![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
Advertising campaigns with user-generated content (UGC) vary in the extent to which they guide or allow user freedom when creating content. It is possible that providing preexisting content that users must change or edit might shape attitudes toward that content and its source in ways different from those campaigns that give freedom to create content as users see fit. In this study, users created a new advertisement, customized an advertisement, or read an existing advertisement. They then rated their perceptions on interactivity, autonomy, competence, attachment, reactance, source credibility, and product liking. Results indicate that customizers had higher reactance and lower product liking compared to creators, suggesting that a guiding template or other preexisting material can significantly change attitudes despite similar tasks. Advertisers should consider the benefits of campaigns that call for creation versus customization and strongly consider impressions from preexisting content on interactive customizable interfaces.
Note
Notes
1 Analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted on the four selected briefings on all dependent measures. There were significant differences between briefings on source credibility, F (3, 289) = 5.49, p = .001, and product liking, F (3, 289) = 5.71, p = .001. To determine the impact of different briefings on the content conditions, multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) were conducted to assess the interaction between company briefing and content condition. There were no significant interactions between briefing and condition on perceived interactivity, autonomy, competence, attachment, reactance, source credibility, or product liking (all ps > .241). As a result, for analyses on content condition, company briefing was not included as a covariate.