Online Marketing Communications

REFERENCES

• Ahren R. Kirkland, Jennifer Stromer-Galley, and W. Russell Neuman (2000), “Interactivity and Structured Issue Comparisons on the Political Web: An Experimental Study of the 2000 New Hampshire Presidential Primary,” paper presented at the International Communication Association, (June 1-5), Acapulco, MX.
   Google Scholar
• Alvesson, Mats and Yvonne Billing (1997), Understanding Gender and Organizations, London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Arnott, D. and S. Bridgewater (2002), “Internet, Interaction and Implications for Marketing,” Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 20 (2), 86-95.
   Google Scholar
• Baran, Stanley J. and Dennis K. Davis (2003), Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment and Future, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Booth-Butterfield, Melanie and Steve Booth-Butterfield (1990), “Conceptualizing Affect as Information in Communication Production,” Human Communication Research, 16 (4), 451-476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunel, Frederic F. and Michelle R. Nelson (2003), “Message Order Effects and Gender Differences in Advertising Persuasion,” Journal of Advertising Research, 43 (5), 330-341.
   Google Scholar
• Bruner, Gordon C., II and Anand Kumar (2000), “Web Commercials and Advertising Hierarchy-of-Effects,” Journal of Advertising Research, 40 (1/2), 35-42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, John T., Richard E. Petty, and Chuan Feng Kao (1984), “The Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition,” Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, John (1989), “Interactive Media,” in International Encyclopedia of Communications, E. Barnouw, ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 328-330.
   Google Scholar
• CBC News (2007), “Females Outnumber Males Online in U.S., Study Finds,” http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/04/13/tech-women-online.html.
   Google Scholar
• Cho, Chang-Hoan and John D. Leckenby (1999), “Interactivity as a Measure of Advertising Effectiveness,” in Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising, Marilyn S. Roberts, ed., Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, 162-179.
   Google Scholar
• Coyle, James R. and Esther Thorson (2001), “The Effects of Progressive Levels of Interactivity and Vividness in Web Marketing Sites,” Journal of Advertising, 30 (3), 65-77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlen, Michael, Alexandra Rasch, and Sara Rosengren (2003), “Love at First Site? A Study of Web Site Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Advertising Research, 43 (1), 25-33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dittmar, Helga, Karen Long, and Rosie Meek (2004), “Buying on the Internet: Gender Differences in On-line and Conventional Buying Motivations,” Sex Roles, 50 (5-6), 423-445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doren, D.C., D.L. Van Fechner, and K. Green-Adelsberger (2000), “Promotional Strategies on the World Wide Web,“ Journal of Marketing Communications, 6 (1), 21-36.
   Google Scholar
• Forrester Research (2005), “Forrester Research Releases US Online Advertising and Marketing Forecast,” http://web.lexis-nexis.com.proxy.lib.utk.edu: 90/itw/infomark/843/129/64586443w1.
   Google Scholar
• Ha, Louisa and Lincoln James (1998), “Interactivity Reexamined: A Baseline Analysis of Early Business Web Sites,” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42 (4), 457-474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haeckel, Stephan H. (1998), “About the Nature and Future of Interactive Marketing,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 12 (1), 63-71.
   Google Scholar
• Haugtvedt, Curtis, Richard Petty, and John T. Cacioppo (1992), “Need for Cognition and Advertising: Understanding the Role of Personality Variables in Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Consumer Psychology, (3), 239-260.
   Google Scholar
• Heeter, Carrie (2000), “Interactivity in the Context of Designed Experiences,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (1), http://www.jiad.org.
   Google Scholar
• Hirschmann, Elizabeth C. and Craig J. Thompson (1997), “Why Media Matter: Toward a Rich Understanding of Consumers’ Relationships with Advertising and Mass Media,” Journal of Advertising, 26 (1), 43-60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, Donna and Thomas P. Novak (1996), “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations,” Journal of Marketing, 60, 50-68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huey, Bill (1999), “Advertising’s Double Helix: A Proposed New Model,” Journal of Advertising Research, (May/June), 43-51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Interactive Advertising Bureau [IAB] (2009), “Internet Advertising Revenues Surpass $23 Billion in ‘08, Reaching Record High,” http://www.iab.net/about_the_iab/recent_press_releases/press_release_archive/press_release/pr-033009.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, Linda A., Kelly S. Ervin, Philip D. Gardner, and Neal Schmitt (2001), “Gender and the Internet: Women Communicating and Men Searching,” Sex Roles, 44, 363-379.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jee, Joonhyung and Wei-Na Lee (2002), “Antecedents and Consequences of Perceived Interactivity: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 3 (Fall), http://www.jiad.org/vol3/no1/jee/index.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, Jens F. (1998), “Interactivity: Tracing a New Concept in Media and Communication Studies,” Nordicom Review, 19 (1), 185-204.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, Elihu, Michael Gurevitch, and Hadassah Hass (1973), “On the Use of Mass Media for Important Things,” American Sociological Review, 38, 164-181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korgaonkar, Pradeep K. and Lori D. Wolin (1999), “A Multivariate Analysis of Web Usage,” Journal of Advertising Research, (March/April), 53-68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavidge, Robert and Gary Steiner (1961), “A Model for Predictive Measurements of Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Marketing, (October), 59-62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Hairong and John D. Leckenby (2007), “Internet Advertising Formats and Effectiveness,” in Internet Advertising: Theory and Research, 2d. ed., David Schumann and Esther Thorson, eds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 202-221.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Qing (2006), “Computer-Mediated Communication: A Meta-Analysis of Male and Female Attitudes and Behaviors,” International Journal on E-Learning, 5 (4), 525-570.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, Yping and L.J. Shrum (2002), “What Is Interactivity and Is It Always Such a Good Thing? Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Advertising, 31 (4), 53-64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, Yping and L.J. Shrum (2009), “A Dual-Process Model of Interactivity Effects,” Journal of Advertising, 37 (5), 53-69.
   Google Scholar
• Lombard, Matthew and Jennifer Snyder-Dutch (2001), “Interactive Advertising and Presence: A Framework,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (2) Available at http://jiad.org.
   Google Scholar
• Macias, Wendy (2000), “The Effect of Interactivity on Comprehension and Persuasion of Interactive Advertising,” doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
   Google Scholar
• Macias, Wendy (2003), “A Beginning Look at the Effects of Interactivity, Product Involvement and Web Experience on Comprehension: Brand Web Sites as Interactive Advertising,” Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 25 (2), 31-44.
   Google Scholar
• McMillan, Sally J. (2000), “The Microscope and the Moving Target: The Challenge of Applying Content Analysis to the World Wide Web,” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (1), 80-98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMillan, Sally J. (2002), “A Four-Part Model of Cyber-Interactivity: Some Cyber-Places Are More Interactive than Others,” New Media and Society, 4(2), 271-291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMillan, Sally J. (2004), “Internet Advertising: One Face or Many?” in Internet Advertising: Theory and Research, 2d ed., David Schumann and Ester Thorson, eds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 15-36.
   Google Scholar
• McMillan, Sally J. (2005), “Interacting through Communication Technologies: When No One Really Cares What Time It Is and There Is No There Anywhere.” Working paper, University of Tennessee.
   Google Scholar
• McMillan, Sally J. and Jang-Sun Hwang (2002), “Measures of Perceived Interactivity: An Exploration of the Role of Direction of Communication, User Control, and Time in Shaping Perceptions of Interactivity,” Journal of Advertising, 11 (3), 29-42.
   Google Scholar
• McMillan, Sally J., Jang-Sun Hwang, and Guiohk Lee (2003), “Effects of Structural and Perceptual Factors on Attitudes toward the Website,” Journal of Advertising Research, 43, 400-409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, Joan (1994), “Gender Differences in Cortical Organization: Social and Biochemical Antecedents and Advertising Consequences,” in Attention, Attitude, and Affect in Response to Advertising, E. Clarke, T. Brock, and D. Stewart, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 107-22.
   Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, Joan and Durairaj Maheswaran (1991), “Exploring Differences in Males’ and Females’ Processing Strategies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (1), 63-70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, Joan and Brian Sternthal (1991), “Gender Differences in the Use of Message Cues and Judgments,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (February), 84-96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murrow, David (2005, April), “New eMarketer Study Sees Women Exerting a Larger Influence Online,” Market Wire. Retrieved from Lexis-Nexis.
   Google Scholar
• Newhagen, John E., John W. Cordes, and Mark R. Levy (1996), “[email protected]: Audience Scope and the Perception of Interactivity in Viewer Mail on the Internet,” Journal of Communication, 45 (3), 164-175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novak, Thomas P., Donna L. Hoffman, and Yiu-Fai Yung (2000), “Measuring the Customer Experience in Online Environments: A Structural Modeling Approach,” Marketing Science, 19 (1), 22-42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palanisamy, Ramaraj (2005), “Impact of Gender Differences on Online Consumer Characteristics on Web-Based Banner Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Services Research, 4 (2), 45-74.
   Google Scholar
• Pavlik, John V. (1998), New Media Technology: Cultural and Commercial Perspectives, 2d ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Internet and American Life Project (2005), “Trends 2005: The Mainstreaming of Online Life,” http://www.Pewinternet.org.
   Google Scholar
• Phillip, Marissa V. and Rajneesh Suri (2004), “Impact of Gender Differences on the Evaluation of Promotional e-Mails,” Journal of Advertising Research, 44 (4), 360-369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pryzgoda, Jayde, and Joan C. Chrisler (2000), “Definitions of Gender and Sex: The Subtleties and Meaning,” Sex Roles, (October), 553-568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rafaeli, Sheizaf (1988), “Interactivity: From New Media to Communication,” in Advancing Communication Science: Merging Mass and Interpersonal Processes, Robert Hawkins, J. Wiemann, and Suzanne Pingree, eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 110-134.
   Google Scholar
• Raman, Niranjan, Chattopadhyay Prithviraj, and Wayne D. Hoyer (1995), “Do Consumers Seek Emotional Situations: The Need for Emotion Scale,” Advances in Consumer Research, 22, 537-542.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson, T. (1971), Innovative Behavior and Communication. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Rodgers, Shelly and Ester Thorson (2000), “The Interactive Advertising Model: How Users Perceive and Process Online Ads,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (1), http://www.jiad.org/vol1/no1/rodgers/.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, Shelly, and Mary Ann Harris (2003), “Gender and e-Commerce: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of Advertising Research, 43 (3), 322-330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumann, David W., Andy Artis, and Rachael Rivera (2001), “The Future of Interactive Advertising Viewed through an IMC Lens,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (2), http://www.jiad.org.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, Surendra N. and Nikunj P. Dalal (1999), “Web Home Pages as Advertisements,” Communications of the ACM, 42 (8), 91-98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steuer, Jonathan (1992), “Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence,” Journal of Communication, 42 (4), 73-93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserman, Ira M. and Marie Richmond-Abbott (2005), “Gender and the Internet: Causes of Variation in Access, Level and Scope of Use,” Social Science Quarterly, 86 (1), 252-270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiser, Eric B. (2000), “Gender Differences in Internet Use Patterns and Internet Application Preferences: A Two Sample Comparison,” CyberPsychology and Behavior, 3 (2), 167-178.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, Julia T. (1996), Gendered Relationships. London: Mayfield.
   Google Scholar
• Wolin., L.D (2003), “Gender Issues in Advertising-An Oversight Synthesis of Research: 1970-2002,” Journal of Advertising Research, 43, 111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Guohua (1999), “Perceived Interactivity and Attitude toward Web Sites,” in Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Marilyn S. Roberts, ed. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, Guohua (2000), “The Role of Perceived Interactivity in Interactive Ad Processing,” doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Yahoo Finance (2005), Company Reports, http://finance.yahoo.com/.
   Google Scholar