SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yildiz Social Science Review / 2016 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 2

Impact of Involvement and Cognitive Load on Affective Responses to Advergames and In-Game Advertising

Ayşegül SAĞKAYA GÜNGÖR
Tuğçe OZANSOY ÇADIRCI
Pages
91–106
Publication Date
2016-11-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As the last section, future research that will help to test these hypotheses are provided.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:It has been long known that there are different ways of communicating promotional messages with branded entertainments.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Deriving the positive effects of both from the literature, different variables that may reduce or increase the ecacy of them are studied.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As the last section, future research that will help to test these hypotheses are provided.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Advergames · Advergaming · In-Game Advertising

Özet

It has been long known that there are different ways of communicating promotional messages with branded entertainments. Among all, the two of them are notable; communicating the message through advergames and integrating the message/brand in the game; known as in game advertising (IGA). Deriving the positive effects of both from the literature, different variables that may reduce or increase the ecacy of them are studied. This study is an attempt to understand the effect of different variables on affective responses to advergames. In the paper, it is suggested from the literature that cognitive overload affects affective responses (i.e. attitudes toward the branded entertainment and the main brand that the game is specifically designed for) of game players. The authors aim to develop hypotheses trying to explain the effect of cognitive overload stimuli on the attitudes of the gamers. In the paper authors also suggested hypotheses about how involvement may affect cognitive overload outcomes. All those hypotheses are developed both for the advergames and IGA. As the last section, future research that will help to test these hypotheses are provided.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜNGÖR, A. S., ÇADIRCI, T. O. (2016). Impact of Involvement and Cognitive Load on Affective Responses to Advergames and In-Game Advertising. Yildiz Social Science Review, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 2, 91–106. https://ajindex.com/articles/823042

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. An, S., & Stern, S. (2011). "Mitigating the eects of advergames on children", Journal of Advertising, Vol.40, No.1, pp.43-56.
  2. An, S. & Kang, H. (2014). "Advertising or Games?", International Journal of Advertising, Vol.33, No.3, pp.509-532.
  3. Bailey, R., Wise, K., & Bolls, P. (2009). "How avatar customizability aects children's arousal and subjective presence during junk food?sponsored online video games", CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol.12, No.3, pp.277-283.
  4. Beilock, S. L., & Ramirez, G. (2011). "On the Interplay of Emotion and Cognitive Control: Implications for Enhancing Academic Achievement", Psychology of learning and motivation-advances in research and theory, Vol.55, p.137. Bellman, S., Kemp, A., Haddad, H., & Varan, D. (2014). "The eectiveness of advergames compared to television commercials and interactive commercials featuring advergames", Computers in Human Behavior, Vol.32, pp.276-283.
  5. Besharat, A., Kumar, A., Lax, J. R., & Rydzik, E. J. (2013). "Leveraging virtual attribute experience in video games to improve brand recall and learning", Journal of Advertising, Vol.42, No.2-3, pp.170-182.
  6. Brennan, I., Dubas, K. M., & Babin, L. A. (1999). "The in uence of product-placement type & exposure time on product-placement recognition", International Journal of Advertising, Vol.18, No.3, pp.323-337.
  7. Brennan, I., & Babin, L. A. (2004). "Brand placement recognition: The in uence of presentation mode and brand familiarity", Journal of Promotion Management, Vol.10, No.1-2, pp.185-202.
  8. Brunken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). "Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning", Educational Psychologist, Vol.38, No.1, pp.53-61.
  9. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1984). "The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion", Advances in consumer research, Vol.11, No.1, pp.673-675.
  10. Calin, G. (2010). "Advergames: Characteristics, Limitations and Potential", Annals of the University of Oradea, Economic Science Series, Vol.19, No.1. Cauberghe, V., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2010). "Advergames", Journal of Advertising, Vol.39, No.1, pp.5-18.
  11. Chaiken, S. (1980). "Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.39, No.5, p.752. Chang, Y., Yan, J., Zhang, J., & Luo, J. (2010). "Online in-game advertising eect: Examining the in uence of a match between games and advertising", Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol.11, No.1, pp.63-73.
  12. Chaudhuri, A., & Bu