The effect of augmented reality versus traditional advertising: a comparison between neurophysiological and self-reported measures

Despite the growing application of augmented reality in advertising, there is limited understanding about how customers respond to their interaction with the augmented reality advertising and how it differs from a standard paper-based advertising. Augmented reality ads are immersive, interactive, an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Marketing letters 2022-03, Vol.33 (1), p.113-128
Hauptverfasser: Pozharliev, Rumen, De Angelis, Matteo, Rossi, Dario
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 128
container_issue 1
container_start_page 113
container_title Marketing letters
container_volume 33
creator Pozharliev, Rumen
De Angelis, Matteo
Rossi, Dario
description Despite the growing application of augmented reality in advertising, there is limited understanding about how customers respond to their interaction with the augmented reality advertising and how it differs from a standard paper-based advertising. Augmented reality ads are immersive, interactive, and lifelike, which means they may help companies create an emotional connection with their customers. The authors test if customers would respond in terms of emotional and affective intensity differently to augmented reality versus standard paper-based advertising. The results of two laboratory studies that consider physiological measures of arousal (galvanic skin response), self-reported measure of affect intensity and willingness to pay show that the higher willingness to pay for customers exposed to augmented reality as opposed to standard paper-based ads is driven by the physiological arousal, but not by the self-reported affect intensity and that processing fluency possibly underlies consumer’s enhanced emotional responses toward AR. These results suggest that replacing traditional advertisements with augmented reality advertisements enhances customer physiological responses and willingness to pay, with possible implications on customer segmentation and marketing communication.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11002-021-09573-9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2641697763</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2641697763</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-16896cf70e72aef5bff75b0acd8694c0f29783f5de316c4ba562d4777f0569ba3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE2LFDEQDaLguPoHPAU8t1bSnaTjTRZdhQUvK3gL6XRlNktP0iZpZa7-cjO2sDdP9ah6H9Qj5DWDtwxAvSusDd4BZx1oofpOPyEHdgEg9Pen5ACaNywH8Zy8KOUBAEYJ7EB-390jRe_RVZo8tdvxhLHiTDPaJdQz_Ym5bIXWbOdQQ4p2oXZuyxpKiMf31FKXTqvNoaRIJ6y_ECONuOW03p9LSEs6BncRxZkWXHyXcU35knBCW7aM5SV55u1S8NW_eUW-ffp4d_25u_168-X6w23nBg61Y3LU0nkFqLhFLybvlZjAunmUenDguVZj78WMPZNumKyQfB6UUh6E1JPtr8ib3XfN6ceGpZqHtOX2UDFcDkxqpWTfWHxnuZxKyejNmsPJ5rNhYC5dm71r07o2f7s2uonoLkKXYiiPkhGgBzH2Q6P0O6W0Yzxifkz_j_EfXx2Ppg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2641697763</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The effect of augmented reality versus traditional advertising: a comparison between neurophysiological and self-reported measures</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Pozharliev, Rumen ; De Angelis, Matteo ; Rossi, Dario</creator><creatorcontrib>Pozharliev, Rumen ; De Angelis, Matteo ; Rossi, Dario</creatorcontrib><description>Despite the growing application of augmented reality in advertising, there is limited understanding about how customers respond to their interaction with the augmented reality advertising and how it differs from a standard paper-based advertising. Augmented reality ads are immersive, interactive, and lifelike, which means they may help companies create an emotional connection with their customers. The authors test if customers would respond in terms of emotional and affective intensity differently to augmented reality versus standard paper-based advertising. The results of two laboratory studies that consider physiological measures of arousal (galvanic skin response), self-reported measure of affect intensity and willingness to pay show that the higher willingness to pay for customers exposed to augmented reality as opposed to standard paper-based ads is driven by the physiological arousal, but not by the self-reported affect intensity and that processing fluency possibly underlies consumer’s enhanced emotional responses toward AR. These results suggest that replacing traditional advertisements with augmented reality advertisements enhances customer physiological responses and willingness to pay, with possible implications on customer segmentation and marketing communication.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0923-0645</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-059X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11002-021-09573-9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Advertisements ; Advertising ; Augmentation ; Augmented reality ; Business and Management ; Customers ; Emotional responses ; Fluency ; Galvanic skin response ; Marketing ; Physiological arousal ; Physiology ; Segmentation ; Self report ; Skin testing ; Willingness to pay</subject><ispartof>Marketing letters, 2022-03, Vol.33 (1), p.113-128</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-16896cf70e72aef5bff75b0acd8694c0f29783f5de316c4ba562d4777f0569ba3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-16896cf70e72aef5bff75b0acd8694c0f29783f5de316c4ba562d4777f0569ba3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5573-0228</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11002-021-09573-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11002-021-09573-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923,41486,42555,51317</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pozharliev, Rumen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Angelis, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rossi, Dario</creatorcontrib><title>The effect of augmented reality versus traditional advertising: a comparison between neurophysiological and self-reported measures</title><title>Marketing letters</title><addtitle>Mark Lett</addtitle><description>Despite the growing application of augmented reality in advertising, there is limited understanding about how customers respond to their interaction with the augmented reality advertising and how it differs from a standard paper-based advertising. Augmented reality ads are immersive, interactive, and lifelike, which means they may help companies create an emotional connection with their customers. The authors test if customers would respond in terms of emotional and affective intensity differently to augmented reality versus standard paper-based advertising. The results of two laboratory studies that consider physiological measures of arousal (galvanic skin response), self-reported measure of affect intensity and willingness to pay show that the higher willingness to pay for customers exposed to augmented reality as opposed to standard paper-based ads is driven by the physiological arousal, but not by the self-reported affect intensity and that processing fluency possibly underlies consumer’s enhanced emotional responses toward AR. These results suggest that replacing traditional advertisements with augmented reality advertisements enhances customer physiological responses and willingness to pay, with possible implications on customer segmentation and marketing communication.</description><subject>Advertisements</subject><subject>Advertising</subject><subject>Augmentation</subject><subject>Augmented reality</subject><subject>Business and Management</subject><subject>Customers</subject><subject>Emotional responses</subject><subject>Fluency</subject><subject>Galvanic skin response</subject><subject>Marketing</subject><subject>Physiological arousal</subject><subject>Physiology</subject><subject>Segmentation</subject><subject>Self report</subject><subject>Skin testing</subject><subject>Willingness to pay</subject><issn>0923-0645</issn><issn>1573-059X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UE2LFDEQDaLguPoHPAU8t1bSnaTjTRZdhQUvK3gL6XRlNktP0iZpZa7-cjO2sDdP9ah6H9Qj5DWDtwxAvSusDd4BZx1oofpOPyEHdgEg9Pen5ACaNywH8Zy8KOUBAEYJ7EB-390jRe_RVZo8tdvxhLHiTDPaJdQz_Ym5bIXWbOdQQ4p2oXZuyxpKiMf31FKXTqvNoaRIJ6y_ECONuOW03p9LSEs6BncRxZkWXHyXcU35knBCW7aM5SV55u1S8NW_eUW-ffp4d_25u_168-X6w23nBg61Y3LU0nkFqLhFLybvlZjAunmUenDguVZj78WMPZNumKyQfB6UUh6E1JPtr8ib3XfN6ceGpZqHtOX2UDFcDkxqpWTfWHxnuZxKyejNmsPJ5rNhYC5dm71r07o2f7s2uonoLkKXYiiPkhGgBzH2Q6P0O6W0Yzxifkz_j_EfXx2Ppg</recordid><startdate>20220301</startdate><enddate>20220301</enddate><creator>Pozharliev, Rumen</creator><creator>De Angelis, Matteo</creator><creator>Rossi, Dario</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5573-0228</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220301</creationdate><title>The effect of augmented reality versus traditional advertising: a comparison between neurophysiological and self-reported measures</title><author>Pozharliev, Rumen ; De Angelis, Matteo ; Rossi, Dario</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-16896cf70e72aef5bff75b0acd8694c0f29783f5de316c4ba562d4777f0569ba3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Advertisements</topic><topic>Advertising</topic><topic>Augmentation</topic><topic>Augmented reality</topic><topic>Business and Management</topic><topic>Customers</topic><topic>Emotional responses</topic><topic>Fluency</topic><topic>Galvanic skin response</topic><topic>Marketing</topic><topic>Physiological arousal</topic><topic>Physiology</topic><topic>Segmentation</topic><topic>Self report</topic><topic>Skin testing</topic><topic>Willingness to pay</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pozharliev, Rumen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Angelis, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rossi, Dario</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Marketing letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pozharliev, Rumen</au><au>De Angelis, Matteo</au><au>Rossi, Dario</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The effect of augmented reality versus traditional advertising: a comparison between neurophysiological and self-reported measures</atitle><jtitle>Marketing letters</jtitle><stitle>Mark Lett</stitle><date>2022-03-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>113</spage><epage>128</epage><pages>113-128</pages><issn>0923-0645</issn><eissn>1573-059X</eissn><abstract>Despite the growing application of augmented reality in advertising, there is limited understanding about how customers respond to their interaction with the augmented reality advertising and how it differs from a standard paper-based advertising. Augmented reality ads are immersive, interactive, and lifelike, which means they may help companies create an emotional connection with their customers. The authors test if customers would respond in terms of emotional and affective intensity differently to augmented reality versus standard paper-based advertising. The results of two laboratory studies that consider physiological measures of arousal (galvanic skin response), self-reported measure of affect intensity and willingness to pay show that the higher willingness to pay for customers exposed to augmented reality as opposed to standard paper-based ads is driven by the physiological arousal, but not by the self-reported affect intensity and that processing fluency possibly underlies consumer’s enhanced emotional responses toward AR. These results suggest that replacing traditional advertisements with augmented reality advertisements enhances customer physiological responses and willingness to pay, with possible implications on customer segmentation and marketing communication.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s11002-021-09573-9</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5573-0228</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0923-0645
ispartof Marketing letters, 2022-03, Vol.33 (1), p.113-128
issn 0923-0645
1573-059X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2641697763
source EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Advertisements
Advertising
Augmentation
Augmented reality
Business and Management
Customers
Emotional responses
Fluency
Galvanic skin response
Marketing
Physiological arousal
Physiology
Segmentation
Self report
Skin testing
Willingness to pay
title The effect of augmented reality versus traditional advertising: a comparison between neurophysiological and self-reported measures
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T17%3A05%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20effect%20of%20augmented%20reality%20versus%20traditional%20advertising:%20a%20comparison%20between%20neurophysiological%20and%20self-reported%20measures&rft.jtitle=Marketing%20letters&rft.au=Pozharliev,%20Rumen&rft.date=2022-03-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=113&rft.epage=128&rft.pages=113-128&rft.issn=0923-0645&rft.eissn=1573-059X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11002-021-09573-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2641697763%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2641697763&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true