Citation
Effects of Ad Placement and Ad Type on Consumer Responses to Podcast Ads

Material Information

Title:
Effects of Ad Placement and Ad Type on Consumer Responses to Podcast Ads
Creator:
RITTER, ERIC A. ( Author, Primary )
Copyright Date:
2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Advertising ( jstor )
Advertising research ( jstor )
Advertising signs ( jstor )
Brands ( jstor )
Comparative advertising ( jstor )
Consumer advertising ( jstor )
Irritation ( jstor )
Podcasting ( jstor )
Podcasts ( jstor )
Sponsorship ( jstor )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Eric A. Ritter. Permission granted to University of Florida to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Embargo Date:
7/12/2007
Resource Identifier:
659871185 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

ritter_e ( .pdf )

ritter_e_Page_56.txt

ritter_e_Page_26.txt

ritter_e_Page_22.txt

ritter_e_pdf.txt

ritter_e_Page_72.txt

ritter_e_Page_67.txt

ritter_e_Page_15.txt

ritter_e_Page_23.txt

ritter_e_Page_43.txt

ritter_e_Page_45.txt

ritter_e_Page_34.txt

ritter_e_Page_37.txt

ritter_e_Page_20.txt

ritter_e_Page_14.txt

ritter_e_Page_61.txt

ritter_e_Page_39.txt

ritter_e_Page_53.txt

ritter_e_Page_21.txt

ritter_e_Page_50.txt

ritter_e_Page_58.txt

ritter_e_Page_16.txt

ritter_e_Page_42.txt

ritter_e_Page_18.txt

ritter_e_Page_48.txt

ritter_e_Page_73.txt

ritter_e_Page_10.txt

ritter_e_Page_62.txt

ritter_e_Page_04.txt

ritter_e_Page_44.txt

ritter_e_Page_55.txt

ritter_e_Page_12.txt

ritter_e_Page_57.txt

ritter_e_Page_01.txt

ritter_e_Page_71.txt

ritter_e_Page_19.txt

ritter_e_Page_11.txt

ritter_e_Page_66.txt

ritter_e_Page_59.txt

ritter_e_Page_07.txt

ritter_e_Page_52.txt

ritter_e_Page_31.txt

ritter_e_Page_70.txt

ritter_e_Page_06.txt

ritter_e_Page_64.txt

ritter_e_Page_41.txt

ritter_e_Page_33.txt

ritter_e_Page_68.txt

ritter_e_Page_08.txt

ritter_e_Page_60.txt

ritter_e_Page_02.txt

ritter_e_Page_51.txt

ritter_e_Page_29.txt

ritter_e_Page_49.txt

ritter_e_Page_09.txt

ritter_e_Page_65.txt

ritter_e_Page_63.txt

ritter_e_Page_03.txt

ritter_e_Page_36.txt

ritter_e_Page_27.txt

ritter_e_Page_13.txt

ritter_e_Page_28.txt

ritter_e_Page_24.txt

ritter_e_Page_05.txt

ritter_e_Page_54.txt

ritter_e_Page_32.txt

ritter_e_Page_17.txt

ritter_e_Page_47.txt

ritter_e_Page_40.txt

ritter_e_Page_46.txt

ritter_e_Page_25.txt

ritter_e_Page_69.txt

ritter_e_Page_30.txt

ritter_e_Page_38.txt

ritter_e_Page_35.txt


Full Text






EFFECTS OF AD PLACEMENT AND AD TYPE ON CONSUMER RESPONSES TO PODCAST ADS


By

ERIC A. RITTER






















A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ADVERTISING

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007






































O 2007 Eric A. Ritter























To the Professors of the Advertising Department in the College of Journalism and
Communications at the University of Florida.









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author would like to offer this deeply felt thanks to the following people, without

whom this thesis could not have been started and certainly would never have been completed.

Thanks to Pamela E. Cross (my future wife) for continuously being there for me and

offering constant motivation. I also want to extend my sincere gratitude to my parents for their

support. Thanks to Jimmy John's for keeping me going. Sincere appreciation goes out to Steve

Jobs and Jonathan Ive for their wonderful inspiration. And last but not least, I would like to

thank Carl Crawford, Scott Kazmir, and Jonny Gomes for their entertainment.















TABLE OF CONTENTS


page



ACKNOWLEDG1VENT S .........._.... ..............4..._.._. ......


LIST OF TABLES .........._.... ..............7...__.........


LI ST OF FIGURE S ........._._... ............... 8....___. ....


ABSTRACT .........._.... ..............9..._.._. ......


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ..............11.......... ......


2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE...................... .......16


Irritation ................ ................. 18..............
Ad Avoidance ................. ................. 19.............
Placement of Advertising ................. ................. 20......... ...
Advertising Type ................. ..............22. ...............
Obj ective ................ ................. 23..............
Hypotheses.............. .............. 2

3 IVETHOD OL OGY ................ ................. 25......... ...


Procedure ................ ................. 25..............
M measure s.............. ... .. ......... .... .... ....... ............2

Sample Recruitment and Qualification .............. ..............28.....
Pre-testing ................. ................. 28.............
Research Stimuli .............. ..............32.....


4 FINDINGS ................ ..............34. ...............


Sample Profile.............. ..............34.
Reliability .............. ........ ............3
Effects of Advertising Placement ................. ..............35.......... .....
Effects of Advertising Type ................. ..............37.................
Interaction of the Independent Variables ................. ..............39. .......... ...
Additional Findings.............. ..............40.


5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ................ ..............46. ..............


Im plications .............. .... ........... ..............47.......
Limitations and Future Research ................ ..............50. ..............













APPENDIX

A PRETEST ONE QUESTIONNAIRES .........._.._ ......... .....___ ...........5

B PRETEST TWO QUESTIONNAIRES.............. .............5

C PRETEST THREE QUESTIONNAIRE ....__ ......_____ .......___ ...........6

D TRANSCRIPT OF TRADITIONAL AD AND SPONSORSHIP .............. ............__..61

E MAIN STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE ................. ..............62. ..............

F RE SUL TS OF OPEN-ENDED QUE STION ................. ......... .....................68

LIST OF REFERENCES ................. ..............70................

BIOGRAPHICAL SKET CH ................. ..............73.......... ......













LIST OF TABLES


Table pg




3-1 Podcast types .............. ..............32.....

3-2 Attitude towards the ad measurements used .............. ..............32.....

3-3 Mean of podcast program's likelihood of download ................ ..............33. .......... .

3-4 Average score for brand attitude of five different brands ................ .......... ..............33

3-5 Manipulation check for mean comparison between traditional advertising and
sponsorship.............. ..............3

4-1 Sample size of each experimental group.............. ..............41..

4-2 Means and standard deviation for adverting placement.............. ..............42

4-3 t-value and mean difference for ad placement. ................ ..............42. ............

4-4 Means and standard deviation for ad Type .............. ..............42.....

4-5 t-value and mean difference for ad Type ................. ......... .......... .........4

4-6 Means and standard deviation of perceived intrusiveness .......... ................ ..............42

4-7 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived intrusiveness .................43

4-8 Means and standard deviation of perceived irritation ................ ............... ......... ..43

4-9 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived irritation ................... .....43

4-10 Means and standard deviation of attitude towards ad ................ ................ ......... 44

4-11 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on attitude towards ad......................44

4-12 Means and standard deviation of ad avoidance ................ ..............44. ............

4-13 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on ad avoidance .............. .... ........._.44

4-14 Multiple regression for attitude towards the ad to perceived intrusiveness, perceived
irritation, and ad avoidance ................ ..............44. ..............













LIST OF FIGURES


FiLure


page


2-1 Proposed model ................ ..............24.................

4-1 Interaction effects of advertising type and perceived intrusiveness ................... ..............45












Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Advertising

EFFECTS OF AD PLACEMENT AND AD TYPE ON CONSUMER RESPONSES TO PODCAST ADS

By

Eric A. Ritter

May 2007

Chair: Chang-Hoan Cho
Major Department: Advertising

Online advertising has been around since the inception of the Internet in 1994 as a

commercial medium and marketplace. A large body of work looking at the Internet as an

advertising medium is available to marketers and advertisers. My work focuses primarily on

technology that, due to changed consumer behavior, is looked at differently today than just a few

years ago. For example, banner ads can no longer be measured by click-through rates, but can

only be sold as brand exposure. The objective of my study was to add to the body of work

looking at online advertising while focusing specifically on podcasting as an advertising

medium .

Due to the quick-changing nature of online content and technology my study should not be

looked as only applicable to podcasting, but rather to any online medium that is developed and

consists of consumers actively choosing to listen to audio content.

My study manipulated advertising placement and advertising type to assess how to

minimize the negative effects of perceived intrusiveness and perceived irritation by consumers.

In addition, my study measured consumers' attitude towards the ad and ad avoidance behaviors.









Four different podcasts were created. Two featured a traditional advertisement and two

featured a sponsorship message. Two of the podcasts had advertising placed at the beginning of

the podcast while two had advertising placed in the middle.

Results are presented and implications for marketers and advertisers are discussed. My

study also presents limitations and suggestions for future research.









CHAPTER 1
INTTRODUCTION

Only a short while ago, podcasting fell into the field of self-proclaimed "geeks" and

"techies." However, this all changed in December 2005 when the New Oxford American

Dictionary declared the word "podcast" word of the year (Honan, 2005). The online entry into

the New Oxford American Dictionary reads, "a digital recording of a radio broadcast or similar

program, made available on the Internet for downloading to a personal audio player." The

selection of podcast as the 2005 word of the year made everyone from marketers to newspaper

editors perk up and pay attention.

This was two years ago and since then podcasting as a medium has continued to grow.

Anybody using a computer can choose from literally thousands of podcasts on virtually any topic

(Follis, 2006) for free download via programs such as Apple's iTunes or via websites such as

iPodder.com or Podcast.net.

Podcasts are starting to find their way into all industries. They are being used for training

purposes, as evidenced in the food service industry. IHOP has started to use video podcasts to

train their cooks and audio podcasts to help employees whose second language is English

develop better communication skills (Berta, 2006). The education field has also started to utilize

podcasts, with Stanford University leading the way by posting faculty lectures online for anyone

who is interested to download for free.

Since its beginnings the number of users has grown. In 2004 podcast users numbered

820,000; in 2005 that number had increased to about five million and is expected to grow to 45

million users by 2010 (Potter, 2006). More evidence of this trend can be found according to a

Pew Internet & American Life Proj ect survey conducted in August 2006, 12% of Internet users









have downloaded a podcast, which is almost twice the amount (7%) that downloaded a podcast

in a February-April 2006 study (Madden, 2006).

Proof of the growing popularity of podcasts is the first episode of the "Ricky Gervais

Show," made by the British comedian and creator of "The Office," which registered 580,000

downloads (Clawson, 2006). While this is more of an exception than a rule, it still shows the

great potential that podcasting offers as a medium for advertisers to reach a large amount of

consumers and not just niche markets. Gervais has since started to charge 1 per download and

still registers over 260,000 downloads per show (Kilby, 2006). This show may still be the

exception, but popular podcasting shows and programs register downloads in the tens of

thousands (Clawson, 2006).

Statistics in the U.K. show how large the possible portable reach of podcasting is. As of

the middle of 2006, over 23% of adults and 58% of all 16 to 24 year olds in the U.K. own a MP3

player (Kilby, 2006). In the United States, JupiterResearch predicts that the MP3 player user

base will hit the 100 million mark by 2011, up from the 2006 user base of 37 million (Card,

2006). Furthermore, an increasing number of consumers are spending less time in front of the

television and more time in front of their computers. According to a study conducted by Google,

consumers in the U.K. spend 164 minutes per day online for personal use versus only 148

minutes in front of the TV (Johnson, 2006).

From the advertising perspective, Julie Jeancolas, a Group Account Director at the media

agency Carat Digital, points out that podcasting is uncharted territory for brands: "No one really

knows yet how people are interacting with podcasts" (Clawson, 2006). Podcasts have the

potential to reach the hard-to-reach segment of 18 to 24 year olds (Clawson, 2006). Sarah

Wood, Director of Marketing at Airmiles (U.K.), believes that portable content, such as podcasts,










can "deepen the relationship between a brand and its audience" (Clawson, 2006). According to

Jamie Riddell, Director of Innovation at the media agency Cheeze in the U.K, if you use

podcasts as your medium to advertise, "you're advertising to an intelligent audience of

influencers" (Clawson, 2006). According to The Pew Internet & American Life Project, as far as

demographics go, current listeners of podcasts are typically male and 18 to 28 (Follis, 2006).

College students and young adults are heavy users of the Internet. Podcasts might be one

way to reach this "hard to reach" segment. As Rishad Tobaccowala, Chief Innovation Officer of

Publicis Groupe Media in Chicago points out: "It's like 1994 was for the Internet, all over again"

(Anderson, 2005). Just as 1994 marked the beginning of the Internet as a place to conduct

business and advertise, podcasting is at the same point and shows potential to be next big thing

for advertisers.

So far there is no body of academic research available for podcasts. Podcasting in

general has not been widely addressed by advertising and marketing researchers. There are no

established metrics or measuring units for podcasts as there are in the traditional media (e.g.

radio, television, newspapers, etc.). Within advertising agencies, the planning procedure for new

media is much more complex as benchmarks are missing (Wyner, 2006). At the end of 2005,

Audible Inc. announced its intention of creating a tool to measure how many people listen to a

given podcast (McBride, 2005). One year later, Audible Inc. still has not unveiled a tool. Many

agencies have taken a "let' s stand back and see how this plays out approach," while others are in

the middle of it. On the other hand, it is not known how users interact with podcasts or how they

feel and think towards podcasts containing advertising. However, utilizing new media, such as

podcasts can be a big competitive advantage for marketers (Wyner, 2006).










An example of a company which can puts advertisers in touch with podcasters is Podtrac.

Podtrac, a startup company, which sells ads within over 1,300 podcasts and tracks the respective

audience size, sees podcast advertising more as product placement. According to the company's

CEO podcasting "represents a new advertising format where the podcast takes product placement

to a new level. The audience gets to learn about a new product, from the user-generated content

they subscribe to and with personalities and programming they really enj oy." (Barnako, 2006)

With the growing popularity of podcasts marketers will be unable to avoid including the

potential utility of podcasts in future advertising campaign efforts. However, as with any

medium, advertising within podcasts may lead to negative reactions in consumers, such as

perceived intrusiveness of ads, perceived irritation and ultimately ad avoidance. This brings up

the question, of how consumers perceive ads on podcasts.

What we know is that so far, advertisers like the fact that listeners must elect to receive

and subscribe to the content, making podcasting a "pull media" (Anderson, 2005). Moreover,

due to listeners engagement in the topic podcasting gives advertisers the opportunity of targeted

communication and the ability to reach people that are passionate and highly involved with a

topic. A good example of this would be the Purina pet food podcasts (see

http://www.purina. com/downloads/podcasts/index .aspx). Animal owners care about their pets

and thus are highly involved with the Purina podcasts about their pets. By facilitating a

conversation, Purina has created a lasting emotional connection with current and potential

customers.

The purpose of my study is to better understand how users perceive and feel about

podcasts containing advertising More specifically, my study will look at what elements of

advertising in podcasts contribute to an audience's perceptions of intrusiveness, perceived









irritation and ad avoidance. In exploring this, the researcher hopes to examine how negative

perceptions and behaviors work in the podcasting context, as well as to provide advertisers with

strategies of eliminating ad avoidance. Chapter 2 will examine prior research conducted on

placement of advertising and the effect that it has on the audience. Placement at the beginning

and in the middle of programming will be addressed. In addition, advertising type will be looked

at; sponsorship message and traditional adverting message will be looked at in-depth. Chapter 2

concludes with the hypothesis and research question that will guide this research. Chapter 3 will

present the methodology for this research, including a discussion of the sample, experimental

design, stimuli, procedure, and measures. Chapter 4 will present the research Eindings and

Einally Chapter 5 will present conclusions, industry implications, limitations of this study and

suggestions for future research. The Eindings of my research will help advertisers better

understand how to place messages in podcasts.









CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Intrusiveness and to a lesser extent irritation are concepts commonly associated with

advertising in general. Advertising is found everywhere, from bathroom stalls to the trailers just

before movies on DVDs that cannot be skipped. Consumers are exposed to advertising

throughout the day whether they chose to be or not. In fact, intrusiveness is the chief cause of

annoyance or irritation of consumers faced with advertising (Bauer and Greyser, 1968).

One of the maj or goals of advertising is to reach the greatest number of a specific

predefined target segment. For this reason, the new media has been embraced by advertisers as a

way of reaching specific segments with their messages. More and more people are spending an

increasing amount of time online instead of utilizing traditional media (Johnson, 2006).

Consequently, advertising on the Internet has become more and more important. Banner ads

were the first and led the way in 1994, and are still one of the most common types of advertising

found on the Internet (Briggs and Hollis 1997). Recently keyword search advertising has

urpassed banner ads as far as money spent. Today, there are many forms of advertising on the

Internet ranging from banner ads to pop-up ads to sponsorships (Zeff and Aronson, 1999). All

forms of advertising with pop-up ads in particular, were soon seen as annoying by consumers

and pop-up blockers are now commonly used to stop these pop-up advertisements. The reason

for this negative response to advertising on the Internet might be due to the fact that the medium

in general is seen as more of a task oriented and information seeking vehicle and not so much as

an entertainment medium (Li, Edwards, and Lee2001). Over the last few years, podcasting has

developed online as a new medium, and its nature is as a medium is entertainment. Accordingly,

people in general may be more receptive of advertising on podcasts versus already established

Internet advertising .









Declining television viewership and increasing upfront costs (Thomaselli, 2004),

declining radio listeners, and declining newspaper readers have fueled doubts in marketers about

effectively and efficiently reaching consumers. These facts in conjunction with the possibility of

reaching very specific (Kilby, 2006), enthusiastic consumers that are electing to listen to

something specific (Clawson, 2006) have fueled the interest in podcasts by advertisers. A study

by Moorman (2005) indicates that it' s important not only to reach the most amounts of people,

but also people that are involved and paying attention to the program.

To this day, no in-depth academic research has been conducted specifically for

podcasting. Just like any other new medium, the best way of researching it is by applying already

established concepts and measures.

Podcasts are multimedia (either audio or video) Eiles commonly distributed with an RSS

(Really Simple Syndication) feed, the podcast' s permanent address on the Internet. The RSS

feed is a list of the URLs (Uniform Research Locator) by which episodes of the show can be

accessed. A listener uses a software program or podcast aggregators, often called "podcatchers"

to subscribe to and manage their feeds (e.g., iTunes). Alternatively, a user can choose to go to a

website such as iPodder.com or directly to the source website and listen or download the

program form there. The downloaded Eiles can be played back on either the listener' s computer

using a pre-installed application or it can be transferred onto a MP3 player to be listened to at

any time the listener chooses. There is still not a definite conclusion of how exactly users

interact with or use podcasts, however it seems as if podcasts can deepen the relationship

between a brand and consumers (Clawson, 2006). It is estimated that only 20% of podcasts are

actually consumed on portable media players and 80% are consumed on the Computer (Clawson,

2006). Podcasting by its very nature is a "pull" media, meaning that the listener actively and









consciously makes the decision to receive and listen to the podcast. This would indicate high

involvement with the podcast. Some researchers have found that highly involving programming,

such as podcasts, may reduce the efficiency of advertisement processing, because so much

attention is paid to the program, which takes away from the processing of the advertising (Land

and Burnkrandt, 1988; 1993). On the other hand, it may be possible that the high involvement

shown towards programming may spill over to advertising and positively influence the

consumer' s attention to the advertising message (Watt, 1998). Either way, by nature

advertisements on podcasts would be reaching a higher level of involved consumers. Studies

have found that high involvement in a program is positively related to commercial attention and

recall (Watt, 1998; Moorman, 2005).

However, on the other hand advertising on a podcast can easily become intrusive, as the

user has downloaded the Eile to listen specifically to its contents, not an advertising message. By

being intertwined with the contents, the user is exposed to the advertisement, which creates

intrusiveness. This can have positive effects, like an increase in ad recall (Ha, 1996). However,

a negative effect, such as ad avoidance, is also likely to occur (Cronin, 1992). Accordingly, an

important theoretical issue for ads on podcasts is how to minimize the perceived negative aspect

of intrusiveness by consumers.

Irritation

The number one reason for people to dislike advertising is the irritation or annoyance it

causes to them (Aaker and Buzzone, 1985). Thus, it' s important to understand what causes

irritation to consumers and how it can be minimized. Irritation is an emotional response

describing the feeling of annoyance, impatience or even anger. Emotions are acute, transitory

and specific affective experiences that occur as a result of some experience including being

confronted with advertising (Holbrrok and O' Shaughnessy, 1987).










What in advertising leads to this negative feeling is different from individual to

individual. Sometimes, it' s the contents, sometimes the frequency at which consumers are

exposed can make them "feel bombarded" (Wegert, 2004), sometimes it' s the placement of the

advertisement and sometimes it' s the length or format of the interruption caused by the

advertisement. Poorly designed advertisements are often a cause of irritation as well (Aaker and

Bruzzone, 1985). Yoo (2005) believes that if an ad is perceived as credible, it is less likely to

make consumers feel irritated. Pieters and Bijimolt (1997) found that irritation with television

commercials increased as the number of commercials increased.

The level of irritation depends on the individual. Irritation will lead to impatience within

the consumer. The most frequent consequence of irritation is avoidance of what is irritating, in

this case the advertisement, if that is possible (Park and McClung, 1986). Ad avoidance in

general is very high on the Internet due to ad clutter (Cho, 2004). Podcasts usually only feature

one advertising message per episode, and consequently might offer a medium where the amount

of clutter is minimized and lead to less ad avoidance.

Ad Avoidance

Ad avoidance is a huge problem with any medium that offers the possibility of avoidance

to the consumer. Abernethy (1991) found that when given the possibility, 90% of commercials

were zipped (fast forwarded), and thus skipped. If you take a closer look, a lot of the media

downloaded to watch on a mobile MP3 player are forming a new kind of television medium. It' s

television on the go and on-demand. The Internet has become a distribution vehicle for media

content.

Many studies have looked at ad irritation and ad avoidance, the apparent results of ad

intrusiveness. An example of looking at the entire picture is Edwards et al.'s (2002) research on

the antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. This study









looked at ad intrusiveness as the precursor to ad irritation and ad avoidance. It demonstrates why

it' s imperative to look at ad intrusiveness, in order to understand how to minimize ad irritation

and ad avoidance. This study on podcasts will follow the same approach used by Edwards, Li,

and Lee (2002) for pop-up ads.

All in all, Edwards et al.'s (2002) study found that intrusiveness is a precursor to

irritation, which is a precursor to ad avoidance. The study recommends that the best way to

minimize perceived intrusiveness of ads is to target consumers, increase relevancy of the ads,

and provide value with the ad.

Attitude towards Radio Advertising might help better understand consumer attitudes

towards podcasts. Consumers' attitudes towards radio advertising are mixed. While a majority

of consumers might dislike radio advertising others enjoy it. Larkin (1979) found that 14% of

respondents found radio advertising to be the most entertaining form of advertising However,

on the other hand 18% wanted advertising removed from radio more than from any other

medium (Larkin, 1979).

Placement of Advertising

Placement is important to any media format. For example, in print more attention is paid

to the front page and top left of a page than to other part of the publication. Placement is certain

to play a role in how consumers perceive ads on podcasts as well.

When a listener downloads a podcast he does so to listen to its editorial contents and not

to an advertising message. This brings up the question of ad placement. There are three

possibilities of where an advertising message can be placed for any given program: at the

beginning before the program begins, in the middle during the content, or at the end of the

podcast. Because the user can easily skip an ad placed at the end of a podcast, and it will not

receive his full attention, if any this study will only look at placement of advertising at the










beginning and at the middle of a podcast. Numerous studies have looked at placement of an

advertisement within a block, but not many studies have looked at he placement of the

advertising block itself.

No matter where the ad is placed or which format it is, it will likely be perceived as

intrusive by the user. A study conducted by Watt (1998) looking at advertising in the middle of

programming, showed a positive relationship between consumer program involvement and

relevance to advertising attention and therefore to attitude towards the advertisement. Another

study found that due to the momentum created from the program consumers are more attentive to

the advertising placed in the middle (Krugman, 1983). It has also been found that effects, such

as advertisement attention and recall are stronger for advertisements interrupting the program

itself, than for blocks in-between programs (Moorman, 2005). Some researchers have argued

that advertisements placed to interrupt the programming will perform worse than those placed at

the beginning of programs, because the interruption will annoy consumers.

On the other hand, Pieters and Bijimolt (1997) found more favorable effects for ads

placed at the beginning of an advertising block, as it does not interrupt what consumers are

doing. An advertising message at the beginning might also show more positive effects because

as programming progresses, consumers are less focused on peripheral stimuli or ads (Newell,

2003).

The previous findings show no clear consistency. However, if an advertising message

(sponsorship or traditional advertisement) is present in a podcast at the beginning of the program

instead of the middle where it would interrupt, it might minimize the perceived intrusiveness by

the consumer.









Advertising Type

There are many different forms of advertising. The two most commonly used types of

advertising today are sponsorship and traditional ads (15 or 30 second messages). For this study

we will look at these two types of advertising on podcasts.

Lots of studies have been done on the public's attitude towards advertising with the

most in-depth being Bauer and Greyser' s 1968 work "Advertising in America: The Consumers

View." In general, attitudes towards advertising are undecided, with great variation in consumer

perceptions by nationality, social and demographic standing, and advertising media type (Bauer

and Greyser, 1968). The main reason why people don't like advertising is because it's seen as

intrusive. In other words people perceive advertising as too much, too often, and interrupting.

The main reasons why people like advertising are that it informs of what products are available

(Bauer and Greyser, 1968).

Sponsorship has greatly increased in importance to marketers. Sponsorship spending is

proj ected to reach $14.93 billion in 2007, which is an increase of 1 1.7% from 2006 versus only a

2.4 % projected growth on advertising spending in 2007 (Nardone and See, 2007). However, in

contrast to advertising not much is known about sponsorship. What is know is that attitude

towards sponsorship is very favorable (Meenaghan, 2001). Sponsorships can also offer unique

and cost-effective opportunities for small companies. To do this, they can reach their consumers

through targeted sponsorship, as larger firms dominate the advertising channels (Gardner, 2001).

Attitudes towards the institution of commercial sponsorships is much more favorable

than towards the institution of advertising (Meenaghan, 2001; Gardner, 1987). This is mainly

because advertising is seen as "selfish" and "persuasive" and much more likely to activate

defense mechanisms by the consumer as it serves no other purpose than that of the advertiser

(Meenaghan, 2001). Sponsorship on the other hand is seen as delivering some benefit to society









and actually increases the likelihood of purchase by the consumer (Meenaghan, 2001; Gardner,

1987).

The more positive attitude of consumers towards sponsorships versus traditional

advertising might carry over to podcasting and thus may minimize the intrusiveness that people

report for traditional advertising (Bauer and Greyser, 1968). In order to better understand how to

minimize intrusiveness of ads in podcasts and the associated ad irritation and ad avoidance,

while looking at the different factors addressed above, I propose the following research question:

Are there any effects of the two independent variables (placement, and type) on consumer

advertising responses (intrusiveness, irritation, ad avoidance, and attitude toward the ad) on

podcasts?

Obj ective

The obj ective of this study is to find out how consumers perceive different types and

positions of podcasting advertising. Little to no research has been conducted regarding the

effects that placement and type of advertising on podcasts have.

More specifically, the following hypotheses will be tested in an experiment:

Hypotheses

H1-1: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less intrusiveness than

Advertising in the middle.

H1-2: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less irritation than

Advertising in the middle.

H1-3: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate more favorable attitude

towards the Ad than Advertising in the middle.

H1-4: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less ad avoidance than

Advertising in the middle.












H2-1: Sponsorship will generate less intrusiveness than Traditional Advertising .

H2-2: Sponsorship will generate less irritation than Traditional Advertising .

H2-3: Sponsorship will generate more favorable attitude towards the Ad than Traditional

Advertising .

H2-4: Sponsorship will generate less ad avoidance than Traditional Advertising .



RQ1: Is there any interaction effect of the two independent variables (placement and type) on

consumer advertising responses (intrusiveness, irritation, ad avoidance, and attitude toward the

ad)?

The model (Figure 2-1) will not be tested, but will serve as a guide to better understand

how certain concepts and constructs interact and why the Independent and Dependant Variables

were chosen.


Figure 2-1. Proposed model









CHAPTER 3
IVETHODOLOGY

The hypotheses were tested using a 2 (traditional vs. sponsorship) x2 (beginning vs. middle) between-group

experimental (2 levels of ad placement and 2 levels of ad type) design. An experiment was

determined to be the appropriate method for studying the effects of different ad placement and ad

types on consumers view on intrusiveness, irritation and ad avoidance.

This study attempted to understand the relationship between the manipulated independent

variables of advertisement placement and advertisement type and the dependant variables of ad

intrusion, ad irritation, attitude towards the ad, ad recall, and ad avoidance.

Below is the 2 (traditional vs. sponsorship) x2 (beginning vs. middle) model:

(1) Sponsorship beginning (3) Sponsorship middle
(2) Traditional advertising beginning (4) Traditional advertising middle


Procedure

The participants were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental groups to satisfy

the 2 (traditional vs. sponsorship) x2 (beginning vs. middle) model. The participants were placed according to the

sequence of their recruitment into one of the four groups (Table 3-1), from one through four.

Every member of the group was directed to one of the four different websites containing

different podcasts; depending on what group they were in.

From the website they could download or listen to one of the four different roughly three

minute long podcasts. To stimulate interest in the podcast, participants were told that they would

be taking an online survey after listening to the podcast. Ideally, the podcast would be

downloaded and then consumed on a portable IVP3 device. However, as the majority of current

podcast users listen to podcasts on their computers (Clawson, 2006), this was acceptable as well.










After listening to the podcast, each group was asked to fill out an online questionnaire, which

measured the dependant variables.

The sample was asked to rate how intrusive and irritating the ads on the podcasts were, and if

they avoided the ad on the podcast. To verify that the subj ects actually listened to the entire

podcast two screening questions were developed and put towards the end of the survey. In

addition, at the end of the online survey an open-ended question was placed to serve as a "catch-

all," for any comments or thoughts that participants had, but could not put anywhere else on the

survey. The results of this open-ended question can be found in Appendix F. Afterwards the

data collected from the sample was exported into SPSS to analyze and the six hypotheses were

tested.

Measures

The two independent variables manipulated were ad placement and ad type. Advertising

placement was manipulated by inserting an advertisement either at the beginning, before the

program content begins, or in the middle of the podcast during the content and interrupting it. It

is assumed that placing the advertisement at the beginning will generate less intrusiveness, less

irritation and in turn invoke a more positive attitude towards the advertisement.

The second independent variable was advertising type, which was manipulated by either

inserting a sponsorship message or traditional advertisement into the podcast. The assumption is

that a sponsorship message will be less intrusive and less irritating to the participant, and in turn

generate a more favorable attitude towards the advertisement. The dependant variables studied

were perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards advertising and ad avoidance

and were measured using an online questionnaire developed specifically for this experiment. All

items were measured using either a seven-point Likert scale or semantic differential scale.

Following is a more in-depth look at the dependant variables.












Ad Intrusiveness. Intrusiveness was measured using the following seven items derived from

Li et al.'s (2001) work: distracting, disturbing, forced, interfering, intrusive, invasive, and

obtrusive (Edwards, 2001). Participants were asked to rate the ad according a to seven-point

scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7).



Ad Irritation. Irritation was measured using the following five items derived from Wells et

al.'s (1971) work: irritating, phony, ridiculous, stupid, and terrible (Edwards, 2001). Participants

were asked to rate the ad according a to seven-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to

strongly agree (7).



Attitude towards the Ad. Attitude towards the Ad is often seen as a mediator of advertising

's effect on brand attitude and purchase intention. For this study, attitudes towards the ad were

measured using a seven-point semantic differential scale based on the work of Muehling and

Laczniak (1988). For the experiment the same seven bipolar pairs were used as in Muehling and

Laczniak study of Advertising' s Influence on Brand Attitudes (see Table 3-2), each preceded by

the statement "The ad on the podcast was."

Participants were asked to rate the ad according to seven-point scale ranging from one pair to

the other.



Ad Avoidance. Ad avoidance was measured via self-reporting using measures derived from

Speck and Elliott' s (1997) work on "Predictors of Advertising Avoidance in Print and Broadcast

Media." More specifically, the avoidance scale developed for radio was adapted for podcasting;










the word "radio" was simply replaced with "podcast." Participants were asked, if they tuned out

the ad on the podcast, skipped past the ad on the podcast, or switched of the podcast during the

ad. Answers were recorded using a seven-point Likert scale ranging from "Strongly Disagree"

or "1" to "Strongly Agree" or "7".

Sample Recruitment and Qualification

The main sample for the experiment consisted of volunteers recruited from an

undergraduate advertising course at a southeastern U.S. University. The instructor was contacted

and asked for permission to use the class as the sample for this experiment. All participants were

given extra credit as determined my the instructor. It was believed that the class was the ideal

age group of typical podcast users (Madden, 2006). The researcher handed out slips of paper

containing one of the four websites created for the study and the students then were directed to

go to the website outside of class time on their own, if they volunteered to participate. A total of

129 students from the class participated.

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Florida was contacted beforehand.

All the appropriate paperwork was turned-in on time, in order to conduct the experiment and

protests required to test the hypotheses. After receiving the approval from IRB the study moved

forward.

Pre-testing

Firstly, two protests were conducted to evaluate the interest in different podcasts and brands

to investigate which would serve as the stimuli for the experiment. In addition, a third pretest

was conducted to check and evaluate, whether the difference between the two types of

advertising (traditional ad versus sponsorship) was clear.









Pretest 1

The content of the actual podcast for this experiment was chosen based on student interest

according to a pretest of 8 podcasts. The podcasts selected for the pretest were chosen among

the top 25 downloaded podcasts from iTunes, the most popular source for Einding and connecting

to podcasts. Additionally only podcasts deemed as interesting to college students by the

researcher were included in the pretest.

The main purpose of this pretest was to use a podcast in his experiment that the target

population of college students would most likely be to download and enj oy on their own time for

entertainment. Since the nature of podcasting is a pull instead of a push medium, the researcher

tried to replicate this as much as possible in the experiment. Twenty-one participants from an

undergraduate course formed the sample for pretest one. The pretest consisted of a coversheet

on which participants were presented the informed consent information from IRB and a second

sheet asking which of the listed podcasts they would be most likely to download (see Appendix

A). Each podcast featured a short description, in order to help students who were unfamiliar

with the podcast or podcasts make a decision. The podcasts given as options on the survey were

chosen broad a broad range of Hields. Only one was chosen from each Hield of interest: Comedy

Central Stand-Up, Dane Cook 's Tourgasnz, The Economist, Learn Spanish aI ithr Coffee Break

Spanish, ESPN: PTI, The Onion Radio News, U.S Senator Barack Obanza Podcast, and

FOXCAST: Family Guy. The podcast, which the participants of the pretest chose as most likely

to download according to a seven-point Likert scale then formed the foundation for the creation

of the experimental stimuli (see Table 3-3). The podcast chosen by the pretest participants to be

most likely downloaded by them was "Dane Cook's Tourgasm." Hence, the most recent episode









of the podcast was chosen to use in the experiment in order to minimize the likelihood that a

participant had been previously exposed to the podcast.

Pretest 2

The brand used for both the sponsorship and traditional advertising message was selected via

a pretest of top Hyve brands from different Hields familiar to college students. When selecting the

brands for the pretest, weight was put on the fact that the brands did not have a clear advertising

messages geared towards college students. The main purpose of this pretest was to Eind a brand

without too positive or too negative associations. Thirty-four participants from an undergraduate

advertising course formed the sample. This pretest consisted of a coversheet on which

participants were presented the informed consent form from IRB as well as a Hyve-page survey

asking questions about the brands (see Appendix B). The brands given as options as part of the

pretest were: Ford, M~TV, Puma, Red Bull, and Sony. The survey tested student's familiarity

with the brand, their likely hood to consider the brand as a consumer, the fit as a sponsor of

"Dane Cook' s Tourgasm," and their attitude towards the brand. Attitude towards the brand was

measured using the same item pairs as Muehling (1988) Bad/Good, Unfavorable/Favorable, and

Negative Positive. Based on the average of all measures, the brand that fell in the middle of the

composite mean of all brands was chosen for the experiment (see Table 3-4). The brand that fell

in the middle of the overall summed scores was the shoe and sportswear company "Puma."

Pretest 3

The third and Einal pretest was a manipulation check of the advertising and sponsorship

messages created to be inserted into the podcasts. Two different audio files were created using

the audio-editing program "Garageband" by Apple (see Appendix D). Both messages were

created to have a similar length. The traditional ad included a call to action, while the










sponsorship message did not. In addition in contrast to the traditional ad the sponsorship

message did not include background music. Both audio Hiles were played out load several times

to a class of twenty-nine undergraduate students, which formed the sample. Afterwards the

students were asked to look over the IRB's informed consent form and fill out a short

questionnaire (see Appendix C). The questionnaire asked to what extend they believed each

audio sample respectively to be either Traditional Advertising or Sponsorship. Plain English

definitions of both traditional advertising and sponsorship were given at the top of the

questionnaire to help guide the students.

The manipulation check was successful as the paired t-tests show a statistical significance at

the p<0.05 levels (see Table 3-5). Participants were able to clearly identify Sample 1 (traditional

advertising) as Traditional advertising (M=-8.69) over sponsorship (M=-3.69). Moreover sample 2

(sponsorship) was clearly recognized as sponsorship (M=-7.76) rather than traditional advertising

(M=-4.90). The t-scores for the two pairs were 6.82 and -3.45 (d.f.=28, p<;0.5). Thus, in

conclusion the manipulation check was successful as the sample was effectively able to

distinguish between the traditional advertising sample and sponsorship sample as to which one

was which.

Pretest Results

The data from all three protests were analyzed using SPSS. The stimuli were then selected

based on the three protests. The summed attitude means provided the podcast and brand to be

used in the Stimuli. "Dane Cook' s Tourgasm" scored the highest mean and was selected as the

stimuli into which the brand message will be inserted. The composite mean score in the middle

of the Hyve brands was "Puma" and accordingly it was selected as the brand for which traditional

advertising as well as a sponsorship message would be created.









Research Stimuli

For this experiment four different audio podcasts were created based on the protests using

Apple' s audio-editing program Garageband. The latest episode of Dane Cook' s Tourgasm was

trimmed down to only include the contents (a live Dane Cook sketch) without any other

messages. This podcast had two advertising "pods," one at the beginning and one in the middle.

The audio podcast was in the m4a fie format in stereo and featuring 44. 1 k
rate, the specifications of a typical audio podcast. On the website the podcast was also offered as

an mp3 fie incase a participant encountered problems with the m4a file.

A feature of m4a Hiles is that images can be embedded into them. For this experiment the

original image was left on during the podcast contents, but during the advertising pods the Puma

logo was shown.


Table 3-1. Podcast types
Group Podcast Type
Podcast 1 beginning, sponsorship
Podcast 2 beginning, traditional ad
Podcast 3 middle, sponsorship
Podcast 4 middle, traditional ad

Table 3-2. Attitude towards the ad measurements used
Bipolar pairs:
Not attractive Attractive
Bad Good
Unappealing Appealing
Unpleasant Pleasant
Dull Dynamic
Depressing Refreshing
Not enjoyable Enjoyable












Table 3-3. Mean of podcast program's likelihood of download
Mean Std. Deviation
Dane Cook's Tourgasm 4.76 1.84
Comedy Central Stand-Up 4.62 1.56
FOXCAST: Family Guy 4. 10 2.00
The Onion Radio News 3.90 1.81
Learn Spanish with Coffee Break Spanish 3.24 1.95
ESPN: PTI 3.14 1.82
U.S. Senator Barack Obama Podcast 2.48 1.47
The Economist 2.24 1.48
*Items were rated on a 1-7 scale (1=very unlikely 7=very likely).

Table 3-4. Average score for brand attitude of five different brands
Average Attitude Score Average fit with podcast score Overall
MTV 4.90 4.02 5.51
Sony 5.87 2.78 5.47
Puma 5.76 2.41 5.14
Red Bull 4.57 3.13 4.72
Ford 4.22 2.42 4.26
*Items were rated on a 1-7 scale.

Table 3-5. Manipulation check for mean comparison between traditional advertising and
sponsorship
N Mean SD t df p
Sample 1 How much do you think this 29 8.69 1.51
(traditional is Traditional Advertising? 6.82* 28 .00
Advertising ) How much do you think this 29 3.69 2.97
is Sponsorship?
Sample 2 How much do you think this 29 4.90 3.00
(Sponsorship) is Traditional Advertising? -3.45* 28 .00
How much do you think this 29 7.76 2.40
is Sponsorship?
*p<.05. Items rated on a 1-10 scale (1=very weak 10=very strong ) SD= Standard Deviation









CHAPTER 4
FINTDINGS

Sample Profile

The main sample consisted of undergraduate and graduate students recruited at a

southeastern U.S. university. Of the 129 students that participated in the experiment, 121

qualified for the final sample by correctly answering the control questions. There were two

control questions developed and applied (see Appendix E). One question asked about the broad

contents of the podcast "The contents of the podccasts0 as (I and then gave Hyve options, one

being "I don 't know." The second question asked a more specific detail about the podcast that

the subj ect could only answer, if they listened to the entire podcast What is 'P.I.R '?, as the

answer to this question is only mentioned once. The Einal main sample consisted of 32 % men

(n=39) participants and 68% female (n=82) participants. The median age of the participants was

20, with a range of 18-38. Of the 121 participants, 34 were current podcast users (28%) with

usage time ranging from 0. 1 to 15 hours (3.4 hour mean).

Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental cells and had an equal

chance of being assigned to each cell. In other words each participant was assigned to one of the

four websites (each containing a different podcast). Table 4-1 shows the number of participants

in each experimental cell.

Reliability

To ensure the reliability of the measures only established and previously used measures

were used to measure the dependant variables in this study. For reliability I checked Cronbach a

of the dependant variable measures. All values were above the 0.6 minimums to ensure

reliability. The Cronbach a for perceived Intrusiveness (seven items) was 0.94, for perceived









irritation (five items) it was 0.82, for attitude towards the ad (seven items) it was 0.90, and for ad

avoidance (three items) it was 0.61.

Effects of Advertising Placement

The first set of four hypotheses examined the effect of different advertising placement on

the perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. To

answer the question, if advertising at the beginning of podcasts will generate more favorable

attitudes, the average score of each of the four dependant variables (intrusiveness, irritation,

attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance) of the podcasts containing the advertising at the

beginning (podcast 1 and podcast 2) were compared to the average scores of the podcasts

containing the advertising in the middle (podcast 3 and podcast 4). More specifically, one-tailed

between group t-tests were conducted for each dependant variable. The hypotheses are as

follows:

H1-1: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less intrusiveness
than Advertising in the middle.

H1-2: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less irritation than
Advertising in the middle.

H1-3: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate more favorable attitude
towards the Ad than Advertising in the middle.

H1-4: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less ad avoidance than
Advertising in the middle.


All items except attitude towards the ad were measured on a seven-point scale where 1 =

"Strongly Disagree" and 7 = "Strongly Agree." For attitude towards the ad a seven-point bipolar

semantic scale was used, were I was the lowest or most negative score and 7 was the highest or

most positive score (see Chapter 3 and Appendix E). The average of seven question items that

measured perceived Intrusiveness shows that participants who encountered the advertisement in









the middle (M=-4.94) perceived more Intrusiveness than those encountering it at the beginning

(M=-3.10). The average of Hyve question items that measured perceived Irritation showed that

participant' s felt more perceived Irritated when encountering the advertisement in the middle

(M=-3.71) versus at the beginning (M=-3.25). The average of seven question items that measured

attitude towards the ad show that participants who encountered the advertisement in the

beginning (M=-3.77) had a more favorable attitude than those encountering it in the middle

(M=-3.49). The average of three question items that measured ad avoidance show only minimal

difference between participants who encountered the advertisement at the beginning (M=-2.67)

against those that encountered it in the middle (M=-2.46).

Table 4-2 shows the group statistics of Mean and Standard deviation for the Dependant

variables in reference to ad placement.

In order to see whether the results are statistically significant and the hypotheses can be

supported or not, four one-tailed independent sample t-tests were conducted. The t-testes were

run in order to compare the means of the effects that putting the Advertisement at the beginning

and in the middle of the podcast had on perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude

towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The results of the one-tailed independent sample t-test are

listed in Table 4-3.

For Hypothesis 1-1, the result (mean difference of -1.87) was statistically significant (t =

-7.79, d.f. = 119, p = 0.00). Thus, Hypothesis 1-1 is supported. Participants did perceive less

Intrusiveness from Ads placed at the beginning versus Ads placed in the middle.

For Hypothesis 1-2, the t-test result (mean difference of -0.46) was statistically

significant (t = -2.07, d.f. = 119, p = 0.02). Thus, Hypothesis 1-2 is supported. Participants










perceived more irritation towards the ad, when it was placed at the middle versus the beginning

of the podcast.

For Hypothesis 1-3, the result was not statistically significant (t = 1.38, d.f. = 119, p =

0.09). Participants did show a little more positive attitude for ads placed at the beginning versus

the middle of a podcast, but Hypothesis 1-3 is not statistically supported (p > 0.05).

For Hypothesis 1-4, the t-test was not statically significant (t = 0.97, d.f. = 119, p = 0. 17).

Participants did show slightly more ad avoidance for ads placed at the beginning versus the

middle of the podcasts, however Hypothesis 1-4 is not statically supported (p > 0.05).

Effects of Advertising Type

The second set of four hypotheses examined the effect of different advertising types or

formats on the perceived intrusiveness, irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The

same was done for the second set of hypotheses as was done for the first. To answer the

question, whether sponsorship will generate more favorable attitudes, the average scores of each

of the four dependant variables (intrusiveness, irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad

avoidance) of the Podcasts containing the sponsorship message (podcast 1 and podcast 3) were

compared to the podcasts containing the traditional advertising (podcast 2 and podcast 4). More

specifically, one-tailed between group t-tests were conducted for each dependant variable. The

hypotheses are as follows:

H2-1: Sponsorship will generate less intrusiveness than Traditional Advertising.

H2-2: Sponsorship will generate less irritation than Traditional Advertising.

H2-3: Sponsorship will generate more favorable attitude towards the Ad than Traditional
Adverti sing.

H2-4: Sponsorship will generate less ad avoidance than Traditional Advertising.









The average of seven question items that measured perceived intrusiveness shows that

participants who encountered the traditional advertisement (M=-4.38) perceived more

Intrusiveness than those encountering the sponsorship (M=-3.68). The average of five question

items that measured perceived irritation showed that participants felt slightly more irritated when

encountering the traditional advertisement (M=-3.62) versus the sponsorship (M=-3.36). The

average of seven question items that measured attitude towards the ad shows that participants

who encountered the Sponsorship (M=-3.74) had a more favorable attitude than those

encountering the traditional advertising (M=-3.51). The average of three question items that

measured ad avoidance show only minimal difference between participants who encountered the

sponsorship (M=-2.47) against those that encountered the traditional advertisement (M=-2.67).

Table 4-4 shows the group statistics of Means and Standard deviation for the Dependant

variables in reference to ad type.

In order to see whether the results are statistically significant and the hypotheses can be

supported or not four one-tailed Independent sample t-test was conducted. The t-testes were run

in order to compare the means of the effects that being exposed to a sponsorship message versus

a traditional advertisement has on perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards

the Ad, and ad avoidance. The results of the one-tailed Independent sample t-test are listed in

Table 4-5.

For Hypothesis 2-1 the result (mean difference of 0.71) was statistically significant (t = -

2.46, d.f. = 119, p = 0.01). Thus, Hypothesis 2-1 is supported. Participants exposed to

sponsorship perceive less intrusiveness than those exposed to traditional advertising.









For Hypothesis 2-2 the t-test was not statically significant (t=-1.17, d.f.=119 p = 0. 12.

Participants did perceive slightly more irritation towards traditional Ads than sponsorship.

However, Hypothesis 2-2 is not statically supported (p > 0.05).

For Hypothesis 2-3 the t-test was not statically significant (t = 1.11, d.f. = 119, p = 0. 13).

Participants did show a little more positive attitude toward sponsorship than towards traditional

Ads, but Hypothesis 2-3 is not statically supported (p > 0.05).

For Hypothesis 2-4 the t-test was not statically significant (t = -0.94, d.f. = 119, p = 0. 18).

Participants did demonstrate more ad avoidance towards traditional Ads than towards

sponsorships, however Hypothesis 2-4 is not statically supported (p > 0.05).

Interaction of the Independent Variables

Finally, to answer the research question, if there were any interaction effects between the

independent variables, two-way ANOVAs were run for each dependant variable. The

independent variables used were advertising placement (beginning or middle) and advertising

format (sponsorship and traditional ad). The dependent variables were perceived intrusiveness,

perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The Research question was as

follows:

RQ1: Is there any interaction effect of the two independent variables (ad placement and

ad format) on consumer advertising responses (intrusiveness, irritation, attitude toward

the ad, and ad avoidance)?

Table 4-6 shows means and standard deviations for perceived intrusiveness.

As Table 4-7 shows, advertising placement has a main effect on the perceived

intrusiveness at the 0.05 significance level (F=66.40, df=1, p=0.00). Advertising type also shows

a main effect on perceived intrusiveness (F=8.17, df=1, p=0.00). Also, a statistically significant

interaction is present between advertising format and advertising placement (F=4.71, df=1,










p=0.03). This interaction effect (Higure 4-1) indicates that when the ad was placed in the

beginning, there was no big difference in perceived intrusiveness between traditional ad

(M=3.16) and sponsorship (M=3.00); however, when the ad was placed in the middle, the

difference between traditional ad and sponsorship was more apparent or noticeable (M=5.53

versus M=4.37).

For perceived irritation, there was a main effect of ad placement (F=4.45, d.f.=1, p=0.04),

but no main effect of ad format and no interaction effect between ad format and ad placement

were detected (p>0.05).

For attitude towards the ad and ad avoidance, no main effects and interaction effects were

statically significant (p>0.05).

Additional Findings

As a manipulation check, a question item concerning the level of brand recall of the

subj ects was placed towards the end of the survey. Participants were given a choice of Hyve

brand options, from which they were instructed to select which one had advertised on the

podcast.

Nearly the entire sample of participants (97.5%) correctly identified Puma as the

advertised brand on the online questionnaire. Specifically, for podcast 1 (sponsorship,

beginning) brand recall was 96.9%, for podcast 2 (traditional advertising, beginning) it was 96.4

%, for podcast 3 (Sponsorship, Middle) it was 100%, and for podcast 4 (traditional advertising,

middle) it was 97.5%. In other words, only three of the 121 participants did not correctly

identify the advertised brand. Thus, it seems like placing ads on podcasts can lead to extremely

high brand recall. However, this should be not be generalized and no clear conclusion should be

drawn from this because only one advertising situation was tested, but it suggests that adverting

on podcasting might lead to increased brand recall.












A multiple regression was preformed to learn more about the relationship between

perceived irritation, perceived intrusiveness, ad avoidance and attitude towards the ad. The

dependant variable used was attitude towards the ad, while perceived intrusiveness, perceived

irritation, and ad avoidance were the independent variables used.

Table 4-14 shows that all three independent variables are statistically significant, with perceived

irritation (j3=|-0.32| being the most important variable in predicting attitude towards the ad.

Moreover, all three show a negative relationship, which means that if people perceived less

intrusiveness and irritation and avoid the ad less, they are more likely to have positive attitude

toward the ad.

There is a strong correlation between the dependant variable and independent variables

(R=0.70). An R2 Of 0.49 shows that 49% of the dependant variable variance is explained by the

regression equation. Following is the regression equation: 6. 10 0.32 (index of irritation) 0. 18

(index of intrusiveness) 0.25 (index of ad avoidance). The f-ratio for the regression equation is

37.79 and is statistically significant (p=0.00), this means it can be generalized to the general

population.

Table 4-1. Sample size of each experimental group
Group : Parti cipants:
(Podcast 1) beginning, traditional ad 32
(Podcast 2) beginning, sponsorship 28
(Podcast 3) middle, traditional ad 31
(Podcast 4) middle, sponsorship 30
Total: 121






































Std. Deviation
1.55
1.62
1.25
1.24
1.18
1.02
1.18
1.10


Table 4-2. Means and standard deviation for adverting placement
Placement N Mean Std. Deviation
Index of Intrusiveness Beginning 60 3.07 1.13
Middle 61 4.94 1.48
Index of Irritation Beginning 60 3.25 1.14
Middle 61 3.71 1.31
Index of Attitude towards Beginning 60 3.77 0.91
the Ad Middle 61 3.49 1.27
Index of ad avoidance Beginning 60 2.67 1.11
Middle 61 2.46 1.18


Table 4-3. t-value and mean difference for ad placement
t-value df Mean difference Sig. (1-tailed)


Index of Intrusiveness
Index of Irritation
Index of Attitude towards
the Ad
Index of ad avoidance
*p<.05


-7.79* 119
-2.07* 119

1.38 119

0.97 119


-1.87
-0.46

0.28

0.20


0.00
0.02

0.09

0.17


Table 4-4. Means and standard deviation for ad Type
Type
Sponsor
Index of intrusiveness
Trad. Ad
Sponsor
Index of irritation
Trad. Ad
Index of attitude towards Sponsor
the Ad Trad. Ad
~Sponsor
Index of ad avoidance
Trad. Ad


Mean
3.68
4.38
3.36
3.62
3.74
3.51
2.47
2.67


Table 4-5. t-value and mean difference for ad type


t-value df
-2.46* 119
-1.17 119

1.11 119

-0.94 119


Mean difference
-0.71
-0.27

0.22

-0.20


Sig. (1-tailed)
0.01
0.12

0.13

0.18


Sum of intrusiveness
Sum of irritation
Sum of attitude towards
the Ad
Sum of ad avoidance
*p<.05










Table 4-6. Means and standard deviation of perceived intrusiveness


Table 4-7. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived intrusiveness
Source SS df MS F
Advertising placement 105.73 1 105.73 66.40*
Advertising format 13.02 1 13.02 8.17*
Advertising placement advertising format 7.50 1 7.50 4.71*
Error 186.29 117 1.59
* Significant at p<.05
Note: SS=Sum of square; MS-mean square

Table 4-8. Means and standard deviation of perceived irritation
Advertising placement
Beginning Middle Total
Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N
Sponsorship 3.29 0.22 32 3.43 0.22 31 3.36 0.15 63
Traditional Ad 3.21 0.23 28 4.01 0.22 30 3.61 0.16 58
Total 3.25 0.16 60 3.72 0.16 61 121

Note: SD=Standard Deviation


Table 4-9. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived irritation
Source SS df MS F
Advertising placement 6.64 1 6.64 4.45*
Advertising format 1.89 1 1.89 1.27
Advertising placement advertising format 3.30 1 3.30 2.27
Error 174.53 117 1.50
* Significant at p<.05
Note: SS=Sum of square; MS-mean square


Advertising placement
Middle
Mean SD N
4.37 0.23 31
5.53 0.23 30
4.95 0.16 61


Beginning
Mean SD
3.00 0.22
3.16 0.24
3.01 0.16


Total
SD
0.16
0.17


Advertising Format
Sponsorship
Traditional ad
Total


Mean
3.69
4.34


Note: SD=Standard Deviation










Table 4-10. Means and standard deviation of attitude towards ad
Advertising placement
Beginning Middle Total
Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N
Sponsorship 3.71 0.19 32 3.77 0.20 31 3.74 0.14 63
Traditional Ad 3.84 0.21 28 3.21 0.20 30 3.52 0.14 58
Total 3.77 0.14 60 3.49 0.14 61 121

Note: SD=Standard Deviation

Table 4-11. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on attitude towards ad
Source SS df MS F
Advertising placement 2.48 1 2.48 2.06
Advertising format 1.39 1 1.38 1.15
Advertising placement advertising format 3.71 1 3.71 3.09
Error 140.60 117 1.20
Note: SS=Sum of square; MS=mean square

Table 4-12. Means and standard deviation of ad avoidance
Advertising placement
Beginning Middle Total
Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N
Sponsorship 2.72 0.20 32 2.22 0.21 31 2.47 0.14 63
Traditional Ad 2.61 0.22 28 2.72 0.21 30 2.67 0.15 58
Total 2.66 0.15 60 2.47 0.15 61 121

Note: SD=Standard Deviation


Table 4-13. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on ad avoidance
Source SS df MS F


Table 4-14. Multiple regression for attitude towards the ad to perceived intrusiveness, perceived
irritation, and ad avoidance
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
B (3 t sig.
(Constant) 6.10 25.07 0.00
Index of irritation -0.32 -.35 -4.02 0.00
Index of intrusiveness -0.18 -.26 -3.21 0.00
Index of ad avoidance -0.25 -.26 -3.55 0.00
(R=0.70, R2=0.49, df=(3,120), F=37.79, p-value=0.00)


1.14 1
1.18 1
2.89 1
152.18 117


1.14
1.18
2.89
1.30


0.88
0.91
2.22


Advertising placement
Advertising format
Advertising placement advertising format
Error
Note: SS=Sum of square; MS=mean square




















Middle


Sponsorship


Traditional Ad


Ad Type


Figure 4-1. Interaction effects of advertising type and perceived intrusiveness









CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The current study was intended to give insight to marketers and advertisers regarding the

effects of advertising placement and advertising type in podcasts on perceived intrusiveness,

perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. Existing research shows that

advertising is perceived as intrusive and irritating, and ad avoidance often goes hand in hand

with this.

This study found that ad avoidance behavior is displayed for advertising on podcasts no

matter were it is placed or what format it is in. In addition, attitude towards the ad is not

dependant on advertising type or advertising placement. However, perceived intrusiveness and

perceived irritation from advertising can be moderated. By placing the advertising at the

beginning versus placing it in the middle, less perceived Intrusiveness and less perceived

Irritation was measured. In addition, advertising type can moderate perceived intrusiveness

experienced by podcast users. It was found that participants perceived less intrusiveness from

sponsorship than from traditional advertising on podcasts.

As far as perceived intrusiveness. and its connection to attitude towards the ad and ad

avoidance no direct connection was relevant. However, higher levels of perceived intrusiveness

can create a negative impact on attitude towards the ad and memory of the ad (Ha, 1996). Even

though no direct connection between perceived intrusiveness and ad avoidance was found

relevant by the study, my study has some implication for this connection. As Edwards et al.

(2002) found ad avoidance was driven by perceived intrusiveness of the ad, which was found

high for podcast advertising utilizing traditional ads placed at the beginning by this study.









Implications

The Eindings of the study supported Hypothesis 1-1 in that subj ects perceived less

intrusiveness from advertising placed at the beginning versus advertising placed in the middle of

a podcast. It implies that the placement at the beginning were less likely to interrupt the

podcasting program and thus less likely to interfere with the process of listening to the podcast.

These Eindings are consistent with Pieters and Bijimolt' s (1997), who found more favorable

effects for ads placed at the beginning, as they do not interrupt what consumers are doing. The

theoretical implication of this is that consumers of podcasts do not like to be interrupted by

advertising while listening to a podcast. As far as managerial implications, it is recommended

that when advertising is placed on a podcast it be placed at the beginning, as to minimize

perceived invasiveness by the listener.

The results of the study also supported Hypothesis 1-2 in that participants perceived less

irritation towards advertising that was placed at the beginning of the podcasting program versus

advertising placed in the middle of the program. This result is thought to go hand in hand with

the results of Hypothesis 1-2 as far as that placement at the beginning less likely to interrupt the

podcast and thus interfere with the participants' utilization of the podcast. The theoretical and

managerial implications are inline with those of Hypothesis 1-1. Consumers perceive more

irritation because the program is interrupted and accordingly it is recommended that on the

managerial side advertising on podcasts be placed at the beginning.

According to the results, Hypothesis 1-3 is not supported. The Einding was not

statistically significant, however the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. The attitude of

subj ects was a little more positive for advertising placed at the beginning versus the middle. It

is thought that this is because of the small sample size and because subj ects do not favor a

particular placement of advertising on a podcast, in general.









According to the results, Hypothesis 1-4 is not supported. The Einding was not

statistically significant, and the mean went in the opposite direction. Participants showed slightly

more ad avoidance for advertising placed at the beginning of podcasts. It is thought that this is

because it is easier for podcast users to skip advertising at the beginning versus in the middle. It

is impractical to attempt to avoid advertising on podcasts in the middle as the controls to fast

forward are not precise enough to not miss any of the podcasting program.

The study also examined advertising type in the relation to perceived intrusiveness,

perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The findings of the study

supported Hypothesis 2-1 in that subj ects perceived less Intrusiveness from sponsorship versus

traditional advertising on a podcast. The result was consistent with those of Meenaghan (2001)

and Gardner (1987), who found that attitudes towards sponsorship are more favorable than

towards advertising. It is thought that sponsorship in general is viewed as more positively and

thus seen as less intrusive than traditional advertising. The theoretical implication of this is that

consumers of podcasts do not feel as disrupted by a sponsorship message as by a traditional

advertisement. Managerial implications of this finding are that it is recommended to choose

sponsorship over traditional advertising deciding to advertise on a podcast.

According to the results, Hypothesis 2-2 is not supported. Even though the Einding was

not statistically significant, the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. Subj ects perceived

less irritation towards sponsorship than towards traditional advertising. It is thought that this is

because of the small sample size and because subj ects in general feel irritated with the presence

of Adverting on podcasts no matter the format.

Hypothesis 2-3 is not supported. The Einding was not statistically significant, however

the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. The attitude of subj ects was a little more positive









for sponsorship versus advertising. It is thought that this is because of the small sample size for

the experiment and because subj ects do not clearly one type of advertising on podcasts over the

other.

The outcome of the experiment did not support Hypothesis 2-4. The Einding was not

statistically significant, however the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. Subj ects

showed a little more ad avoidance towards traditional advertising than towards Sponsorship. It is

thought that the results were not statistically significant because it is impractical for podcast

users to attempt to avoid advertising on podcasts as the controls to fast forward are not exact

enough to fast-forward without missing any of the podcasting program.



In a world of increasing media fragmentation podcasts are but one piece of the media

planning puzzle marketers and advertisers are faced with. Podcasts are gaining popularity

quickly as portable MP3 player adoption rises throughout the population and multimedia

computers become commonplace in many households. Podcasting offers a way for marketers

and advertisers to reach young, captive, and highly involved consumers. This study

demonstrates how to utilize podcasts as an advertising medium while minimizing negative

effects, such as intrusiveness, irritation and ad avoidance that are commonly associated with

advertising.

The practical implications of this study for marketers and advertisers is that in order to

minimize perceived intrusiveness, and perceived irritation it is best to choose placement at the

beginning over placement in the middle of the podcast. Moreover, in order to further minimize

perceived intrusiveness it is best to choose sponsorship as a vehicle over a traditional

advertisement. In addition, advertisers and marketers can understand from this study that the









likelihood that the brand will be recalled is very high, as participants were able to correctly

identify the advertised brand 98% of the time.



Limitations and Future Research

There are several limitations to this study. The individual limitations are broken down

and addressed in-depth with future research ideas below.

Sample limitations

The sample was completely made up of advertising students, which are only a small part

of the population. The measure of ad avoidance is important, but it did not work in this study

because the participants were advertising maj ors and will thus pay more attention to the ad than a

typical consumer. Ad avoidance should be higher in a more diversified sample. Moreover, the

sample size was very small for this experiment, which helps to explain the large standard

deviation found throughout the experiment. A more diverse and larger sample is recommended

for future research. It is thought that a larger sample size with larger experimental cells may

show more significant results. A larger sample size would lead to larger experimental cells and

thus lead to clearer opinions and perceptions of participants. This is an opportunity for future

research to look at demographics of podcast listeners in general. Gender and ethnicity should be

looked at, as well as how the fit of the sponsor might moderate the negative effects of

advertising.

Turning a pull into a push medium

By nature podcasting is a pull medium. This means that consumers of podcasts actively

choose which podcast they will and which one they will not listen to. Thus, the podcast listener

is by nature very involved and interested in the subj ect matter. For this study participants were

not given any options on what to listen to, but rather only a single podcast was given to the










participants. This in turn made the podcast a push medium rather than a pull medium. Thus, ad

avoidance should have been high in this study, but was not due to the sample limitations. The

attempt was made to minimize this limitation by conducting a pretest to choose the podcast that

students themselves would be most likely to download. It is recommended that in future

research give multiple podcasts from different interest areas as options to simulate more of a pull

medium to participants.

Assumption of download

A further limitation was the assumption that participants would download the stimulus.

Podcasts were developed to be listened to on portable audio players. However, this study did not

look at the fact if the participants downloaded the podcast onto a portable digital audio player or

not. Future research should have the sample listen to the podcasts on digital audio players. A

suggestion is to contact makers of portable digital audio players directly and ask for a grant of

their players.

Female heavy sample

The sample was contained 68% of females and only 32% of males. This goes against the

profile of typical podcast downloader according to the Pew Internet & American Life Proj ect,

who is male (Madden, 2006). Including more males in a future sample is advisable, as they are

more likely to actually download a podcast than a female.

Context of listening

The context of listening was not looked at for this study. However, this is a very

important element, as podcasts can and are consumed virtually anywhere and anytime. In a car

situation, they can replace radio, at home they can be watched in the living room and replace

television, on an airplane they can replace in-flight entertainment, and on a bus or train commute










they can be listened to on a portable MP3 player. Different expectations for media context go

along with each context.

This is an opportunity for future research. It is recommended that future research look at the

context in which consumers listen to the podcast.

Podcast limitations

The podcast used in this study was short (3 minutes) in comparison to many podcasts

available today. National Public Radio (NPR), for example, provides a podcast version of their

most popular shows that can run for up to an hour. The length of the podcast adds a whole new

element that should be looked at in future research. Repetition of advertising is prominent on

these longer podcasts. The responses to the recurrence of advertising should be looked at in

future research, as they will undoubtedly influence brand recall, irritation, etc. Another

limitation that should be considered is that an artificial element was added to the study, as the

podcast chosen for the study was highly involving to the participants, as the topic was interesting

and important and they received extra credit for listening to it. Content of the podcast is also

something that should be looked at in future research. What the consumer uses the podcast for,

either for information or entertainment purposes should be addressed, as each should show

different levels of irritation and intrusiveness once the context is discovered.

Audio vs. video podcast

A third Independent variable of audio versus video podcast was planned during the

developmental stages of this study. However, due to time constraints it was ultimately left out of

the final study. Audio podcasting is by far the most evolved and popular format of podcasting

found on the Internet. However, video podcasting has been growing in popularity, especially

since the introduction of the video iPod in October 2005 and the Microsoft Zune in 2007.









Moreover, the popular Onion Radio News is now also available as a Video version, which

debuted at number one (for both audio or video podcasts) on the iTunes top podcasts list. Thus,

future research should look at video and audio podcasts not just audio podcasts.



































































_


APPENDIX A

PRETEST ONE QUESTIONNAIRES


E c~
on

a




ei
&>

Xr
*


rI





eSe


Q






O

3


E

tn













a
0


;t
c
a
3;
E
.3,
E

=I
o
r
S
fj



f-
Pr
VtT)

E"~
oefo,
U ~


01
C
X
m
E
g I
O C
r
r
c
~
a
H
5 f-
nr
~5 ""
.g
C o,
ur re
C ~ti
A ,e
P r,
VtC~-,
Y)~v
f~35

3 ut(D4iz.I


r
~
8
4 t~
uar
r
V1C
C30
gu
Nlc:
ChU
C

ra BUJ
(P
?nXf
F--U ~1

oaf
C 3
ut~;

g-
u3~
c~m
(p~c~


L


EB
o,
Y:
OT

S,
c-o
t;%
EO
E E
7


o
EL3:
~t78
a ol~cm
CU~-
1Lrp"
ra
P ZI pUa


I
ov;
Ipo
E"
A
O 0~-
oZz

O 1,
C~n
cv~n
PP7r;
ol
cfi
4
r,
r
~

Vl"'i
js~


jat
E
Yt
iso
~uo
ce
t
0,
o
f"

3co15
~si?
Jm
OmS
r,
I ~tr

~sS


m t
C oE c


E

vr~
Tr
c
-J
x;
12:
0-~'
oCr
~
LC
ES
ou,~
20-r=



~ig
eol


ti
E

E
u
ur

E
E

c
o~f
C"
O0)
gUt
IY O "
10
PDcr
C'E


Ol O













Please answer the following questions keeping the respective brand in mind. Check the box that reflects your
attitude/opinion. Please select only one option per question.


1.1 How familiar are you with Ford?
Very Somewhat Somewhat ..
Vey Unfamilhar Familiar Very Familiar
Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Neutral Familiar

O O 00 0 0

1.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Ford?
Ver nikl Somewhat Somewhat Lkl eyLkl
Unlikely Unlikel Neutral Likl



1.3 How likely would Ford be to sponsor Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ve" Unlikely SmhaSoeat Likely Very Likely
Unlikely Unlikel Neutral Likel



1.4 How relevant is Ford to Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ve" Unlikely SmhaSoeat Likely Very Likely
Unlikely Unlikel Neutral Lkl



1.5 My attitude towards Ford is:

Somewhat Somewhat
Veny Bad Bad Good Veny Good
Bad Neutral Good

O 0 0 0 0 0 0


Very Somewhat Somewhat Very
Unfavorable Favorable
Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Favorable

O O 0 0 0 0


Somewhat Somewhat
Very Negative Positive Very Positive
Negative Negative Neutral Positive


APPENDIX B
PRETEST TWO QUESTIONNAIRES


0


0 0 00I


0 0









2. 1 How familiar are you with MTV?
Ven Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfamilhar Familiar
Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Neutral Familiar Familiar

O O 0 00 0 0

2.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider MTV?
Ve" Unlikeh oewa omwa Likely Very Likely
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

2.3 How likely would MTV be to sponsor Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ver nikl Somewhat Somewhat Lkl eyLkl
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

2.4 How relevant is MTV to Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ve" Unlikely SmhaSoeat Likely Very Likely
Unlikehy Unlikehy Neutral Likehy
O O 0 0 0 0 0

2.5 My attitude towards MTV is:

Veny Bad Bad SmhaSoeat Good Veny Good
Bad Neutral Good

O 0 0 0 0 0 0

Veny Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfavorable Favorable
Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Favorable

O O 0 0 0 0


Somewhat Somewhat
Very Negative Positive Very Positive
Negative Negative Neutral Positive
0 0 0 0 0 0









3.1 How familiar are you with Puma?
Ven Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfamilhar Familiar
Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Neutral Familiar Familiar

O O 0 00 0 0

3.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Puma?
Ve" Unlikeh oewa omwa Likely Very Likely
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

3.3 How likely would Puma be to sponsor Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ver nikl Somewhat Somewhat Lkl eyLkl
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

3.4 How relevant is Puma to Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ve" Unlikely SmhaSoeat Likely Very Likely
Unlikehy Unlikehy Neutral Likehy
O O 0 0 0 0 0

3.5 My attitude towards Puma is:

Veny Bad Bad SmhaSoeat Good Veny Good
Bad Neutral Good

O 0 0 0 0 0 0

Veny Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfavorable Favorable
Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Favorable

O O 0 0 0 0


Somewhat Somewhat
Very Negative Positive Very Positive
Negative Negative Neutral Positive
0 0 0 0 0 0









4. 1 How familiar are you with Red Bull?
Ven Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfamilhar Familiar
Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Neutral Familiar Familiar

O O 0 00 0 0

4.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Red Bull?
Ve" Unlikeh oewa omwa Likely Very Likely
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

4.3 How likely would Red Bull be to sponsor Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ver nikl Somewhat Somewhat Lkl eyLkl
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

4.4 How relevant is Red Bull to Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ve" Unlikely SmhaSoeat Likely Very Likely
Unlikehy Unlikehy Neutral Likehy
O O 0 0 0 0 0

4.5 My attitude towards Red Bull is:

Veny Bad Bad SmhaSoeat Good Veny Good
Bad Neutral Good

O 0 0 0 0 0 0

Veny Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfavorable Favorable
Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Favorable

O O 0 0 0 0


Somewhat Somewhat
Very Negative Positive Very Positive
Negative Negative Neutral Positive
0 0 0 0 0 0









5.1 How familiar are you with Sony?
Ven Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfamilhar Familiar
Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Neutral Familiar Familiar

O O 0 00 0 0

5.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Sony?
Ve" Unlikeh oewa omwa Likely Very Likely
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

5.3 How likely would Sony be to sponsor Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ve" Unlikely SmhaSoeat Likely Very Likely
Unlike Unlikeh Neutral Lie

O O 0 0 0 0 0

5.4 How relevant is Sony to the Dane Cook's Tourgasm Podcast?
Ver nikl Somewhat Somewhat Lkl eyLkl
Unlikehy Unlikehy Neutral Likehy

O O 0 0 0 0 0

5.5 My attitude towards Sony is:
Veny Bad Bad SmhaSoeat Good Veny Good
Bad Neutral Good




Veny Somewhat Somewhat Veny
Unfavorable Favorable
Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Favorable

O O 0 0 0 0


Somewhat Somewhat
Very Negative Positive Very Positive
Negative Negative Neutral Positive
0 0 0 0 0 0










APPENDIX C
PRETEST THREE QUESTIONNAIRE

Definition of Traditional Advertising :
Advertising is paid communication through a non-personal medium in which the sponsor is identified and
the message is controlled

Definition of Sponsorship:
To sponsor something is to support an event, activity, person, or organization Einancially or through the
provision of products or services. Sponsorship is typically done for promotional purposes, to generate
publicity, or to obtain access to a wider audience.


The following questions are on alI to 10 scale with 1 being very weak and 10 being very strong. Check
the box that reflects your attitude/opinion. Please select only one option per question.




1. (Sample 1) How much do you think that this is Traditional Advertising ?


very
weak


very
strong


2. (Sample 1) To what extent do you identify this as sponsorship?


very
weak


very
strong


3. (Sample 2) How much do you think that this is Traditional Advertising ?


very
weak


very
strong


4. (Sample 2) To what extent do you identify this as sponsorship?


very
weak


very
strong


1 23 4 56 7 8910
00 00 00 00 0 0


1 23 4 56 7 8910
00 00 00 00 0 0


1 23 4 56 7 8910
00 00 00 00 0 0


1 23 4 56 7 8910
00 00 00 00 0 0









APPENDIX D
TRANSCRIPT OF TRADITIONAL AD AND SPONSORSHIP


Sample 1 (traditional ad):
You thought Puma is just all about shoes?
Check out puma.com
and discover puma denim, jackets, tee-shirts, bags
and of course shoes
shop puma.com today



Sample 2 (sponsorship):
This podcast is brought to you by Puma.
You thought puma is just all about shoes?
Discover puma denim, jackets, tee-shirts, bags
and of course shoes











APPENDIX E
MAIN STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE





Online Survey


Sg UNIVERSITY o

The Foundation for The Gaitor Nattion:
Check the box that reflects your attitude/opinion. Please select only one option per question.
Before starting please mark, which podcast (1-4) you listened to.


I listened to podcast Number:
One (1)
STwo (2)
0 Three (3)
03 Four (4)

1.1 The ad on the podcast was distracting:
S1 Strongly Disagree
C3:2 Disagree
=;3 Somewhat Disagree
24 Neutral
0 5 Somewhat Agree
0:6 Agree
(S7 Strongly Agree

1.2 The ad on the podcast was disturbing:
0.1 Strongly Disagree
02 Disagree
CI3 Somewhat Disagree
4 Neutral
0 5 Somewhat Agree
56 Agree
==7 Strongly Agree

1,3 The ad on the podcast was forced:
e1 Strongly Disagree
C2 Disagree
53 Somewhat Disagree
C 4 Neutral
0 5 Somewhat Agree
S6 Agree
C17 Strongly Agree

1.4 The ad on the podcast was interfering:
C1 Strongly Disagree
C ;2 Disagree
0 3 Somewhat Disagree
4 Neutral












C5 Somewhat Agree
6 Agree
57 Strongly Agree

1.5 The ad on the podcast was intrusive:
C1Strongly Disagree
2Z Disagree
53 Somewhat Disagree
54 Neutral
"5 Somewhat Agree
6 Agree
C7 Strongly Agree

1 6 The ad on the podcast was invasive:
C1Strongly Disagree
2Z Disagree
53 Somewhat Disagree
54 Neutral
55 Somewhat Agree
C6 Agree
(C7 Strongly Agree

1.7 The ad on the podcast was obtrusive:
S1 Strongly Disagree
02 Disagree
=;3 Somewhat Disagree
"34 Neutral
0 5 Somewhat Agree
6 Agree
C;7 Strongly Agree

2.1 The ad on the podcast was irritating:
1r Strongly Disagree
52 Disagree
C3 Somewhat Disagree
~4 Neutral
55 Somewhat Agree
C6 Agree
57 Strongly Agree

2.2 The ad on the podcast was phony:
01 Strongly Disagree
52 Disagree
",3 Somewhat Disagree
C04 Neutral
0 5 Somewhat Agree
C6 Agree
C7 Strongly Agree

2.3 The ad on the podcast was ridiculous:












C1Strongly Disagree
2Z Disagree
53 Somewhat Disagree
~C4 Neutral
55 Somewhat Agree
C6 Agree
C7 Strongly Agree

2.4 The ad on the podcast was stupid:
1r Strongly Disagree
:2 Disagree
C3 Somewhat Disagree
:4 Neutral
~:5 Somewhat Agree
26 Agree
[7 Strongly Agree

2.5 The ad on the podcast was terrible:
1r Strongly Disagree
:2 Disagree
53 Somewhat Disagree
:4 Neutral
C5 Somewhat Agree
56 Agree
~7 Strongly Agree

3.1 The ad on the podcast was:
1n Not attractive


~34 Neutral


~7 Attractive

3.2 The ad on the podcast was:
1r Bad

C3
34 Neutral
55

S7Good

3.3 The ad on the podcast was:
1T Unappealing
S2
53
1 4 Neutral















7 Appealing

3.4 The ad on the podcast was:
1 Unpleasant


4 Neutral



07 Pleasant

3.5 The ad on the podcast was:
1 Dull





"2

4 Neutral



7 Dynamicin

3.6 The ad on the podcast was:



4 Neutral



7 Refroaeshn

3.7 Tue t he ad on the podcast ws

1 Not enjoabligee

4 Neutral



7 Etrnjoyablee

4.1 I tunped oust the ad on the podcast:












C1 Strongly Disagree
C2 Disagree
53 Somewhat Disagree
0C4 Neutral
0 5 Somewhat Agree
C:6 Agree
C7 Strongly Agree

4.3 I switched off the podcast sound during the ad:
S1 Strongly Disagree
0:2 Disagree
C;3 Somewhat Disagree
0:4 Neutral
0: 5 Somewhat Agree
26 Agree
07 Strongly Agree

5.1 What was the brand advertised on the podcast?
0 1 Nike
0 2 Puma
53 Adidas
0 4 Asics
0 5 Reebok

6.1 The contents of the podcast was:
0 1 A Dane Cook cookie recipe
52 A Dane Cook biography
Cn 3 A joke about Dane Cook
C14 A live Dane Cook sketch
0 5 I don't know

6.2 What is "P.I.R."?
0 1 Pigs in Rochester
0 2 Parents in Room
0 3 Person in Reserve
54 The Price is Right
0 5 Pretty Intelligent Reply

7. My name is: (Your name will only be collected in order to receive the extra credit and not
used in any other ways whatsoever)


7.1 My Gender is:
S1 Male
S2 Female

7.2 My age is:
Age

7.3 Are you a current user of Podcasting?













1 Yes
~ 2 No

7.4 How many hours per week do you spend podcasting?


8.1 Are there any final thoughts you would like to share'?




CSubmi


Should you have any questions please contact me at: eritter@ufl.edu.









APPENDIX F
RESULTS OF OPEN-ENDED QUESTION

8.1~ Are there any final thoughts you would like to share?

Dane Cook is someone respected by many, and would be someone great to
use in an Advertisment.

Dane Cook is a funny little man!

Thanks for picking something funny for me to listen to, and to GET extra
credit for listening to!

I hope that ad wasn't real because it sounded pretty fake!

Podcast seems like a good way to advertise to me.

I think Dane cook is funny and it was a good podcast.

I didn't pay attention to the ad at all.

Dane Cook is hilarious

I think the ad was positive on the podcast. It got my attention, and I
listened to the audio, however more than just the Puma brand image would
have been better for visual stimulation.

the add volume was too loud that is why i turned the sound off. it was some
what annoying.

only used podcast once for writing for mass communications class

the ad was short so it wasn't really intrusive but other people might find it
annoying to have ads on their ipod.

The P.I.R sketch was really funny and a good choice for the survey,
especially with regaurds to questions about distractions.Good Luck with your
research

Hope this helps out!

the podcast was very difficult to download, if this was not for extra credit I
would not have been so persistent in trying to download it, and probably
would not have completed it.










Thank you for the extra credit. This survey was actually interesting.

I like Puma's but not their ads.

I think in order for advertising to be successful with podcast the
advertisement needs to be short but flashy. The advertisement that come on
during the podcasts of Jericho are horrible .. that is usually why I use
podcast.

I was offended by the content of the podcast, while I voluntarily choose to
particapte, I do feel that more of a waringing in the welcome page, which I
guess is the informed consent page, is due.

if there are going to be advertisements in podcasts then they should be only
at the beginning and not during or after.

Dane Cook isn't funny.

The Ad was very unexpected and intrusive. The audio was definitely louder
than the Podcast skit itself so it certainly grabbed my attention. I'll admit, I
was annoyed when I saw the ad come up. I most certainly doubt the
effectiveness of an ad in the middle of a podcast. I don't believe I would
have been as annoyed if the ad was at the beginning or end of the podcast.

The podcast was very funny- I love Dane Cooke!

I had a hard time pulling the podcast up. It took several tries to get anything
to play.

I liked the immage of the Pumba logo, but the sound effects of it roaring
were strange. I thought my speakers was broken or something.

Interesting...

I enjoyed the Dane Cook.

Funny skit, but the ad was totally out of place and did not sound like a
professional ad.

The add was quick enough to listen to and get right to the podcast content.

I enjoyed listening to the sketch about P.I.R.










LIST OF REFERENCES


Aaker, D., & Bruzzone, D. (1985). Causes of irritation in advertising. Journal of2arketing, 49,
47-57.

Abernethy, A. (1991). Physical and mechanical avoidance of television commercials: An
exploratory study of zipping, zapping and leaving. Proceedings of 1991 Conference of the
American Academy ofAdvertising. Rebecca Holman, ed., New York: The American
Academy of Advertising 223-231.

Anderson, D. (2005). The Pod People. Adw~eek, 46, 1.

Barnako, F. (2006, September 29). Podcaster of the year wants name change. Retrieved March
13, 2007, from Market Watch Web site:
http://www.marketwatch. com/News/Story/Story .aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&gui
d=%7B769920DF-0151 -41CA-9E7A-E31 0970E3 922%7D&keyword=

Bauer, R., & Greyser, S. (1968). Advertising in America: The Consumer view. Boston, MA:
Harvard University.

Berta, D. (2006). IHOP units test iPod as a language teaching tool. Nation 's Restaurant News.
40, 12.

Card, D. (2006). US Portable Music Device Forecast, 2006 to 2011. Retrieved January 7, 2007.
from Jupiterresearch web site:
http ://www.jupiterresearch. com/bin/item.pl/research: concept/1 05/id=98101/

Clawson, T. (2006). Listening in. New M~edia Age, 25-26.

Dahlen, M. (2005). The medium as a contextual cue. Journal ofAdvertising. 34, 89-98.

Dertouzos, J. and Garber, S. (2006). Effectiveness of advertising in different media. Journal of
Advertising, 35, 111-122.

Edwards, S., Li, H., Lee, J. (2002). Forced exposure and psychological reactance: Antecedents
and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. Journal of Advertising. 31,
83-95.

Follis, J. (2006). Podcasting grows up. Adw~eek, 47, 17.

Fuchs, D. (1964). Two source effects in magazine advertising. Journal of2arketing Research. 1,
59-62.

Gardner, M., & Shuman, P. (1987). Sponsorship: An important component of the promotions
mix. Journal ofAdvertising. 16, 11-17.










Gardner, M., & Shuman, P. (2001). Sponsorship and small business. Journal ofSnzallBusiness
Management, 26, 44-52.

Ha, L. (1996). Observations: Advertising clutter in consumer magazines. Journal ofAdvertising
Research, 36, 76-84.

Hoch, S. (2002, December). Product experience is seductive. Journal of Consumer Research, 29,
448-454.

Holbrook, M., & O'Shaughnessy, J. (1987). The role of emotion in advertising. Psychological
Marketing, 1, 45-64.

Honan, M. (2005). Podcast is 2005 word of the year. Retrieved October 18, 2006, from
Macworld: News: Podcast is 2005 Word of the Year Web site:
http:.//www.macworld. com/news/2005/1 2/06/podcastword/index.php.

Hoyer, W., & MacInnis, D. (2004). Consumer Behavior. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
Company.

Jacoby, J. et al. (1983). To read, view, or listen? A cross-media comparison of comprehension.
Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 6, 201-218.

Johnson, B. (2006). Wanted: marketers with online savvy. Travel Trade Galzette UK & Ireland,
2709, 15.

Li, H., Edwards, S., Lee, J. (2001). Measuring the intrusiveness of internet advertising: Scale
development and validation. Proceedings of the 2001 Conference of the American Academy
ofAdvertising. Charles R. Taylor, ed., Villanova, PA: American Academy of Advertising,
25-26.

Kilby, N. (2006). Grabbing a slice of the download cake. Marketing Week, 29, 32.

Krugman, H. (1983). Television program interest and commercial interruption. Journal of
Advertising Research, 21, 21-23.

Larkin, E. (1979). Consumer perceptions of the media and their advantages. Journal of
Advertising, 8, 5-7.

Lewis, E. (2005). To blog or not to blog. Brand Strategy, 192, 24-27

Nardone, J., & See, E. (2007). Measure sponsorship to drive sales. Advertising Age, 78, 20-21.

Madden, M. (2006). Pew internet project data memo. Retrieved January 10, 2007, from Pew
Internet & American Life Project Web site:
http://www. pewi nternet. org/p dfs/PIPPodcasti ng. pdf











McBride, S. (2005). Device tallies podcast audiences. Wall Street Journal, p. B4.

Meenaghan, T. (2001). Sponsorship and advertising : A comparison of consumer perceptions.
Psychology & Marketing, 18, 191-215.

Moorman, M. et al. (2005). The effects of program responses on the processing of commercials
placed at various positions in the program and the block. Journal ofAdvertising Research,
45, 49-59.

Muehling, D., & Laczniak, R. (1988). Advertising's immediate and delayed influence on brand
attitude: Considerations across message-involvement levels. Journal ofAdvertising, 17, 23-
34.

Park, C., & McClung, G. (1986). The effect of TV program involvement on involvement with
commercials. Advances in Consumer Research, 13, 544-548.

Pieters, R., & Bijmolt, T. (1997). Consumer memory for television advertising : a field study of
duration, serial position, and competition effects. Journal of Consumer research, 12, 362-
372.

Potter, D. (2006). iPod, You Pod, We All Pod. American Journalism Review, 28, 64.

Speck, E., & Elliott, M. (1997). Predictors of advertising avoidance in print and broadcast media.
Journal ofAdvertising, 26, 61-76.

Watt, J. et al. (1998). The effect of program involvement and commercial position on reactance
to embedded commercials. Advances in Consumer Research, 25, 492-498.

Wells, W., Leavitt, C., McConville, M. (1971). A reaction profile for TV commercials. Journal
of Advertising Research, 11, 1 1-17.

Yoo, C., & McInnis, D. (2005). The brand attitude formation process of emotional and
informational ads. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1397-1406.

Zeff, R., Aronson, B. (1999). Advertising on the Internet. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Eric Ritter was educated in Germany until he earned his German Certificate of Maturity.

Afterwards, he attended the University of Maryland University College' s campus in Germany

from where he received his associate of arts degree. Following this, he moved to Florida where

he earned his Bachelor of Science in Communication from the Florida Institute of Technology.

After receiving his Master of Advertising degree from the University of Florida in May 2007, he

plans on professionally working in the advertising field.




Full Text

PAGE 1

1 EFFECTS OF AD PLACEMENT AND AD TYPE ON CONSUMER RESPONSES TO PODCAST ADS By ERIC A. RITTER A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ADVERTISING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Eric A. Ritter

PAGE 3

3 To the Professors of the Advertising Depa rtment in the College of Journalism and Communications at the University of Florida.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to offer this deeply felt thanks to the following people, without whom this thesis could not have been started and certainly would never have been completed. Thanks to Pamela E. Cross (my future wi fe) for continuously being there for me and offering constant motivation. I also want to exte nd my sincere gratitude to my parents for their support. Thanks to Jimmy JohnÂ’s for keeping me going. Sincere appreciation goes out to Steve Jobs and Jonathan Ive for their wonderful inspiration. And last but not least, I would like to thank Carl Crawford, Scott Kazmir, a nd Jonny Gomes for their entertainment.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. .....7 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ ....8 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ........9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................11 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.....................................................................................16 Irritation..................................................................................................................... ........18 Ad Avoidance................................................................................................................... .19 Placement of Advertising ...................................................................................................20 Advertising Type............................................................................................................... .22 Objective...................................................................................................................... ......23 Hypothe ses..................................................................................................................... ....23 3 METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................25 Procedure...................................................................................................................... .....25 Measures....................................................................................................................... .....26 Sample Recruitment a nd Qualifi cation ...............................................................................28 Pre-testing.................................................................................................................... ......28 Research Stimu li............................................................................................................... .32 4 FINDINGS..................................................................................................................... ....34 Sample Profile................................................................................................................. ...34 Reliab ility .................................................................................................................... ......34 Effects of Advertising Placement .......................................................................................35 Effects of Advertising Type...............................................................................................37 Interaction of the Independent Variables............................................................................39 Additional Findings............................................................................................................ 40 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ...............................................................................46 Implications................................................................................................................... ....47 Limitations and Futu re Research........................................................................................50

PAGE 6

6 APPENDIX A PRETEST ONE QUESTI ONNAIRES ...............................................................................54 B PRETEST TWO QUESTI ONNAIRES ...............................................................................55 C PRETEST THREE QUESTI ONNAIRE .............................................................................60 D TRANSCRIPT OF TRADITIONAL AD AND SPONSORSHIP ........................................61 E MAIN STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE ...................................................................................62 F RESULTS OF OPEN-ENDED QUESTION......................................................................68 LIST OF REFERENCES..........................................................................................................70 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.....................................................................................................73

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Podcast types.............................................................................................................. ........32 3-2 Attitude towards the ad measuremen ts used........................................................................32 3-3 Mean of podcast programÂ’s likelihood of downloa d............................................................33 3-4 Average score for brand attitude of five diffe rent brands.....................................................33 3-5 Manipulation check for mean comparison between traditional advertising and sponsor ship.................................................................................................................... 33 4-1 Sample size of each experimental group ..............................................................................41 4-2 Means and standard deviation for adverting placement........................................................42 4-3 t-value and mean difference for ad placement ......................................................................42 4-4 Means and standard deviation for ad Type..........................................................................42 4-5 t-value and mean di fference for ad Type.............................................................................42 4-6 Means and standard deviation of perceived intrusiveness....................................................42 4-7 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived intrusiveness .................43 4-8 Means and standard deviation of perceived irritation...........................................................43 4-9 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived irritation ........................43 4-10 Means and standard devia tion of attitude towards ad.........................................................44 4-11 Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on attitude towards ad ......................44 4-12 Means and standard deviation of ad avoidance..................................................................44 4-13 Effect of advertising placement a nd advertising type on ad avoidance ...............................44 4-14 Multiple regression for attitude towards th e ad to perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, and ad avoidance............................................................................................44

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1 Proposed mode l............................................................................................................. .....24 4-1 Interaction effects of advertising type and perceived intrusiveness......................................45

PAGE 9

9 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Advertising EFFECTS OF AD PLACEMENT AND AD TYPE ON CONSUMER RESPONSES TO PODCAST ADS By Eric A. Ritter May 2007 Chair: Chang-Hoan Cho Major Department: Advertising Online advertising has been around since the inception of the Internet in 1994 as a commercial medium and marketplace. A large bo dy of work looking at the Internet as an advertising medium is available to marketers and advertisers. My work focuses primarily on technology that, due to changed consumer behavior, is looked at differently today than just a few years ago. For example, banner ads can no longe r be measured by click-through rates, but can only be sold as brand exposure. The objective of my study was to add to the body of work looking at online advertising while focusing specifically on podcasting as an advertising medium. Due to the quick-changing nature of online content and technology my study should not be looked as only applicable to podcasting, but rather to any online medium that is developed and consists of consumers actively choos ing to listen to audio content. My study manipulated advertising placement a nd advertising type to assess how to minimize the negative effects of pe rceived intrusiveness and percei ved irritation by consumers. In addition, my study measured consumersÂ’ attitude towards the ad and ad avoidance behaviors.

PAGE 10

10 Four different podcasts were created. Two featured a traditional advertisement and two featured a sponsorship message. Two of the podcas ts had advertising placed at the beginning of the podcast while two had advertising placed in the middle. Results are presented and implications for mark eters and advertisers are discussed. My study also presents limitations and suggestions for future research.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Only a short while ago, podcasting fell into the field of self-proclaimed “geeks” and “techies.” However, this all changed in December 2005 when the New Oxford American Dictionary declared the word “podcast” word of the year (Honan, 2005). The online entry into the New Oxford American Dictionary reads, “a di gital recording of a radio broadcast or similar program, made available on the Internet for dow nloading to a personal audio player.” The selection of podcast as the 2005 word of the y ear made everyone from marketers to newspaper editors perk up and pay attention. This was two years ago and since then podcasting as a medium has continued to grow. Anybody using a computer can choose from literally thousands of podcasts on virtually any topic (Follis, 2006) for free download via programs such as Apple’s iTunes or via websites such as iPodder.com or Podcast.net. Podcasts are starting to find their way into all industries. They are being used for training purposes, as evidenced in the food service industry. IHOP has started to use video podcasts to train their cooks and audio podcasts to help employees whose second language is English develop better communication skills (Berta, 2006). The education field has also started to utilize podcasts, with Stanford University leading the way by posting faculty lectures online for anyone who is interested to download for free. Since its beginnings the number of users has grown. In 2004 podcast users numbered 820,000; in 2005 that number had increased to about five million and is expected to grow to 45 million users by 2010 (Potter, 2006). More evidence of this trend can be found according to a Pew Internet & American Life Project survey conducted in August 2006, 12% of Internet users

PAGE 12

12 have downloaded a podcast, whic h is almost twice the amount (7%) that downloaded a podcast in a February-April 2006 study (Madden, 2006). Proof of the growing popularity of podcasts is the first episode of the “Ricky Gervais Show,” made by the British comedian and creator of “The Office,” which registered 580,000 downloads (Clawson, 2006). While this is more of an exception than a rule, it still shows the great potential that podcasting offers as a medium for advertisers to reach a large amount of consumers and not just niche markets. Gervais has since started to charge £1 per download and still registers over 260,000 downloads per show (K ilby, 2006). This show may still be the exception, but popular podcasting shows and programs register downloads in the tens of thousands (Clawson, 2006). Statistics in the U.K. show how large the possible portable reach of podcasting is. As of the middle of 2006, over 23% of adults and 58% of all 16 to 24 year olds in the U.K. own a MP3 player (Kilby, 2006). In the United States, Jupite rResearch predicts that the MP3 player user base will hit the 100 million mark by 2011, up from the 2006 user base of 37 million (Card, 2006). Furthermore, an increasing number of consumers are spending less time in front of the television and more time in front of their com puters. According to a study conducted by Google, consumers in the U.K. spend 164 minutes per day online for personal use versus only 148 minutes in front of the TV (Johnson, 2006). From the advertising perspective, Julie Jean colas, a Group Account Director at the media agency Carat Digital, points out that podcasting is uncharted territory for brands: “No one really knows yet how people are interacting with pod casts” (Clawson, 2006). Podcasts have the potential to reach the hard-to-reach segment of 18 to 24 year olds (Clawson, 2006). Sarah Wood, Director of Marketing at Airmiles (U.K.), believes that portable content, such as podcasts,

PAGE 13

13 can “deepen the relationship between a brand a nd its audience” (Clawson, 2006). According to Jamie Riddell, Director of Innovation at the media agency Cheeze in the U.K, if you use podcasts as your medium to advertise, “you’re advertising to an intelligent audience of influencers” (Clawson, 2006). According to The Pe w Internet & American Life Project, as far as demographics go, current listeners of podcasts ar e typically male and 18 to 28 (Follis, 2006). College students and young adults are heavy users of the Internet. Podcasts might be one way to reach this “hard to reach” segment. As Rishad Tobaccowala, Chief Innovation Officer of Publicis Groupe Media in Chicago points out: “It's like 1994 was for the Internet, all over again" (Anderson, 2005). Just as 1994 marked the beginning of the Internet as a place to conduct business and advertise, podcasting is at the same point and shows potential to be next big thing for advertisers. So far there is no body of academic research available for podcasts. Podcasting in general has not been widely ad dressed by advertising and marketing researchers. There are no established metrics or measuring units for podcasts as there are in the traditional media (e.g. radio, television, newspapers, etc.). Within a dvertising agencies, the planning procedure for new media is much more complex as benchmarks are missing (Wyner, 2006). At the end of 2005, Audible Inc. announced its intention of creating a tool to measure how many people listen to a given podcast (McBride, 2005). One year later, Audible Inc. still has not unveiled a tool. Many agencies have taken a “let’s stand back and see how this plays out approach,” while others are in the middle of it. On the other hand, it is not known how users interact with podcasts or how they feel and think towards podcasts containing advertising. However, utilizing new media, such as podcasts can be a big competitive advantage for marketers (Wyner, 2006).

PAGE 14

14 An example of a company which can puts adver tisers in touch with podcasters is Podtrac. Podtrac, a startup company, which sells ads within over 1,300 podcasts and tracks the respective audience size, sees podcast advertising more as product placement. According to the company’s CEO podcasting “represents a new advertising fo rmat where the podcast takes product placement to a new level. The audience gets to learn a bout a new product, from the user-generated content they subscribe to and with personalities and pr ogramming they really enjoy.” (Barnako, 2006) With the growing popularity of podcasts market ers will be unable to avoid including the potential utility of podcasts in future advertisi ng campaign efforts. However, as with any medium, advertising within podcasts may lead to negative reactions in consumers, such as perceived intrusiveness of ads, pe rceived irritation and ultimately ad avoidance. This brings up the question, of how consumers perceive ads on podcasts. What we know is that so far, advertisers like the fact that listeners must elect to receive and subscribe to the content, making podcasti ng a “pull media” (Anderson, 2005). Moreover, due to listeners e ngagement in the topic podcasting gives a dvertisers the opportunity of targeted communication and the ability to reach people that are passionate and highly involved with a topic. A good example of this would be the Purina pet food podcasts (see http://www.purina.com/downloads/podcasts/index.as px). Animal owners care about their pets and thus are highly involved with the Purina podcasts about their pets. By facilitating a conversation, Purina has created a lasting em otional connection with current and potential customers. The purpose of my study is to better unders tand how users perceive and feel about podcasts containing advertising More specifica lly, my study will look at what elements of advertising in podcasts contribute to an audien ce’s perceptions of intrusiveness, perceived

PAGE 15

15 irritation and ad avoidance. In exploring th is, the researcher hopes to examine how negative perceptions and behaviors work in the podcasting c ontext, as well as to provide advertisers with strategies of eliminating ad avoidance. Ch apter 2 will examine prior research conducted on placement of advertising and the effect that it has on the audience. Placement at the beginning and in the middle of programming will be addressed. In addition, advertising type will be looked at; sponsorship message and trad itional adverting message will be looked at in-depth. Chapter 2 concludes with the hypothesis and re search question that will guide this research. Chapter 3 will present the methodology for this research, includi ng a discussion of the sample, experimental design, stimuli, procedure, and measures. Chapter 4 will present the research findings and finally Chapter 5 will present conclusions, indus try implications, limitations of this study and suggestions for future research. The findings of my research will help advertisers better understand how to place messages in podcasts.

PAGE 16

16 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Intrusiveness and to a lesser extent irritation are concepts commonly associated with advertising in general. A dvertising is found everywhere, from bath room stalls to the trailers just before movies on DVDs that cannot be skippe d. Consumers are exposed to advertising throughout the day whether they chose to be or not. In fact, intrusiveness is the chief cause of annoyance or irritation of consumers faced with advertising (Bauer and Greyser, 1968). One of the major goals of advertising is to reach the greatest number of a specific predefined target segment. For this reason, the new media has been embraced by advertisers as a way of reaching specific segments with their messages. More and more people are spending an increasing amount of time online instead of utilizing traditional media (Johnson, 2006). Consequently, advertising on the Internet has become more and more important. Banner ads were the first and led the way in 1994, and are s till one of the most common types of advertising found on the Internet (Briggs and Hollis 1997). Recently keyword search advertising has urpassed banner ads as far as money spent. Toda y, there are many forms of advertising on the Internet ranging from banner ads to pop-up ads to sponsorships (Zeff and Aronson, 1999). All forms of advertising with pop-up ads in par ticular, were soon seen as annoying by consumers and pop-up blockers are now commonly used to stop these pop-up advertisements. The reason for this negative response to advertising on the Inte rnet might be due to the fact that the medium in general is seen as more of a task oriented and information seeking vehicle and not so much as an entertainment medium (Li, Edwards, and Lee2001). Over the last few years, podcasting has developed online as a new medium, a nd its nature is as a medium is entertainment. Accordingly, people in general may be more receptive of adve rtising on podcasts versus already established Internet advertising

PAGE 17

17 Declining television viewership and increasing upfront costs (Thomaselli, 2004), declining radio listeners, and d eclining newspaper readers have fueled doubts in marketers about effectively and efficiently reaching consumers. These facts in conjunction with the possibility of reaching very specific (Kilby, 2006), enthusiastic consumers that are electing to listen to something specific (Clawson, 2006) have fueled the interest in podcasts by advertisers. A study by Moorman (2005) indicates that it’s important not only to reach the most amounts of people, but also people that are involved an d paying attention to the program. To this day, no in-depth academic res earch has been conducted specifically for podcasting. Just like any other new medium, the best way of researching it is by applying already established concepts and measures. Podcasts are multimedia (either audio or video) files commonly distributed with an RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feed, the podcast’s permanent address on the Internet. The RSS feed is a list of the URLs (Uniform Research Locator) by which episodes of the show can be accessed. A listener uses a software program or podcast aggregators, often called “podcatchers“ to subscribe to and manage their feeds (e.g., iTunes). Alternatively, a user can choose to go to a website such as iPodder.com or directly to the source website and listen or download the program form there. The downloaded files can be played back on either the listener’s computer using a pre-installed application or it can be tr ansferred onto a MP3 player to be listened to at any time the listener chooses. There is still not a definite conclusion of how exactly users interact with or use podcasts, however it seems as if podcasts can deepen the relationship between a brand and consumers (Clawson, 2006). It is estimated that only 20% of podcasts are actually consumed on portable media players and 80% are consumed on the Computer (Clawson, 2006). Podcasting by its very nature is a “pull” media, meaning that the listener actively and

PAGE 18

18 consciously makes the decision to receive and lis ten to the podcast. This would indicate high involvement with the podcast. Some research ers have found that highly involving programming, such as podcasts, may reduce the efficiency of advertisement processing, because so much attention is paid to the program, which takes aw ay from the processing of the advertising (Land and Burnkrandt, 1988; 1993). On the other hand, it may be possible that the high involvement shown towards programming may spill over to advertising and positively influence the consumerÂ’s attention to the advertising message (Watt, 1998) Either way, by nature advertisements on podcasts would be reaching a higher level of involved consumers. Studies have found that high involvement in a program is positively related to co mmercial attention and recall (Watt, 1998; Moorman, 2005). However, on the other hand advertising on a podc ast can easily become intrusive, as the user has downloaded the file to listen specifically to its contents, not an advertising message. By being intertwined with the contents, the user is exposed to the advertisement, which creates intrusiveness. This can have positive effects, like an increase in ad recall (Ha, 1996). However, a negative effect, such as ad avoidance, is also likely to occur (Cronin, 1992). Accordingly, an important theoretical issue for ads on podcasts is how to minimize the perceived negative aspect of intrusiveness by consumers. Irritation The number one reason for people to dislike a dvertising is the irritation or annoyance it causes to them (Aaker and Buzzone, 1985). Thus, itÂ’s important to understand what causes irritation to consumers and how it can be min imized. Irritation is an emotional response describing the feeling of annoyance, impatience or even anger. Emotions are acute, transitory and specific affective experiences that occur as a result of some experience including being confronted with advertising (Holbrrok and OÂ’Shaughnessy, 1987).

PAGE 19

19 What in advertising leads to this negative feeling is different from individual to individual. Sometimes, it’s the contents, sometimes the frequency at which consumers are exposed can make them “feel bombarded” (Weg ert, 2004), sometimes it’s the placement of the advertisement and sometimes it’s the length or format of the interruption caused by the advertisement. Poorly designed advertisements are often a cause of irritation as well (Aaker and Bruzzone, 1985). Yoo (2005) believes that if an ad is perceived as credible, it is less likely to make consumers feel irritated. Pieters and B ijimolt (1997) found that irritation with television commercials increased as the number of commercials increased. The level of irritation depends on the individual. Irritation will lead to impatience within the consumer. The most frequent consequence of i rritation is avoidance of what is irritating, in this case the advertisement, if that is possible (Park and McClung, 1986). Ad avoidance in general is very high on the Internet due to ad clutter (Cho, 2004). Podcasts usually only feature one advertising message per epis ode, and consequently might offer a medium where the amount of clutter is minimized and lead to less ad avoidance. Ad Avoidance Ad avoidance is a huge problem with any medium that offers the possibility of avoidance to the consumer. Abernethy (1991) found that when given the possibility, 90% of commercials were zipped (fast forwarded), and thus skipped. If you take a closer look, a lot of the media downloaded to watch on a mobile MP3 player are fo rming a new kind of television medium. It’s television on the go and on-demand. The Internet has become a distribution vehicle for media content. Many studies have looked at ad irritation and ad avoidance, the apparent results of ad intrusiveness. An example of looking at the enti re picture is Edwards et al.’s (2002) research on the antecedents and consequences of the percei ved intrusiveness of pop-up ads. This study

PAGE 20

20 looked at ad intrusiveness as the precursor to ad irritation and ad avoidance. It demonstrates why itÂ’s imperative to look at ad intrusiveness, in order to understand how to minimize ad irritation and ad avoidance. This study on podcasts will fo llow the same approach used by Edwards, Li, and Lee (2002) for pop-up ads. All in all, Edwards et al.Â’s (2002) study found that intrusiveness is a precursor to irritation, which is a precursor to ad avoidan ce. The study recommends that the best way to minimize perceived intrusiveness of ads is to target consumers, increase relevancy of the ads, and provide value with the ad. Attitude towards Radio Advertising might help better understa nd consumer attitudes towards podcasts. ConsumersÂ’ attitudes towards radio advertising are mixed. While a majority of consumers might dislike radio advertising others enjoy it. Larkin (1979) found that 14% of respondents found radio advertising to be the most entertaining form of advertising However, on the other hand 18% wanted advertising re moved from radio more than from any other medium (Larkin, 1979). Placement of Advertising Placement is important to any media format. For example, in print more attention is paid to the front page and top left of a page than to other part of the publication. Placement is certain to play a role in how consumers perceive ads on podcasts as well. When a listener downloads a podcast he does so to listen to its editorial contents and not to an advertising message. This brings up the question of ad placement. There are three possibilities of where an advertising message can be placed for any given program: at the beginning before the program begins, in the middle during the content, or at the end of the podcast. Because the user can easily skip an ad placed at the end of a podcast, and it will not receive his full attention, if any this study w ill only look at placement of advertising at the

PAGE 21

21 beginning and at the middle of a podcast. Nume rous studies have looked at placement of an advertisement within a block, but not many studies have looked at he placement of the advertising block itself. No matter where the ad is placed or which format it is, it will likely be perceived as intrusive by the user. A study conducted by Watt ( 1998) looking at advertising in the middle of programming, showed a positive relationship be tween consumer program involvement and relevance to advertising attention and therefore to attitude towards the advertisement. Another study found that due to the momentum created from the program consumers are more attentive to the advertising placed in the middle (Krugman, 1983). It has also been found that effects, such as advertisement attention and recall are stronge r for advertisements interrupting the program itself, than for blocks in-between programs (Moorman, 2005). Some researchers have argued that advertisements placed to interrupt the pr ogramming will perform worse than those placed at the beginning of programs, because the interruption will annoy consumers. On the other hand, Pieters and Bijimolt (1997) found more favorable effects for ads placed at the beginning of an advertising block, as it does not interrupt what consumers are doing. An advertising message at the beginning might also show more positive effects because as programming progresses, consumers are less focused on peripheral stimuli or ads (Newell, 2003). The previous findings show no clear consistenc y. However, if an advertising message (sponsorship or traditional advertisement) is present in a podcast at the beginning of the program instead of the middle where it would interrupt, it might minimize the perceived intrusiveness by the consumer.

PAGE 22

22 Advertising Type There are many different forms of advertising. The two most commonly used types of advertising today are sponsorship and traditional ads (15 or 30 second messages). For this study we will look at these two types of advertising on podcasts. Lots of studies have been done on the public ’s attitude towards a dvertising with the most in-depth being Bauer and Greyser’s 1968 work “Advertising in America: The Consumers View.” In general, attitudes to wards advertising are undecided, w ith great variation in consumer perceptions by nationality, social and demographic standing, and advertising media type (Bauer and Greyser, 1968). The main reason why people don’t like advertising is because it’s seen as intrusive. In other words people perceive adver tising as too much, too often, and interrupting. The main reasons why people like advertising are that it informs of what products are available (Bauer and Greyser, 1968). Sponsorship has greatly increased in importance to marketers. Sponsorship spending is projected to reach $14.93 billion in 2007, which is an increase of 11.7% from 2006 versus only a 2.4 % projected growth on advertising spending in 2007 (Nardone and See, 2007). However, in contrast to advertising not much is known about sponsorship. What is know is that attitude towards sponsorship is very favorable (Meenagha n, 2001). Sponsorships can also offer unique and cost-effective opportunities for small companies. To do this, they can reach their consumers through targeted sponsorship, as larger firms domi nate the advertising ch annels (Gardner, 2001). Attitudes towards the institution of commercia l sponsorships is much more favorable than towards the institution of advertising (Meen aghan, 2001; Gardner, 1987). This is mainly because advertising is seen as “selfish” and “persuasive” and much more likely to activate defense mechanisms by the consumer as it serves no other purpose than that of the advertiser (Meenaghan, 2001). Sponsorship on the other hand is seen as delivering some benefit to society

PAGE 23

23 and actually increases the likelihood of purchase by the consumer (Meenaghan, 2001; Gardner, 1987). The more positive attitude of consumers towards sponsorships versus traditional advertising might carry over to podcasting and thus may minimize the intrusiveness that people report for traditional advertising (Bauer and Greyse r, 1968). In order to better understand how to minimize intrusiveness of ads in podcasts and the associated ad irritation and ad avoidance, while looking at the different factors addressed above, I propose the following research question: Are there any effects of the two independent variables (placement, and type) on consumer advertising responses (intrusiveness, irritation, ad avoidance, and attitude toward the ad) on podcasts? Objective The objective of this study is to find out how consumers perceive different types and positions of podcasting advertising. Little to no research has been conducted regarding the effects that placement and type of advertising on podcasts have. More specifically, the following hypotheses will be tested in an experiment: Hypotheses H1-1: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less intrusiveness than Advertising in the middle. H1-2: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less irritation than Advertising in the middle. H1-3: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate more favorable attitude towards the Ad than Advertising in the middle. H1-4: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less ad avoidance than Advertising in the middle.

PAGE 24

24 H2-1: Sponsorship will generate less intrusiv eness than Traditional Advertising H2-2 : Sponsorship will generate less irr itation than Traditional Advertising H2-3: Sponsorship will generate more favorable attitude towards the Ad than Traditional Advertising H2-4: Sponsorship will generate less ad a voidance than Traditional Advertising RQ1 : Is there any interaction effect of the two independent variables (placement and type) on consumer advertising responses (intrusiveness, i rritation, ad avoidance, and attitude toward the ad)? The model (Figure 2-1) will not be tested, but will serve as a guide to better understand how certain concepts and constructs interact and why the Independent and Dependant Variables were chosen. Figure 2-1. Proposed model

PAGE 25

25 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY The hypotheses were tested using a 2 (traditional vs. sponsorship) x2 (beginning vs. middle) between-group experimental (2 levels of ad placement and 2 le vels of ad type) design. An experiment was determined to be the appropriate method for studyi ng the effects of different ad placement and ad types on consumers view on intrusivene ss, irritation and ad avoidance. This study attempted to understand the rela tionship between the ma nipulated independent variables of advertisement placement and advertis ement type and the dependant variables of ad intrusion, ad irritation, attitude toward s the ad, ad recall, and ad avoidance. Below is the 2 (traditional vs. s ponsorship) x2 (beginning vs. middle) model: (1) Sponsorship beginning (3) Sponsorship middle (2) Traditional advertising beginning (4) Traditional advertising middle Procedure The participants were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental groups to satisfy the 2 (traditional vs. sponsorship) x2 (beginning vs. middle) model. The participants were placed according to the sequence of their recruitment into one of the four groups (Table 3-1), from one through four. Every member of the group was directed to one of the four different websites containing different podcasts; depending on what group they were in. From the website they could dow nload or listen to one of the four different roughly three minute long podcasts. To stimulate interest in the p odcast, participants were told that they would be taking an online survey after listening to the podcast. Ideally, the podcast would be downloaded and then consumed on a portable MP3 de vice. However, as the majority of current podcast users listen to podcasts on their computers (Clawson, 2006), this was acceptable as well.

PAGE 26

26 After listening to the podcast, each group was aske d to fill out an online questionnaire, which measured the dependant variables. The sample was asked to rate how intrusive and irritating the ads on the podcasts were, and if they avoided the ad on the podcast. To verify that the subjects actually listened to the entire podcast two screening questions were developed and put towards the end of the survey. In addition, at the end of the online survey an open-ended question was placed to serve as a “catchall,” for any comments or thoughts that participants had, but could not put anywhere else on the survey. The results of this open-ended question can be found in Appendix F. Afterwards the data collected from the sample was exported into SPSS to analyze and the six hypotheses were tested. Measures The two independent variables manipulated were ad placement and ad type. Advertising placement was manipulated by inserting an advertisement either at the beginning, before the program content begins, or in the middle of the po dcast during the content and interrupting it. It is assumed that placing the advertisement at the beginning will generate less intrusiveness, less irritation and in turn invoke a more positiv e attitude towards the advertisement. The second independent variable was advertising type, which was manipulated by either inserting a sponsorship message or traditional adve rtisement into the podcast. The assumption is that a sponsorship message will be less intrusive a nd less irritating to the pa rticipant, and in turn generate a more favorable attitude towards the advertisement. The dependant variables studied were perceived intrusiveness, pe rceived irritation, attitude toward s advertising and ad avoidance and were measured using an online questionnaire de veloped specifically for this experiment. All items were measured using either a seven-point Likert scale or semantic differential scale. Following is a more in-depth look at the dependant variables.

PAGE 27

27 Ad Intrusiveness. Intrusiveness was measured using the following seven items derived from Li et al.’s (2001) work: distracting, disturbing, forced, interfering, intrusive, invasive, and obtrusive (Edwards, 2001). Participants were asked to rate the ad according a to seven-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Ad Irritation. Irritation was measured using the following five items derived from Wells et al.’s (1971) work: irritating, phony, ridiculous, st upid, and terrible (Edwards, 2001). Participants were asked to rate the ad according a to sevenpoint scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Attitude towards the Ad. Attitude towards the Ad is often seen as a mediator of advertising ‘s effect on brand attitude and purchase intention. For this st udy, attitudes towards the ad were measured using a seven-point semantic differe ntial scale based on the work of Muehling and Laczniak (1988). For the experiment the same seve n bipolar pairs were used as in Muehling and Laczniak study of Advertising’s Influence on Brand Attitudes (see Table 3-2), each preceded by the statement “The ad on the podcast was.” Participants were asked to rate the ad according to seven-point scale ranging from one pair to the other. Ad Avoidance. Ad avoidance was measured via self-reporting using measures derived from Speck and Elliott’s (1997) work on “Predictors of Advertising Avoidance in Print and Broadcast Media.” More specifically, the avoidance scale developed for radio was adapted for podcasting;

PAGE 28

28 the word “radio” was simply replaced with “podcast.” Participants were asked, if they tuned out the ad on the podcast, skipped past the ad on the podcast, or switched of the podcast during the ad. Answers were recorded using a seven-poi nt Likert scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” or “1” to “Strongly Agree” or “7”. Sample Recruitment and Qualification The main sample for the experiment consisted of volunteers recruited from an undergraduate advertising course at a southeastern U.S. University. The instructor was contacted and asked for permission to use the class as the sample for this experiment. All participants were given extra credit as determined my the instructor. It was believed that the class was the ideal age group of typical podcast users (Madden, 2006). The researcher handed out slips of paper containing one of the four websites created for th e study and the students then were directed to go to the website outside of class time on their own, if they volunteered to participate. A total of 129 students from the class participated. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Florida was contacted beforehand. All the appropriate paperwork was turned-in on time, in order to conduc t the experiment and pretests required to test the hypotheses. After receiving the approval from IRB the study moved forward. Pre-testing Firstly, two pretests were conducte d to evaluate the interest in different podcasts and brands to investigate which would serve as the stimuli fo r the experiment. In addition, a third pretest was conducted to check and evaluate, whethe r the difference between the two types of advertising (traditional ad versus sponsorship) was clear.

PAGE 29

29 Pretest 1 The content of the actual podcast for this expe riment was chosen based on student interest according to a pretest of 8 podcasts. The podcasts selected for the pretest were chosen among the top 25 downloaded podcasts from iTunes, the most popular source for finding and connecting to podcasts. Additionally only podcasts deemed as interesting to college students by the researcher were included in the pretest. The main purpose of this pretest was to use a podcast in his experiment that the target population of college students would most likely be to download and enjoy on their own time for entertainment. Since the nature of podcasting is a pull instead of a push medium, the researcher tried to replicate this as much as possible in th e experiment. Twenty-one participants from an undergraduate course formed the sample for pretes t one. The pretest consisted of a coversheet on which participants were presented the info rmed consent information from IRB and a second sheet asking which of the listed podcasts they would be most likely to download (see Appendix A). Each podcast featured a short description, in order to help students who were unfamiliar with the podcast or podcasts make a decision. The podcasts given as options on the survey were chosen broad a broad range of fields. Only one was chosen from each field of interest: Comedy Central Stand-Up, Dane Cook’s Tourgasm, The Economist, Learn Spanish with Coffee Break Spanish, ESPN: PTI, The Onion Radio News, U.S. Senator Barack Obama Podcast, and FOXCAST: Family Guy. The podcast, which the participants of the pretest chose as most likely to download according to a seven-point Likert s cale then formed the foundation for the creation of the experimental stimuli (see Table 3-3). The p odcast chosen by the pretest participants to be most likely downloaded by them was “Dane Cook’s Tourgasm.” Hence, the most recent episode

PAGE 30

30 of the podcast was chosen to use in the exper iment in order to minimize the likelihood that a participant had been previously exposed to the podcast. Pretest 2 The brand used for both the sponsorship and tr aditional advertising message was selected via a pretest of top five brands from different fields familiar to college students. When selecting the brands for the pretest, weight was put on the fact that the brands did not have a clear advertising messages geared towards college students. The main purpose of this pretest was to find a brand without too positive or too negative associations. Thirty-four participants from an undergraduate advertising course formed the sample. This pretest consisted of a coversheet on which participants were presented the informed consent form from IRB as well as a five-page survey asking questions about the brands (see Appendix B). The brands given as options as part of the pretest were: Ford, MTV, Puma, Red Bull, and Sony The survey tested student’s familiarity with the brand, their likely hood to consider the brand as a consumer, the fit as a sponsor of “Dane Cook’s Tourgasm,” and their attitude toward s the brand. Attitude towards the brand was measured using the same item pairs as Muehli ng (1988) Bad/Good, Unfavorable/Favorable, and Negative Positive. Based on the average of all measures, the brand that fell in the middle of the composite mean of all brands was chosen for the experiment (see Table 3-4). The brand that fell in the middle of the overall summed scores was the shoe and sportswear company “Puma.” Pretest 3 The third and final pretest was a manipulati on check of the advertising and sponsorship messages created to be inserted into the podcasts. Two different audio files were created using the audio-editing program “Garageband” by Apple (see Appendix D ). Both messages were created to have a similar length. The traditional ad included a call to action, while the

PAGE 31

31 sponsorship message did not. In addition in contrast to the traditional ad the sponsorship message did not include background music. Both audio files were played out load several times to a class of twenty-nine undergraduate students, which formed the sample. Afterwards the students were asked to look over the IRB’s informed consent form and fill out a short questionnaire (see Appendix C). The questionnair e asked to what extend they believed each audio sample respectively to be either Traditi onal Advertising or Sponsorship. Plain English definitions of both traditional advertising a nd sponsorship were given at the top of the questionnaire to help guide the students. The manipulation check was successful as the paired t-tests show a statistical significance at the p<0.05 levels (see Table 3-5). Participants were able to clearly identify Sample 1 (traditional advertising) as Traditional advertising ( M =8.69) over sponsorship ( M =3.69). Moreover sample 2 (sponsorship) was clearly recognized as sponsorship ( M =7.76) rather than traditional advertising ( M =4.90). The t-scores for the two pairs were 6.82 and -3.45 (d.f.=28, p 0.5). Thus, in conclusion the manipulation check was successful as the sample was effectively able to distinguish between the traditional advertising sa mple and sponsorship sample as to which one was which. Pretest Results The data from all three pretests were analyzed using SPSS. The stimuli were then selected based on the three pretests. The summed attitude means provided the podcast and brand to be used in the Stimuli. “Dane Cook’s Tourgasm” scor ed the highest mean an d was selected as the stimuli into which the brand message will be inserted. The composite mean score in the middle of the five brands was “Puma” and accordingly it was selected as the brand for which traditional advertising as well as a sponsorship message would be created.

PAGE 32

32 Research Stimuli For this experiment four different audio podcasts were created based on the pretests using Apple’s audio-editing program Garageband. The latest episode of Dane Cook’s Tourgasm was trimmed down to only include the contents (a live Dane Cook sketch) without any other messages. This podcast had two advertising “pods,” one at the beginning and one in the middle. The audio podcast was in the m4a file format in stereo and featuring 44.1 kHz and a 128 kbps bit rate, the specifications of a typical audio podcast. On the website the podcast was also offered as an mp3 file incase a participant encountered problems with the m4a file. A feature of m4a files is that images can be em bedded into them. For this experiment the original image was left on during the podcast cont ents, but during the advertising pods the Puma logo was shown. Table 3-1. Podcast types Group Podcast Type Podcast 1 beginning, sponsorship Podcast 2 beginning, traditional ad Podcast 3 middle, sponsorship Podcast 4 middle, traditional ad Table 3-2. Attitude towards the ad measurements used Bipolar pairs: Not attractive Bad Unappealing Unpleasant Dull Depressing Not enjoyable Attractive Good Appealing Pleasant Dynamic Refreshing Enjoyable

PAGE 33

33 Table 3-3. Mean of podcast programÂ’s likelihood of download Mean Std. Deviation Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm 4.76 1.84 Comedy Central Stand-Up 4.62 1.56 FOXCAST: Family Guy 4.10 2.00 The Onion Radio News 3.90 1.81 Learn Spanish with Coffee Break Spanish 3.24 1.95 ESPN: PTI 3.14 1.82 U.S. Senator Barack Obama Podcast 2.48 1.47 The Economist 2.24 1.48 *Items were rated on a 1-7 scale (1=very unlikely 7=very likely). Table 3-4. Average score for brand attitude of five different brands Average Attitude Score Average fit with podcast score Overall MTV 4.90 4.02 5.51 Sony 5.87 2.78 5.47 Puma 5.76 2.41 5.14 Red Bull 4.57 3.13 4.72 Ford 4.22 2.42 4.26 *Items were rated on a 1-7 scale. Table 3-5. Manipulation check for mean co mparison between traditi onal advertising and sponsorship N Mean SD t df p How much do you think this is Traditional Advertising? 29 8.69 1.51 Sample 1 (traditional Advertising ) How much do you think this is Sponsorship? 29 3.69 2.97 6.82* 28 .00 How much do you think this is Traditional Advertising? 29 4.90 3.00 Sample 2 (Sponsorship) How much do you think this is Sponsorship? 29 7.76 2.40 -3.45* 28 .00 *p<.05. Items rated on a 1-10 scale (1=very weak 10=very strong ) SD=Standard Deviation

PAGE 34

34 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS Sample Profile The main sample consisted of undergraduate and graduate students recruited at a southeastern U.S. university. Of the 129 student s that participated in the experiment, 121 qualified for the final sample by correctly answering the control questions. There were two control questions devel oped and applied (see Appendix E). One question asked about the broad contents of the podcast “ The contents of the podcasts was: ” and then gave five options, one being “ I don’t know. ” The second question asked a more specific detail about the podcast that the subject could only answer, if they listened to the entire podcast “ What is ‘P.I.R’?, ” as the answer to this question is only mentioned once. The final main sample consisted of 32 % men (n=39) participants and 68% female (n=82) partic ipants. The median age of the participants was 20, with a range of 18-38. Of the 121 participants, 34 were current podcast users (28%) with usage time ranging from 0.1 to 15 hours (3.4 hour mean). Participants were randomly assi gned to one of the four exper imental cells and had an equal chance of being assigned to each cell. In other words each participant was assigned to one of the four websites (each containing a different podcast) Table 4-1 shows the number of participants in each experimental cell. Reliability To ensure the reliability of the measures onl y established and previously used measures were used to measure the dependant variables in this study. For reliability I checked Cronbach of the dependant variable measures. All va lues were above the 0.6 minimums to ensure reliability. The Cronbach for perceived Intrusiveness (sev en items) was 0.94, for perceived

PAGE 35

35 irritation (five items) it was 0.82, for attitude towards the ad (seven items) it was 0.90, and for ad avoidance (three items) it was 0.61. Effects of Advertising Placement The first set of four hypotheses examined the effect of different advertising placement on the perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. To answer the question, if advertising at the beginning of podcasts will generate more favorable attitudes, the average score of each of the four dependant variables (int rusiveness, irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance) of the podcasts containing the advertising at the beginning (podcast 1 and podcast 2) were compared to the average scores of the podcasts containing the advertising in the middle (podcast 3 and podcast 4). More specifically, one-tailed between group t-tests were conducted for each dependant variable. The hypotheses are as follows: H1-1: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less intrusiveness than Advertising in the middle. H1-2: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less irritation than Advertising in the middle. H1-3: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate more favorable attitude towards the Ad than Advertising in the middle. H1-4: Advertising at the beginning of Audio Podcasts will generate less ad avoidance than Advertising in the middle. All items except attitude towards the ad were measured on a seven-point scale where 1 = “Strongly Disagree” and 7 = “Strongly Agree.” For attitude towards the ad a seven-point bipolar semantic scale was used, were 1 was the lowest or most negative score and 7 was the highest or most positive score (see Chapter 3 and Appendix E). The average of seven question items that measured perceived Intrusiveness shows that par ticipants who encountered the advertisement in

PAGE 36

36 the middle ( M =4.94) perceived more Intrusiveness than those encountering it at the beginning ( M =3.10). The average of five question items th at measured perceived Irritation showed that participantÂ’s felt more perceived Irritated when encountering the advertisement in the middle ( M =3.71) versus at the beginning ( M =3.25). The average of seven question items that measured attitude towards the ad show that participan ts who encountered the advertisement in the beginning ( M =3.77) had a more favorable attitude than those encountering it in the middle ( M =3.49). The average of three question items th at measured ad avoidance show only minimal difference between participants who encounter ed the advertisement at the beginning ( M =2.67) against those that encountered it in the middle ( M =2.46). Table 4-2 shows the group statistics of Mean and Standard deviati on for the Dependant variables in reference to ad placement. In order to see whether the results are st atistically significant a nd the hypotheses can be supported or not, four one-tailed i ndependent sample t-tests were conducted. The t-testes were run in order to compare the means of the effect s that putting the Advertisement at the beginning and in the middle of the podcast had on perceive d intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The results of the one-tailed independe nt sample t-test are listed in Table 4-3. For Hypothesis 1-1, the result (mean difference of -1.87) was statistically significant (t = -7.79, d.f. = 119, p = 0.00). Thus, Hypothesis 11 is supported. Participants did perceive less Intrusiveness from Ads placed at the beginning versus Ads placed in the middle. For Hypothesis 1-2, the t-test result (mean difference of -0.46) was statistically significant (t = -2.07, d.f. = 119, p = 0.02). Thus, Hypothesis 1-2 is supported. Participants

PAGE 37

37 perceived more irritation towards the ad, when it was placed at the middle versus the beginning of the podcast. For Hypothesis 1-3, the result was not statistically significant (t = 1.38, d.f. = 119, p = 0.09). Participants did show a little more positiv e attitude for ads placed at the beginning versus the middle of a podcast, but Hypothesis 1-3 is not statistically supported (p > 0.05). For Hypothesis 1-4, the t-test was not statically significant (t = 0.97, d.f. = 119, p = 0.17). Participants did show slightly more ad avoidance for ads placed at the beginning versus the middle of the podcasts, however Hypothesis 1-4 is not statically supported (p > 0.05). Effects of Advertising Type The second set of four hypotheses examined the effect of different advertising types or formats on the perceived intrusiveness, irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The same was done for the second set of hypotheses as was done for the first. To answer the question, whether sponsorship will generate more favorable attitudes, the average scores of each of the four dependant variables (intrusiveness, irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance) of the Podcasts containing the spons orship message (podcast 1 and podcast 3) were compared to the podcasts containing the traditional advertising (podcast 2 and podcast 4). More specifically, one-tailed between group t-tests were conducted for each dependant variable. The hypotheses are as follows: H2-1: Sponsorship will generate less intr usiveness than Traditional Advertising. H2-2: Sponsorship will generate less ir ritation than Traditional Advertising. H2-3: Sponsorship will generate more favorab le attitude towards the Ad than Traditional Advertising. H2-4: Sponsorship will generate less ad avoidance than Traditional Advertising.

PAGE 38

38 The average of seven question items that m easured perceived intrusiveness shows that participants who encountered the traditional advertisement ( M =4.38) perceived more Intrusiveness than those encountering the sponsorship ( M =3.68). The average of five question items that measured perceived irritation showed that participants felt slightly more irritated when encountering the traditional advertisement ( M =3.62) versus the sponsorship ( M =3.36). The average of seven question items that measured attitude towards the ad shows that participants who encountered the Sponsorship ( M =3.74) had a more favorable attitude than those encountering the traditional advertising ( M =3.51). The average of three question items that measured ad avoidance show only minimal differe nce between participants who encountered the sponsorship ( M =2.47) against those that encountered the traditional advertisement ( M =2.67). Table 4-4 shows the group statistics of Means and Standard deviati on for the Dependant variables in reference to ad type. In order to see whether the results are st atistically significant a nd the hypotheses can be supported or not four one-tailed I ndependent sample t-test was c onducted. The t-testes were run in order to compare the means of the effects that being exposed to a sponsorship message versus a traditional advertisement has on perceived intrus iveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the Ad, and ad avoidance. The results of the one -tailed Independent sample t-test are listed in Table 4-5. For Hypothesis 2-1 the result (mean difference of 0.71) was statistically significant (t = 2.46, d.f. = 119, p = 0.01). Thus, Hypothesis 21 is supported. Participants exposed to sponsorship perceive less intrusiveness than those exposed to traditional advertising.

PAGE 39

39 For Hypothesis 2-2 the t-test was not statically significant (t=-1.17, d.f.=119 p = 0.12. Participants did perceive slightly more irr itation towards traditional Ads than sponsorship. However, Hypothesis 2-2 is not statically supported (p > 0.05). For Hypothesis 2-3 the t-test was not statically significant (t = 1.11, d.f. = 119, p = 0.13). Participants did show a little more positive attit ude toward sponsorship than towards traditional Ads, but Hypothesis 2-3 is not statically supported (p > 0.05). For Hypothesis 2-4 the t-test was not statically si gnificant (t = -0.94, d.f. = 119, p = 0.18). Participants did demonstrate more ad avoidance towards traditional Ads than towards sponsorships, however Hypothesis 2-4 is not statically supported (p > 0.05). Interaction of the Independent Variables Finally, to answer the research question, if there were any interaction effects between the independent variables, two-way ANOVAs were run for each dependant variable. The independent variables used were advertising placement (beginning or middle) and advertising format (sponsorship and traditional ad). The depe ndent variables were perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The Research question was as follows: RQ1 : Is there any interaction effect of the two independent variables (ad placement and ad format) on consumer advertising responses (intrusiveness, irritation, attitude toward the ad, and ad avoidance)? Table 4-6 shows means and standard devi ations for perceived intrusiveness. As Table 4-7 shows, advertising placement has a main effect on the perceived intrusiveness at the 0.05 significance level (F=66.40 df=1, p=0.00). Advertising type also shows a main effect on perceived intrusiveness (F=8.17, df=1, p=0.00). Also, a statistically significant interaction is present between advertising form at and advertising placement (F=4.71, df=1,

PAGE 40

40 p=0.03). This interaction effect (figure 4-1) indicates that when the ad was placed in the beginning, there was no big difference in per ceived intrusiveness between traditional ad (M=3.16) and sponsorship (M=3.00); however, when the ad was placed in the middle, the difference between traditional ad and sponsorship was more apparent or noticeable (M=5.53 versus M=4.37). For perceived irritation, there was a main effect of ad placement (F=4.45, d.f.=1, p=0.04), but no main effect of ad format and no interaction effect between ad format and ad placement were detected (p>0.05). For attitude towards the ad and ad avoidance, no main effects and interaction effects were statically significant (p>0.05). Additional Findings As a manipulation check, a question item con cerning the level of brand recall of the subjects was placed towards the end of the survey. Participants were given a choice of five brand options, from which they were instructed to select which one had advertised on the podcast. Nearly the entire sample of participants (97.5%) correctly identified Puma as the advertised brand on the online questionnaire. Specifically, for podcast 1 (sponsorship, beginning) brand recall was 96.9%, for podcast 2 (t raditional advertising, beginning) it was 96.4 %, for podcast 3 (Sponsorship, Middle) it was 100%, and for podcast 4 (traditional advertising, middle) it was 97.5%. In other words, only three of the 121 participants did not correctly identify the advertised brand. Thus, it seems like placing ads on podcasts can lead to extremely high brand recall. However, this should be not be generalized and no clear conclusion should be drawn from this because only one advertising situ ation was tested, but it suggests that adverting on podcasting might lead to increased brand recall.

PAGE 41

41 A multiple regression was preformed to l earn more about the relationship between perceived irritation, perceived intrusiveness, ad avoidance and attitude towards the ad. The dependant variable used was attitude towards th e ad, while perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, and ad avoidance were the independent variables used. Table 4-14 shows that all three independent variab les are statistically significant, with perceived irritation ( =|-0.32| being the most important variable in predicting attitude towards the ad. Moreover, all three show a negative relationshi p, which means that if people perceived less intrusiveness and irritation and avoid the ad less, they are more likely to have positive attitude toward the ad. There is a strong correlation between the de pendant variable and independent variables (R=0.70). An R2 of 0.49 shows that 49% of the dependant variable variance is explained by the regression equation. Following is the regression equa tion: 6.10 0.32 (index of irritation) – 0.18 (index of intrusiveness) – 0.25 (index of ad avoidance). The f-ratio for the regression equation is 37.79 and is statistically significant (p=0.00), this means it can be generalized to the general population. Table 4-1. Sample size of each experimental group Group: Participants: (Podcast 1) beginning, traditional ad 32 (Podcast 2) beginning, sponsorship 28 (Podcast 3) middle, traditional ad 31 (Podcast 4) middle, sponsorship 30 Total: 121

PAGE 42

42 Table 4-2. Means and standard de viation for adverting placement Placement N Mean Std. Deviation Beginning 60 3.07 1.13 Index of Intrusiveness Middle 61 4.94 1.48 Beginning 60 3.25 1.14 Index of Irritation Middle 61 3.71 1.31 Beginning 60 3.77 0.91 Index of Attitude towards the Ad Middle 61 3.49 1.27 Beginning 60 2.67 1.11 Index of ad avoidance Middle 61 2.46 1.18 Table 4-3. t-value and mean difference for ad placement t-value df Mean difference Sig. (1-tailed) Index of Intrusiveness -7.79* 119 -1.87 0.00 Index of Irritation -2.07* 119 -0.46 0.02 Index of Attitude towards the Ad 1.38 119 0.28 0.09 Index of ad avoidance 0.97 119 0.20 0.17 *p<.05 Table 4-4. Means and standard deviation for ad Type Type N Mean Std. Deviation Sponsor 63 3.68 1.55 Index of intrusiveness Trad. Ad 58 4.38 1.62 Sponsor 63 3.36 1.25 Index of irritation Trad. Ad 58 3.62 1.24 Sponsor 63 3.74 1.18 Index of attitude towards the Ad Trad. Ad 58 3.51 1.02 Sponsor 63 2.47 1.18 Index of ad avoidance Trad. Ad 58 2.67 1.10 Table 4-5. t-value and mean difference for ad type t-value df Mean difference Sig. (1-tailed) Sum of intrusiveness -2.46* 119 -0.71 0.01 Sum of irritation -1.17 119 -0.27 0.12 Sum of attitude towards the Ad 1.11 119 0.22 0.13 Sum of ad avoidance -0.94 119 -0.20 0.18 *p<.05

PAGE 43

43 Table 4-6. Means and standard devi ation of perceived intrusiveness Advertising placement Beginning Middle Total Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Sponsorship 3.00 0.22 32 4.37 0.23 31 3.69 0.16 63 Traditional ad 3.16 0.24 28 5.53 0.23 30 4.34 0.17 58 Total 3.01 0.16 60 4.95 0.16 61 121 Note: SD=Standard Deviation Table 4-7. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived intrusiveness Source SS df MS F Advertising placement 105.73 1 105.73 66.40* Advertising format 13.02 1 13.02 8.17* Advertising placement advertising format 7.50 1 7.50 4.71* Error 186.29 117 1.59 Significant at p .05 Note: SS=Sum of square; MS=mean square Table 4-8. Means and standard de viation of perceived irritation Advertising placement Beginning Middle Total Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Sponsorship 3.29 0.22 32 3.43 0.22 31 3.36 0.15 63 Traditional Ad 3.21 0.23 28 4.01 0.22 30 3.61 0.16 58 Total 3.25 0.16 60 3.72 0.16 61 121 Note: SD=Standard Deviation Table 4-9. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on perceived irritation Source SS df MS F Advertising placement 6.64 1 6.64 4.45* Advertising format 1.89 1 1.89 1.27 Advertising placement advertising format 3.30 1 3.30 2.27 Error 174.53 117 1.50 Significant at p .05 Note: SS=Sum of square; MS=mean square

PAGE 44

44 Table 4-10. Means and standard deviation of attitude towards ad Advertising placement Beginning Middle Total Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Sponsorship 3.71 0.19 32 3.77 0.20 31 3.74 0.14 63 Traditional Ad 3.84 0.21 28 3.21 0.20 30 3.52 0.14 58 Total 3.77 0.14 60 3.49 0.14 61 121 Note: SD=Standard Deviation Table 4-11. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on attitude towards ad Source SS df MS F Advertising placement 2.48 1 2.48 2.06 Advertising format 1.39 1 1.38 1.15 Advertising placement advertising format 3.71 1 3.71 3.09 Error 140.60 117 1.20 Note: SS=Sum of square; MS=mean square Table 4-12. Means and standard deviation of ad avoidance Advertising placement Beginning Middle Total Advertising Format Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Sponsorship 2.72 0.20 32 2.22 0.21 31 2.47 0.14 63 Traditional Ad 2.61 0.22 28 2.72 0.21 30 2.67 0.15 58 Total 2.66 0.15 60 2.47 0.15 61 121 Note: SD=Standard Deviation Table 4-13. Effect of advertising placement and advertising type on ad avoidance Source SS df MS F Advertising placement 1.14 1 1.14 0.88 Advertising format 1.18 1 1.18 0.91 Advertising placement advertising format 2.89 1 2.89 2.22 Error 152.18 117 1.30 Note: SS=Sum of square; MS=mean square Table 4-14. Multiple regression for attitude towards the ad to perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, and ad avoidance Unstandardized Coefficients B Standardized Coefficients t sig. (Constant) 6.10 25.07 0.00 Index of irritation -0.32 -.35 -4.02 0.00 Index of intrusiveness -0.18 -.26 -3.21 0.00 Index of ad avoidance -0.25 -.26 -3.55 0.00 (R=0.70, R2=0.49, df=(3,120), F=37.79, p-value=0.00)

PAGE 45

45 Figure 4-1. Interaction effects of adver tising type and perceived intrusiveness

PAGE 46

46 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The current study was intended to give insight to marketers and advertisers regarding the effects of advertising placement and advertising type in podcasts on perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, an d ad avoidance. Existing research shows that advertising is perceived as intrusive and irri tating, and ad avoidan ce often goes hand in hand with this. This study found that ad avoidance behavior is displayed for advertising on podcasts no matter were it is placed or what format it is in In addition, attitude towards the ad is not dependant on advertising type or advertising placement. However, perceived intrusiveness and perceived irritation from adver tising can be moderated. By placing the advertising at the beginning versus placing it in the middle, less perceived Intrusiveness and less perceived Irritation was measured. In addition, advertisi ng type can moderate perceived intrusiveness experienced by podcast users. It was found that participants perceived less intrusiveness from sponsorship than from traditional advertising on podcasts. As far as perceived intrusiveness and its connection to attitude towards the ad and ad avoidance no direct connection was relevant. Howe ver, higher levels of perceived intrusiveness can create a negative impact on attitude towards the ad and memory of the ad (Ha, 1996). Even though no direct connection between perceived intrusiveness and ad avoidance was found relevant by the study, my study has some implicati on for this connection. As Edwards et al. (2002) found ad avoidance was driven by perceive d intrusiveness of the ad, which was found high for podcast advertising utilizing traditional ads placed at the beginning by this study.

PAGE 47

47 Implications The findings of the study supported Hypothesis 1-1 in that subjects perceived less intrusiveness from advertising placed at the beginning versus advertising placed in the middle of a podcast. It implies that the placement at the beginning were less likely to interrupt the podcasting program and thus less likely to interfere with the process of listening to the podcast. These findings are consistent with Pieters and BijimoltÂ’s (1997), who found more favorable effects for ads placed at the beginning, as they do not interrupt what consumers are doing. The theoretical implication of this is that consumers of podcasts do not like to be interrupted by advertising while listening to a podcast. As far as managerial implications, it is recommended that when advertising is placed on a podcast it be placed at the beginning, as to minimize perceived invasivene ss by the listener. The results of the study also supported Hypothesi s 1-2 in that participants perceived less irritation towards advertising that was placed at the beginning of the podcasting program versus advertising placed in the middle of the program. This result is thought to go hand in hand with the results of Hypothesis 1-2 as far as that placem ent at the beginning less likely to interrupt the podcast and thus interfere with the participantsÂ’ utilization of the podcast. The theoretical and managerial implications are inline with those of Hypothesis 1-1. Consumers perceive more irritation because the program is interrupted and accordingly it is recommended that on the managerial side advertising on podcasts be placed at the beginning. According to the results, Hypothesis 1-3 is not supported. The finding was not statistically significant, however the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. The attitude of subjects was a little more positive for advertising pl aced at the beginning versus the middle. It is thought that this is because of the small sample size and because subjects do not favor a particular placement of advertising on a podcast, in general.

PAGE 48

48 According to the results, Hypothesis 1-4 is not supported. The finding was not statistically significant, and the mean went in the opposite direction. Participants showed slightly more ad avoidance for advertising placed at the beginning of podcasts. It is thought that this is because it is easier for podcast users to skip advertising at the beginning versus in the middle. It is impractical to attempt to avoid advertising on podcasts in the middle as the controls to fast forward are not precise enough to not miss any of the podcasting program. The study also examined advertising type in the relation to perceived intrusiveness, perceived irritation, attitude towards the ad, and ad avoidance. The findings of the study supported Hypothesis 2-1 in that subjects percei ved less Intrusiveness from sponsorship versus traditional advertising on a podcast. The result was consistent with those of Meenaghan (2001) and Gardner (1987), who found that attitudes to wards sponsorship are more favorable than towards advertising. It is thought that sponsorsh ip in general is viewed as more positively and thus seen as less intrusive than traditional advertis ing. The theoretical implication of this is that consumers of podcasts do not feel as disrupted by a sponsorship message as by a traditional advertisement. Managerial implications of th is finding are that it is recommended to choose sponsorship over traditional advertisi ng deciding to advertise on a podcast. According to the results, Hypothesis 2-2 is not supported. Even though the finding was not statistically significant, the mean was in th e direction of the hypothe sis. Subjects perceived less irritation towards sponsorship than towards trad itional advertising. It is thought that this is because of the small sample size and because subjects in general feel irritated with the presence of Adverting on podcasts no matter the format. Hypothesis 2-3 is not supported. The finding was not statistically significant, however the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. The attitude of subjects was a little more positive

PAGE 49

49 for sponsorship versus advertising. It is thought that this is because of the small sample size for the experiment and because subjects do not clearly one type of advertising on podcasts over the other. The outcome of the experiment did not support Hypothesis 2-4. The finding was not statistically significant, however the mean was in the direction of the hypothesis. Subjects showed a little more ad avoidance towards traditiona l advertising than towards Sponsorship. It is thought that the results were not statistically significant because it is impractical for podcast users to attempt to avoid advertising on podcasts as the controls to fast forward are not exact enough to fast-forward without missing any of the podcasting program. In a world of increasing media fragmentati on podcasts are but one piece of the media planning puzzle marketers and advertisers are faced with. Podcasts are gaining popularity quickly as portable MP3 player adoption rises throughout the population and multimedia computers become commonplace in many households Podcasting offers a way for marketers and advertisers to reach young, captive, and highly involved consumers. This study demonstrates how to utilize podcasts as an advertising medium wh ile minimizing negative effects, such as intrusiveness, irritation and ad avoidance that are commonly associated with advertising. The practical implications of this study for mark eters and advertisers is that in order to minimize perceived intrusiveness, and perceived irr itation it is best to choose placement at the beginning over placement in the middle of the podcast. Moreover, in order to further minimize perceived intrusiveness it is best to choos e sponsorship as a vehicle over a traditional advertisement. In addition, advertisers and marketers can understand from this study that the

PAGE 50

50 likelihood that the brand will be r ecalled is very high, as particip ants were able to correctly identify the advertised brand 98% of the time. Limitations and Future Research There are several limitations to this st udy. The individual limitations are broken down and addressed in-depth with future research ideas below. Sample limitations The sample was completely made up of adve rtising students, which are only a small part of the population. The measure of ad avoidance is important, but it did not work in this study because the participants were advertising majors a nd will thus pay more attention to the ad than a typical consumer. Ad avoidance should be higher in a more diversified sample. Moreover, the sample size was very small for this experiment, which helps to explain the large standard deviation found throughout the experiment. A more diverse and larger sample is recommended for future research. It is thought that a larger sample size with larger experimental cells may show more significant results. A larger sample size would lead to larger experimental cells and thus lead to clearer opinions and perceptions of participants. This is an opportunity for future research to look at demographics of podcast listene rs in general. Gender and ethnicity should be looked at, as well as how the fit of the s ponsor might moderate the negative effects of advertising. Turning a pull into a push medium By nature podcasting is a pull medium. This means that consumers of podcasts actively choose which podcast they will and which one they will not listen to. Thus, the podcast listener is by nature very involved and interested in the su bject matter. For this study participants were not given any options on what to listen to, but rather only a single podcast was given to the

PAGE 51

51 participants. This in turn made the podcast a push medium rather than a pull medium. Thus, ad avoidance should have been high in this study, but was not due to the sample limitations. The attempt was made to minimize th is limitation by conducting a pretest to choose the podcast that students themselves would be most likely to dow nload. It is recommended that in future research give multiple podcasts from different interest areas as options to simulate more of a pull medium to participants. Assumption of download A further limitation was the assumption that participants would download the stimulus. Podcasts were developed to be listened to on portable audio player s. However, this study did not look at the fact if the participants downloaded the podcast onto a portable digital audio player or not. Future research should have the sample lis ten to the podcasts on digital audio players. A suggestion is to contact makers of portable digita l audio players directly and ask for a grant of their players. Female heavy sample The sample was contained 68% of females and only 32% of ma les. This goes against the profile of typical podcast downloader according to the Pew Internet & American Life Project, who is male (Madden, 2006). Including more males in a future sample is advisable, as they are more likely to actually download a podcast than a female. Context of listening The context of listening was not looked at fo r this study. However, this is a very important element, as podcasts can and are consumed virtually anywhere and anytime. In a car situation, they can replace radio, at home they can be watched in the living room and replace television, on an airplane they can replace in-flight entertainment, and on a bus or train commute

PAGE 52

52 they can be listened to on a portable MP3 player Different expectations for media context go along with each context. This is an opportunity for future research. It is recommended that future research look at the context in which consumers listen to the podcast. Podcast limitations The podcast used in this study was short (3 minutes) in comparison to many podcasts available today. National Public Radio (NPR), for example, provides a podcast version of their most popular shows that can run for up to an hour. The length of the podcast adds a whole new element that should be looked at in future research. Repetition of advertising is prominent on these longer podcasts. The responses to the recurrence of advertising should be looked at in future research, as they will undoubtedly influence brand recall, irritation, etc. Another limitation that should be considered is that an ar tificial element was added to the study, as the podcast chosen for the study was highly involving to the participants, as the topic was interesting and important and they received extra credit for listening to it. Content of the podcast is also something that should be looked at in future res earch. What the consumer uses the podcast for, either for information or entertainment purposes should be addressed, as each should show different levels of irritation and intrus iveness once the context is discovered. Audio vs. video podcast A third Independent variable of audio ve rsus video podcast was planned during the developmental stages of this study. However, due to time constraints it wa s ultimately left out of the final study. Audio podcasting is by far the most evolved and popular format of podcasting found on the Internet. However, video podcasting has been growing in popularity, especially since the introduction of the video iPod in October 2005 and the Microsoft Zune in 2007.

PAGE 53

53 Moreover, the popular Onion Radio News is now also available as a Video version, which debuted at number one (for both audio or video podcasts) on the iTunes top podcasts list. Thus, future research should look at video a nd audio podcasts not just audio podcasts.

PAGE 54

54 APPENDIX A PRETEST ONE QUESTI ONNAIRES

PAGE 55

55 APPENDIX B PRETEST TWO QUESTI ONNAIRES Please answer the following questions keeping the respective brand in mind. Check the box that reflects your attitude/opinion. Please select only one option per question. 1.1 How familiar are you with Ford ? Very Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Somewhat Unfamiliar Neutral Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very Familiar 1.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Ford ? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 1.3 How likely would Ford be to sponsor Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 1.4 How relevant is Ford to Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 1.5 My attitude towards Ford is: a. Very Bad Bad Somewhat Bad Neutral Somewhat Good Good Very Good b. Very Unfavorable Unfavorable Somewhat Unfavorable Neutral Somewhat Favorable Favorable Very Favorable c. Very Negative Negative Somewhat Negative Neutral Somewhat Positive Positive Very Positive

PAGE 56

56 2.1 How familiar are you with MTV ? Very Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Somewhat Unfamiliar Neutral Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very Familiar 2.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider MTV ? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 2.3 How likely would MTV be to sponsor Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 2.4 How relevant is MTV to Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 2.5 My attitude towards MTV is: a. Very Bad Bad Somewhat Bad Neutral Somewhat Good Good Very Good b. Very Unfavorable Unfavorable Somewhat Unfavorable Neutral Somewhat Favorable Favorable Very Favorable c. Very Negative Negative Somewhat Negative Neutral Somewhat Positive Positive Very Positive

PAGE 57

57 3.1 How familiar are you with Puma ? Very Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Somewhat Unfamiliar Neutral Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very Familiar 3.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Puma ? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 3.3 How likely would Puma be to sponsor Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 3.4 How relevant is Puma to Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 3.5 My attitude towards Puma is: a. Very Bad Bad Somewhat Bad Neutral Somewhat Good Good Very Good b. Very Unfavorable Unfavorable Somewhat Unfavorable Neutral Somewhat Favorable Favorable Very Favorable c. Very Negative Negative Somewhat Negative Neutral Somewhat Positive Positive Very Positive

PAGE 58

58 4.1 How familiar are you with Red Bull ? Very Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Somewhat Unfamiliar Neutral Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very Familiar 4.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Red Bull ? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 4.3 How likely would Red Bull be to sponsor Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 4.4 How relevant is Red Bull to Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 4.5 My attitude towards Red Bull is: a. Very Bad Bad Somewhat Bad Neutral Somewhat Good Good Very Good b. Very Unfavorable Unfavorable Somewhat Unfavorable Neutral Somewhat Favorable Favorable Very Favorable c. Very Negative Negative Somewhat Negative Neutral Somewhat Positive Positive Very Positive

PAGE 59

59 5.1 How familiar are you with Sony ? Very Unfamiliar Unfamiliar Somewhat Unfamiliar Neutral Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very Familiar 5.2 As a consumer, how likely are you to consider Sony ? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 5.3 How likely would Sony be to sponsor Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 5.4 How relevant is Sony to the Dane CookÂ’s Tourgasm Podcast? Very Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neutral Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely 5.5 My attitude towards Sony is: Very Bad Bad Somewhat Bad Neutral Somewhat Good Good Very Good b. Very Unfavorable Unfavorable Somewhat Unfavorable Neutral Somewhat Favorable Favorable Very Favorable c. Very Negative Negative Somewhat Negative Neutral Somewhat Positive Positive Very Positive

PAGE 60

60 APPENDIX C PRETEST THREE QUESTI ONNAIRE Definition of Traditional Advertising : Advertising is paid communication through a non-personal medium in which the sponsor is identified and the message is controlled Definition of Sponsorship: To sponsor something is to support an event, activity, person, or organization financially or through the provision of products or services. Sponsorship is typically done for promotional purposes, to generate publicity, or to obtain access to a wider audience. The following questions are on a 1 to 10 scale with 1 being very weak and 10 being very strong. Check the box that reflects your attitude/opinion. Please select only one option per question. 1. (Sample 1) How much do you think that this is Traditional Advertising ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very weak very strong 2. (Sample 1) To what extent do you identify this as sponsorship? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very weak very strong 3. (Sample 2) How much do you think that this is Traditional Advertising ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very weak very strong 4. (Sample 2) To what extent do you identify this as sponsorship? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very weak very strong

PAGE 61

61 APPENDIX D TRANSCRIPT OF TRADITIONAL AD AND SPONSORSHIP Sample 1 (traditional ad): You thought Puma is just all about shoes? Check out puma.com and discover puma denim, jackets, tee-shirts, bags and of course shoes shop puma.com today Sample 2 (sponsorship): This podcast is brought to you by Puma. You thought puma is just all about shoes? Discover puma denim, jackets, tee-shirts, bags and of course shoes

PAGE 62

62 APPENDIX E MAIN STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE

PAGE 63

63

PAGE 64

64

PAGE 65

65

PAGE 66

66

PAGE 67

67

PAGE 68

68 APPENDIX F RESULTS OF OPEN-ENDED QUESTION 8.1 Are there any final thoughts you would like to share? Dane Cook is someone respected by many, and would be someone great to use in an Advertisment. Dane Cook is a funny little man! Thanks for picking something funny for me to listen to, and to GET extra credit for listening to! I hope that ad wasn't real because it sounded pretty fake! Podcast seems like a good way to advertise to me. I think Dane cook is funny and it was a good podcast. I didn't pay attention to the ad at all. Dane Cook is hilarious I think the ad was positive on the podcast. It got my attention, and I listened to the audio, however more than just the Puma brand image would have been better for visual stimulation. the add volume was too loud that is why i turned the sound off. it was some what annoying. only used podcast once for writng for mass communications class the ad was short so it wasnt really intrusive but other people might find it annoying to have ads on their ipod. The P.I.R sketch was really funny and a good choice for the survey, especially with regaurds to questions about distractions.Good Luck with your research Hope this helps out! the podcast was very difficult to download, if this was not for extra credit I would not have been so persistent in trying to download it, and probably would not have completed it.

PAGE 69

69 Thank you for the extra credit. This survey was actually interesting. I like Puma's but not their ads. I think in order for advertising to be successful with podcast the advertisment needs to be short but flashy. The advertisment that come on during the podcasts of Jericho are horrible .. that is usually why I use podcast. I was offended by the content of the podcast, while I voluntarily choose to particapte, I do feel that more of a waringing in the welcome page, which I guess is the informed consent page, is due. if there are going to be advertisements in podcasts then they should be only at the beginning and not during or after. Dane Cook isn't funny. The Ad was very unexpected and intrusive. The audio was definitely louder than the Podcast skit itself so it certainly grabbed my attention. I'll admit, I was annoyed when I saw the ad come up. I most certainly doubt the effectiveness of an ad in the middle of a podcast. I don't believe I would have been as annoyed if the ad was at the beginning or end of the podcast. The podcast was very funnyI love Dane Cooke! I had a hard time pulling the podcast up. It took several tries to get anything to play. I liked the immage of the Pumba logo, but the sound effects of it roaring were strange. I thought my speakers was broken or something. Interesting... I enjoyed the Dane Cook. Funny skit, but the ad was totally out of place and did not sound like a professional ad. The add was quick enough to listen to and get right to the podcast content. I enjoyed listening to the sketch about P.I.R.

PAGE 70

70 LIST OF REFERENCES Aaker, D., & Bruzzone, D. (1985). Caus es of irritation in advertising. Journal of Marketing 49, 47-57. Abernethy, A. (1991). Physical and mechani cal avoidance of television commercials: An exploratory study of zipping, zapping and leaving. Proceedings of 1991 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising Rebecca Holman, ed., New York: The American Academy of Advertising 223-231. Anderson, D. (2005). The Pod People. Adweek, 46, 1. Barnako, F. (2006, September 29). Podcaster of the year wants name change. Retrieved March 13, 2007, from Market Watch Web site: http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Stor y.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&gui d=%7B769920DF-0151-41CA-9E7A-E310970E3922%7D&keyword= Bauer, R., & Greyser, S. (1968). Advertising in America: The Consumer view Boston, MA: Harvard University. Berta, D. (2006). IHOP units test iPod as a language teaching tool. Nation’s Restaurant News 40 12. Card, D. (2006). US Portable Music Device Forecast, 2006 to 2011. Retrieved January 7, 2007. from Jupiterresearch web site: http://www.jupiterresearch.com/bin/item.pl/research:concept/105/id=98101/ Clawson, T. (2006). Listening in. New Media Age 25-26. Dahln, M. (2005). The medium as a contextual cue. Journal of Advertising 34 89-98. Dertouzos, J. and Garber, S. (2006). Effectiv eness of advertising in different media. Journal of Advertising, 35, 111-122. Edwards, S., Li, H., Lee, J. (2002). Forced exposure and psychological reactance: Antecedents and consequences of the percei ved intrusiveness of pop-up ads. Journal of Advertising 31 83-95. Follis, J. (2006). Podcasting grows up. Adweek 47 17. Fuchs, D. (1964). Two source effects in magazine advertising. Journal of Marketing Research 1 59–62. Gardner, M., & Shuman, P. (1987). Sponsorship: An important component of the promotions mix. Journal of Advertising 16, 11-17.

PAGE 71

71 Gardner, M., & Shuman, P. (2001). Sponsorship and small business. Journal of Small Business Management, 26 44-52. Ha, L. (1996). Observations: Advertisi ng clutter in consumer magazines. Journal of Advertising Research, 36, 76-84. Hoch, S. (2002, December). Product experience is seductive. Journal of Consumer Research, 29 448–454. Holbrook, M., & O’Shaughnessy, J. (1987). The role of emotion in advertising. Psychological Marketing 1 45-64. Honan, M. (2005). Podcast is 2005 word of the year. Retrieved October 18, 2006, from Macworld: News : Podcast is 2005 Word of the Year Web site: http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/12/06/podcastword/index.php. Hoyer, W., & MacInnis, D. (2004). Consumer Behavior Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Jacoby, J. et al. (1983). To read, view, or listen? A cross-media comparison of comprehension. Current Issues & Research in Advertising 6 201-218. Johnson, B. (2006). Wanted: marketers with online savvy. Travel Trade Gazette UK & Ireland 2709 15. Li, H., Edwards, S., Lee, J. (2001). Measuring the intrusiveness of internet advertising: Scale development and validation. Proceedings of the 2001 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising Charles R. Taylor, ed., Villanova, PA: American Academy of Advertising, 25-26. Kilby, N. (2006). Grabbing a slice of the download cake. Marketing Week 29 32. Krugman, H. (1983). Television program interest and commercial interruption. Journal of Advertising Research, 21 21-23. Larkin, E. (1979). Consumer perceptions of the media and their advantages. Journal of Advertising 8, 5-7. Lewis, E. (2005). To blog or not to blog. Brand Strategy, 192 24-27 Nardone, J., & See, E. (2007). Measure sponsorship to drive sales. Advertising Age, 78 20-21. Madden, M. (2006). Pew internet project da ta memo. Retrieved January 10, 2007, from Pew Internet & American Life Project Web site: http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Podcasting.pdf

PAGE 72

72 McBride, S. (2005). Device tallies podcast audiences. Wall Street Journal p. B4. Meenaghan, T. (2001). Sponsorship and advertis ing : A comparison of consumer perceptions. Psychology & Marketing, 18, 191-215. Moorman, M. et al. (2005). The effects of program responses on the processing of commercials placed at various positions in the program and the block. Journal of Advertising Research, 45 49-59. Muehling, D., & Laczniak, R. (1988). Advertis ingÂ’s immediate and delaye d influence on brand attitude: Considerations acro ss message-involvement levels. Journal of Advertising 17, 2334. Park, C., & McClung, G. (1986). The effect of TV program involvement on involvement with commercials. Advances in Consumer Research, 13 544-548. Pieters, R., & Bijmolt, T. (1997). Consumer memory for television advertising : a field study of duration, serial position, and competition effects. Journal of Consumer research, 12, 362372. Potter, D. (2006). iPod, You Pod, We All Pod. American Journalism Review, 28, 64. Speck, E., & Elliott, M. (1997). Predictors of adve rtising avoidance in print and broadcast media. Journal of Advertising 26, 61-76. Watt, J. et al. (1998). The effect of program involvement and commercial position on reactance to embedded commercials. Advances in Consumer Research 25 492-498. Wells, W., Leavitt, C., McConville, M. (1971). A reaction profile for TV commercials. Journal of Advertising Research, 11, 11-17. Yoo, C., & McInnis, D. (2005). The brand attitude formation process of emotional and informational ads. Journal of Business Research, 58 1397-1406. Zeff, R., Aronson, B. (1999). Advertising on the Internet New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

PAGE 73

73 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Eric Ritter was educated in Germany until he earned his German Certificate of Maturity. Afterwards, he attended the University of Maryland University CollegeÂ’s campus in Germany from where he received his associate of arts degree. Following this, he moved to Florida where he earned his Bachelor of Science in Communicat ion from the Florida Institute of Technology. After receiving his Master of Advertising degree from the University of Florida in May 2007, he plans on professionally working in the advertising field.