Processes and effects of targeted online advertising among children

Figures & data

Figure 1. Hypothesized path models of the mediated effects of profile targeting via (1) ad liking, (2) perceived relevance, and (3) targeting recognition.

Table 1. Ratings of dependent variables and mediators and their comparisons using MANCOVA.

		Product
	Color	Non-targeted	Targeted	Total
Brand attitude^.1	Non-targeted	5.72 (0.31)	6.70 (0.24)	6.21 (0.20)
	Targeted	6.22 (0.26)	6.85 (0.21)	6.53 (0.17)
	Total	5.97** (0.20)	6.77** (0.16)
Purchase intent^.2	Non-targeted	1.73 (0.12)	2.06 (0.09)	1.89 (0.08)
	Targeted	1.86 (0.10)	2.07 (0.08)	1.97 (0.06)
	Total	1.80** (0.08)	2.06** (0.06)
Ad liking^.2	Non-targeted	2.34 (0.11)	2.52 (0.09)	2.43 (0.07)
	Targeted	2.41 (0.09)	2.58 (0.08)	2.50 (0.06)
	Total	2.37* (0.07)	2.54* (0.06)
Perceived relevance^.2	Non-targeted	2.00 (0.11)	2.15 (0.09)	2.07 (0.07)
	Targeted	1.97 (0.09)	2.11 (0.08)	2.04 (0.06)
	Total	1.98 (0.07)	2.13 (0.06)
Targeting Recognition^.2	Non-targeted	1.97 (0.14)	1.71 (0.11)	1.84 (0.09)
	Targeted	1.66 (0.11)	1.85 (0.09)	1.76 (0.07)
	Total	1.82 (0.09)	1.78 (0.07)

Note: Data are expressed as estimated marginal mean (standard deviation).

¹Scale from 1 to 10.

²Scale from 1 to 4.

**p < 0.05 within the row.

*p < 0.10 within the row.

Figure 2. Observed path model of the hypothesized mediated effect of profile targeting on purchase intention via ad liking and brand attitude. Unstandardized coefficients (B) are portrayed. *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001, ^at = 1.86; ^bt = 11.78; ^ct = 7.10; ^dt = 2.32; ^et = 0.79; ^ft = 7.32.