Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Anyuan Shen, A. Ball (2011)
Preference stability belief as a determinant of response to personalized recommendationsJournal of Consumer Behaviour, 10
I. Ajzen (2001)
Nature and operation of attitudes.Annual review of psychology, 52
Neeraj Arora, Xavier Drèze, A. Ghose, J. Hess, R. Iyengar, Bing Jing, Yogesh Joshi, V. Kumar, Nicholas Lurie, S. Neslin, S. Sajeesh, Meng Su, Niladri Syam, Jacquelyn Thomas, Z. Zhang (2008)
Putting one-to-one marketing to work: Personalization, customization, and choiceMarketing Letters, 19
S. Noar, Christina Benac, Melissa Harris (2007)
Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions.Psychological bulletin, 133 4
R. Petty, J. Cacioppo (1986)
Communication and persuasion
A. Eagly, S. Chaiken (2005)
Attitude Research in the 21st Century: The Current State of Knowledge.
E. Nap-Kolhoff, Peter Broeder (2008)
I Me Mine
M. Kreuter, R. Wray (2003)
Tailored and targeted health communication: strategies for enhancing information relevance.American journal of health behavior, 27 Suppl 3
R. Chellappa, Raymond Sin (2005)
Personalization versus Privacy: An Empirical Examination of the Online Consumer’s DilemmaInformation Technology and Management, 6
University of Miami) is an assistant professor in the Richard T
E. Maslowska, E. Smit, B. Putte (2013)
Assessing the cross-cultural applicability of tailored advertisingInternational Journal of Advertising, 32
Sriram Kalyanaraman, S. Sundar (2006)
The Psychological Appeal of Personalized Content in Web Portals: Does Customization Affect Attitudes and Behavior?Journal of Communication, 56
Cong Li (2008)
Are highly tailored messages always more effective? The influence of cultural psychology on web -based customization
J. Krosnick, D. Boninger, C. Yao, Matthew Berent, C. Carnot (1993)
Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65
Cong Li (2016)
When does web-based personalization really work? The distinction between actual personalization and perceived personalizationComput. Hum. Behav., 54
K. Tam, S. Ho (2005)
Web Personalization as a Persuasion Strategy: An Elaboration Likelihood Model PerspectiveInf. Syst. Res., 16
S. Sundar, Haiyan Jia, T. Waddell, Yan Huang (2015)
Toward a Theory of Interactive Media Effects (TIME)
D. O’Keefe (2002)
Persuasion : theory & research
A. Binder, Kajsa Dalrymple, D. Brossard, Dietram Scheufele (2009)
The Soul of a Polarized DemocracyCommunication Research, 36
B. Murthi, S. Sarkar (2003)
The Role of the Management Sciences in Research on PersonalizationManag. Sci., 49
S. Noar, N. Harrington, Rosalie Aldrich (2009)
The Role of Message Tailoring in the Development of Persuasive Health Communication MessagesAnnals of the International Communication Association, 33
Cong Li, Sriram Kalyanaraman (2013)
“I, Me, Mine” or “Us, We, Ours?”: The Influence of Cultural Psychology on Web-Based CustomizationMedia Psychology, 16
S. Sundar, Sampada, S. Marathe, S. Sundar, S Marathe
Human Communication Research Issn 0360-3989 Personalization versus Customization: the Importance of Agency, Privacy, and Power Usage Personalization vs. Customization Personalization vs. Customization Personalization vs. Customization Personalization vs. Customization Personalization vs. Customizati
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) is an associate professor in the School of Communication at the University of Miami
R. Fazio (1995)
Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility.
R. Petty, J. Cacioppo (1986)
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
R. Rust, Tuck Chung (2006)
Marketing Models of Service and RelationshipsMarketing Science, 25
Namyoon Kim, Nam Kim, Nam Kim, S. Sundar, S. Sundar (2012)
Personal Relevance Versus Contextual RelevanceJ. Media Psychol. Theor. Methods Appl., 24
John Updegraff, D. Sherman, F. Luyster, T. Mann (2007)
The effects of message quality and congruency on perceptions of tailored health communications.Journal of experimental social psychology, 43 2
Elizabeth Aguirre, D. Mahr, Dhruv Grewal, K. Ruyter, Martin Wetzels (2015)
Unraveling the personalization paradox: The effect of information collection and trust-building strategies on online advertisement effectivenessJournal of Retailing, 91
Jacob Westfall, Leaf Boven, John Chambers, C. Judd (2015)
Perceiving Political Polarization in the United StatesPerspectives on Psychological Science, 10
Asim Ansari, C. Mela (2003)
E-CustomizationJournal of Marketing Research, 40
B. Rimer, M. Kreuter (2006)
Advancing Tailored Health Communication: A Persuasion and Message Effects PerspectiveJournal of Communication, 56
Franziska Marquart, Brigitte Naderer (1988)
Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude changeAmerican Journal of Psychology, 101
Scott MacKenzie, R. Lutz, G. Belch (1986)
The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing ExplanationsJournal of Marketing Research, 23
G. Fitzsimons (2008)
Death to DichotomizingJournal of Consumer Research, 35
Hua-Hsin Wan (2008)
Resonance as a Mediating Factor Accounting for the Message Effect in Tailored Communication—Examining Crisis Communication in a Tourism ContextJournal of Communication, 58
M. Kreuter, V. Strecher, B. Glassman (1999)
One size does not fit all: The case for tailoring print materialsAnnals of Behavioral Medicine, 21
Jakob Jensen, Andy King, Nick Carcioppolo, L. Davis (2012)
Why are Tailored Messages More Effective? A Multiple Mediation Analysis of a Breast Cancer Screening Intervention.The Journal of communication, 62 5
Thomas Kramer, Suri Weisfeld-Spolter, M. Thakkar (2007)
The Effect of Cultural Orientation on Consumer Responses to PersonalizationBehavioral Marketing
P. West, Christina Brown, Stephen Hoch (1996)
Consumption Vocabulary and Preference FormationJournal of Consumer Research, 23
J. Krosnick, R. Petty (1995)
Attitude strength: An overview.
Albert Gunther (1988)
Attitude Extremity and Trust in MediaJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 65
Cong Li, Sriram Kalyanaraman (2012)
What if Web site editorial content and ads are in two different languages? A study of bilingual consumers' online information processingJournal of Consumer Behaviour, 11
N. Franke, P. Keinz, Christoph Steger (2009)
Testing the Value of Customization: When Do Customers Really Prefer Products Tailored to Their Preferences?Journal of Marketing, 73
Neeraj Bharadwaj, R. Reczek, Frenkel Hofstede (2009)
Consumer Response to and Choice of Customized versus Standardized SystemsMcCombs School of Business Research Paper Series
J. Bettman, M. Luce, J. Payne (2006)
The Construction of Preference: Constructive Consumer Choice Processes
Itamar Simonson (2005)
Determinants of Customers’ Responses to Customized Offers: Conceptual Framework and Research PropositionsJournal of Marketing, 69
Stephen Porter, M. Whitcomb (2003)
The Impact of Contact Type on Web Survey Response RatesPublic Opinion Quarterly, 67
L. Shrum (1999)
The Relationship of Television Viewing with Attitude Strength and Extremity: Implications for the Cultivation EffectMedia Psychology, 1
P. Briñol, R. Petty (2006)
Fundamental processes leading to attitude change : Implications for cancer prevention communicationsJournal of Communication, 56
Michael Beam (2014)
Automating the NewsCommunication Research, 41
Personalized advertising is widely believed to be an effective persuasion strategy. A typical personalized advertising process consists of two phases: The message sender first “learns” the message receiver’s preferences, and then “matches” the message to that person according to his or her preferences. The present study argues that this process may be problematic because it assumes that an individual’s preferences are always stable (i.e., preferences remain the same over time) and extreme (i.e., preferences are highly polarized). Through a 2 (message type: personalized vs. nonpersonalized) × 2 (preference stability: high vs. low) × 2 (preference extremity: high vs. low) between-participants experiment (N = 227), it is shown that the effectiveness of personalized advertising is moderated by preference stability and extremity. A new conceptualization of personalization is proposed based on the study results, and how the two phases of personalized advertising may be refined is highlighted.
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly – SAGE
Published: Jun 1, 2019
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.