Abstract
We investigate the impact of website interactivity in connection with its attention-getting effect on imagery processing and the generation of mental imagery. Results of an experiment indicate that the use of interactivity on brand websites can increase the activity of the Internet users’ imagery and support different dimensions of mental imagery, such as vividness or complexity. Furthermore, highly interactive and imagery-strong websites can lead to more favorable attitudes toward the site and the brand as well as to stronger behavioral intentions. Implications for theory and practice of internet advertising are discussed at the end of this article.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, N. H. (1981), “Integration Theory Applied to Cognitive Responses and Attitudes,” in: Cognitive Responses in Persuasion, eds. R. E. Petty, T. M. Ostrom and T. C. Brock, T. C., Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 361–397.
Alesandrini, K. L. and A. A. Sheikh (1983), “Research on Imagery: Implications for Advertising,” in: Imagery: Current Theory, Research and Application, ed. A. A. Sheikh, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 535–556.
Ariely, D. (1998), “Controlling the Information Flow: On the Role of Interactivity in Consumers’ Decision Making and Preference,” Dissertation in the Department of Business in the Fuqua Graduate School of Duke University.
Ariely, D. (2000), “Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers’ Decision Making and Preference”, in: Journal of Consumer Research, 27,3, 233–248.
Babin, L. A. and A. C. Burns (1997), “Effects of Print Ad Pictures and Copy Containing Instructions to Imagine on Mental Imagery That Mediates Attitudes,” in: Journal of Advertising, 26,3, 33–44.
Babin, L. A., A. C. Burns and A. Biswas (1992), “A Framework Providing Direction for Research on Communications Effects of Mental Imagery-Evoking Advertising Strategies,” in: Advances in Consumer Research, eds. J. F. Sherry, Jr. and B. Sternthal, Vol. 19, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 621–628.
Belch, G. E. and M. A. Belch (2000), “Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective,” 5th Edition, Chicago: McGraw-Hill.
Bezjian-Avery, A., B. Calder and D. Iacobucci (1998), “New Media Interactive Advertising vs. Traditional Advertising,” in: Journal of Advertising Research, 38,4, 23–32.
Blattberg, R. C. and J. Deighton (1991), “Interactive Marketing: Exploiting the Age of Addressability,” in: Sloan Management Review, 33,1, 5–14.
Bone, P. F. and P. S. Ellen (1990), “The Effect of Imagery Processing and Imagery Content on Behavior Intentions,” in: Advances in Consumer Research, eds. M. Goldberg, G. Gorn and R. Pollay, Vol. 17, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 449–454.
Chen, Q. and W. D. Wells (1999), “Attitude toward the Site,” in: Journal of Advertising Research, 39,5, 27–37.
Chen, Q., S. J. Clifford and W. D. Wells (2002), “Attitude toward the Site II: New Information,” in: Journal of Advertising Research, 42,2, 33–45.
Childers, T. L. and M. J. Houston (1982), “Imagery Paradigms for Consumer Research: Alternative Perspectives from Cognitive Psychology,” in: Advances in Consumer Research, eds. A.M. Tybout and R.P. Bagozzi, Vol. 10, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 59–64.
Cho, C.-H. and J. D. Leckenby (1999), “Interactivity as a Measure of Advertising Effectiveness,” in: Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, ed. M. S. Roberts, Gainesville, FL: American Academy of Advertising, 162–179.
Coyle, J.E. and E. Thorston (2001), “The Effects of Progressive Levels of Interactivity and Vividness in Web Marketing Sites,” in: Journal of Advertising, 30,3, 65–77.
Craik, F. I. M. and R. S. Lockhart (1972), “Levels of Processing — A Framework for Memory Research,” in: Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975), “Play and Intrinsic Rewards,” in: Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15,3, 41–63.
Dellaert, B. G. C. and B. E. Kahn (1999), “How Tolerable is Delay? — Consumers’ Evaluation of Internet Web Sites after Waiting,” in: Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13,4, 41–54.
Downes, E. J. and S. J. McMillan (2000), “Defining Interactivity — A Qualitative Identification of Key Dimensions,” in: New Media and Society, 2,2, 157–179.
Engelkamp, J. and H. D. Zimmer (1985), “Motor Programs and Their Relation to the Semantic Memory,” in: German Journal of Psychology, 9, 239–254.
Esch, F.-R. (2001), „Wirkung integrierter Kommunikation — Ein verhaltenswissenschaftlicher Ansatz für die Werbung,“ 3rd Edition, Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Esch, F.-R. (2005), „Strategie und Technik der Markenführung,“ 3rd Edition, München: Verlag Vahlen.
Gregory, W. L., R. B. Cialdini and K. M. Carpenter (1982), “Self-Relevant Scenarios as Mediators of Likelihood Estimates and Compliance: Does Imagining Make It So?,” in: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43,1, 89–99.
Ha, L. and E. L. James (1998), “Interactivity Reexamined: A Baseline Analysis of Early Business Web Sites,” in: Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42,4, 457–474.
Hastak, M. and J. C. Olson (1989), “Assessing the Role of Brand Related Cognitive Responses as Mediators of Communication Effects,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 15,1, 444–456.
Hoffman, D. L. and T. P. Novak (1996), “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations,” in: Journal of Marketing, 60,3, 50–68.
Hoffman, D. L. and T. P. Novak (2000), “How to Acquire Customers on the Web,” in: Harvard Business Review, 78,3, 179–200.
Kisielius, J. and B. Sternthal (1984), “Detecting and Explaining Vividness Effects in Attitudinal Judgments,” in: Journal of Marketing Research, 21,1, 54–64.
Kiss, G. (2005), „Wirkung interaktiver Markenauftritte im Internet,“ Berlin: Logos Verlag.
Kiss, G. and F.-R. Esch (2003), “Interactive Brand Communication,” Working Paper in the Department of Marketing of the University of Giessen.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1980), “Image and Mind,” Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Liu, Y. and L. J. Shrum (2002), “What Is Interactivity and Is It Always Such a Good Thing? Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising Effectiveness,” in: Journal of Advertising, 31,Winter, 53–64.
Lombard, M. and J. Snyder-Duch (2001), “Interactive Advertising and Presence: A Framework,” in Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1, 2.
Lutz, K. A. and R. J. Lutz (1977), “Effects of Interactive Imagery on Learning: Application to Advertising,” in: Journal of Applied Psychology, 64,4, 493–498.
MacInnis, D. J. and L. L. Price (1987), “The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 13,1, 473–491.
McGill, A. L. and P. Anand (1989), “The Effect of Imagery on Information Processing Strategy in a Multiattribute Choice Task,” in: Marketing Letters, 1,1, 7–16.
McMillan, S. J. and J.-S. Hwang (2002), “Measures of Perceived Interactivity: An Exploration of the Role of Direction of Communication, User Control, and Time in Shaping Perceptions of Interactivity,” in: Journal of Advertising, 31,Fall, 29–42.
Mitchell, A. A. (1986), “The Effect of Verbal and Visual Components of Advertisements on Brand Attitudes and Attitude toward the Advertisement,” in: Journal of Consumer Research, 13,2, 12–24.
Mitchell, A. A. and J. C. Olson (1981), “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?,” in: Journal of Marketing Research, 18,3, 318–332.
Paivio, A. (1971), “Imagery and Verbal Processes,” New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Paivio, A. (1986), “Mental Representations,” New York: Oxford University Press.
Pavlou, P. A. and D. W. Stewart (2000), “Measuring the Effects and Effectiveness of Interactive Advertising: A Research Agenda,” in: Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1, 1.
Rafaeli, S. (1988), “Interactivity: From New Media to Communication,” in: Advancing Communication Science: Merging Mass and Interpersonal Process, eds. R. P. Hawkins, J. M. Wiemann and S. Pingree, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 110–134.
Rafaeli, S. and F. Sudweeks (1997), “Networked Interactivity,” in: Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 2, 4.
Rice, R. E. and F. Williams (1984), “Theories Old and New: The Study of New Media,” in: The New Media: Communication, Research, and Technology, ed. R.E. Rice, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 55–80.
Rossiter, J. R. and L. Percy (1983), “Visual Communication in Advertising,” in Information Processing Research in Advertising, ed. R.J. Harris, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 83–125.
Schulz, D. E., S. I. Tannenbaum and R. F. Lauterborn (1996), “The New Marketing Paradigm: Integrated Marketing Communications,” Chicago: McGraw-Hill.
Sundar, S. S., J. Brown and S. Kalyanaraman (1999), “Reactivity vs. Interactivity,” Paper presented at the conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
Steuer, J. (1992), “Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence,” in: Journal of Communication, 42,4, 73–93.
Williams, F., R. E. Rice and E. M. Rogers (1988), “Research Methods and the New Media,” New York: The Free Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag ∣ GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kiss, G., Esch, FR. (2006). Effects of interactive and imagery-strong websites. In: Diehl, S., Terlutter, R. (eds) International Advertising and Communication. DUV. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-8350-5702-2_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-8350-5702-2_19
Publisher Name: DUV
Print ISBN: 978-3-8350-0455-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-8350-5702-9
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)