice. J. Mark. Res. (JMR) 39, 440–454 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meyers-Levy, J., Malaviya, P.: Consumers’ processing of persuasive advertisements: an integrative framework of persuasion theories. J. Mark. 63, 45–60 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Courbet, D., Fourquet-Courbet, M.-P., Kazan, R., Intartaglia, J.: The long-term effects of e-advertising: the influence of internet pop-ups viewed at a low level of attention in implicit memory. J. Comput. Mediated Commun. 19, 274–293 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kindermann, H.: Priming effect and inattentional blindness: an experimental study on decision making (Poster). In: Sixth European Conference on Sensory and Consumer Research, Copenhagen (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moreland, R.L., Zajonc, R.B.: Exposure effects in person perception: familiarity, similarity, and attraction. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 18, 395–415 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee, A.Y.: The mere exposure effect: an uncertainty reduction explanation revisited. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 27, 1255–1266 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grimes, A., Kitchen, P.J.: Researching mere exposure effects to advertising. Int. J. Mark. Res. 49, 191–219 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mandler, G., Nakamura, Y., Van Zandt, B.J.: Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimuli that cannot be recognized. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cognit. 13, 646 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Janiszewski, C.: The influence of nonattended material on the processing of advertising claims. J. Mark. Res. 27, 263–278 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Janiszewski, C.: Preconscious processing effects: the independence of attitude formation and conscious thought. J. Consum. Res. 15, 199–209 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baker, W.E.: When can affective conditioning and mere exposure directly influence brand choice? J. Advertising 28, 31–46 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Meyer, D.E., Schvaneveldt, R.W.: Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. J. Exp. Psychol. 90, 227 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meyer, D.E., Schvaneveldt, R.W.: Retrieval and Comparison Processes in Semantic Memory Attention and Performance IV. Academic Press, New York (1973)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tulving, E., Schacter, D.L.: Priming and human memory systems. Science 247, 301–306 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Johnson-Laird, P.N.: Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1983)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Applied Sciences Upper AustriaSteyrAustria

Personalised recommendations