It Is All in the Name: A Study of Consumers' Responses to Personalized Communication

References

• Aaker, David A., and Donald E. Bruzzone (1985), “Causes of Irritation in Advertising,” Journal of Marketing, 49, 47–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aaker, Jennifer L., Anne M. Brumbaugh, and Sonya A. Grier (2000), “Nontarget Markets and Viewer Distinctiveness: The Impact of Target Marketing on Advertising Attitudes,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9, 127–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansari, Asim, and Carl F. Mela (2003), “E-Customization,” Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (2), 131–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baek, Tae H., and Mariko Morimoto (2011), “Stay Away from Me: Examining the Determinants of Consumer Avoidance of Personalized Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 41 (1), 59–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bang, Hyejin, and Bartosz W. Wojdynski (2016), “ Tracking users' visual attention and responses to personalized advertising based on task cognitive demand,” Computers in Human Behavior, 55 (B), 867–76.
   Google Scholar
• Batra, Rajeev, and Olli T. Ahtola (1991), “ Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes,“ Marketing Letters, 2 (2), 159–70.
   Google Scholar
• Bettman, James R., Mary Frances Luce, and John W. Payne (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (3), 187–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bombe, Sandra, and Heribert Gierl (2012), “When Self-Referencing Cues Are Harmful: The Effect of ‘For You’ Statements in Advertisements on Product Attitudes,” paper presented at International Conference on Research in Advertising (ICORIA), Stockholm Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Rupert (2000), “Social Identity Theory: Past Achievements, Current Problems and Future Challenges,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 745–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brumbaugh, Anne M. (2009), “Why Do I Identify with Thee? Let Me Count Three Ways: How Ad Context Influences Race-Based Character Identification,” Psychology and Marketing, 26, 970–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bull, Fiona C., Matthew W. Kreuter, and Darcell P. Scharff (1999), “Effects of Tailored, Personalized, and General Health Messages on Physical Activity,” Patient Education and Counseling, 36, 181–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnkrant, Robert E., and Rao H. Unnava (1989), “Self-Referencing: A Strategy for Increasing Processing of Message Content,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 628–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———, and ——— (1995), “Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 17–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, Barbara M. (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, John T., and Richard E. Petty (1981), “Social Psychological Procedures for Cognitive Response Assessment: The Thought Listing Technique,” in Cognitive Assessment, Thomas V. Merluzzi, Carol R. Glass, and Hyles Genest, eds., New York: Guilford, 309–42.
   Google Scholar
• ———, William von Hippel, and John M. Ernst (1997), “Mapping Cognitive Structures and Processes Through Verbal Content: The Thought-Listing Technique,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65 (6), 928–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, Margaret C. (1995), “When Attention-Getting Advertising Tactics Elicit Consumer Inferences of Manipulative Intent: The Importance of Balancing Benefits and Investments,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4, 225–54.
   Google Scholar
• Chellappa, Ramnath K., and Raymond G. Sin (2005), “Personalization versus Privacy: An Empirical Examination of the Online Consumer's Dilemma,” Information Technology and Management, 6, 181–202.
   Google Scholar
• Cherry, E. Colin (1953), “Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech with One and with Two Ears,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25, 975–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debevec, Kathleen, and Easwar Iyer (1988), “Self-Referencing as a Mediator of the Effectiveness of Sex-Role Portrayals in Advertising,” Psychology and Marketing, 5, 71–84.
   Google Scholar
• ———, and Jean B. Romeo (1992), “Self-Referent Processing in Perceptions of Verbal and Visual Commercial Information,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1, 83–102.
   Google Scholar
• De Keyzer, Freya, Nathalie Dens, and Patrick De Pelsmacker (2015), “Is This for Me? How Consumers Respond to Personalized Advertising on Social Network Sites,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 15 (2), 124–34.
   Google Scholar
• Dijkstra, Arie (2005), “Working Mechanism of Computer-Tailored Health Education: Evidence from Smoking Cessation,” Health Education Research, 20, 527–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ——— (2008), “The Psychology of Tailoring-Ingredients in Computer-Tailored Persuasion,” Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2 (2), 765–84.
   Google Scholar
• ———, and Karien Ballast (2012), “Personalization and Perceived Personal Relevance in Computer-Tailored Persuasion in Smoking Cessation,” British Journal of Health Psychology, 17, 60–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———, and Hein De Vries (1999), “The Development of Computer-Generated Tailored Interventions in Smoking Cessation,” Patient Education and Counselling, 36, 99–105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friestad, Marian, and Peter Wright (1994), “The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (1), 1–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins, Robert P., Matthew Kreuter, Kenneth Resnicow, Martin Fishbein, and Arie Dijkstra, A. (2008), “Understanding Tailoring in Communicating about Health,” Health Education Research, 23, 454–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooper, Daire, Joseph Coughlan, and Michael Mullen (2008), “Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit,” Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6 (1), 53–60.
   Google Scholar
• Howard, Daniel J., and Roger A. Kerin (2004), “The Effects of Personalized Product Recommendations on Advertisement Response Rates: The ‘Try This. It works!’ Technique,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 271–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———, and ——— (2011), “The Effects of Name Similarity on Message Processing and Persuasion,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 63–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jupiter Research (2007), http://www.emailstatcenter.com/Personalization.html.
   Google Scholar
• Kalyanaraman, Sriram, and Shyam S. Sundar (2006), “The Psychological Appeal of Personalized Content in Web Portals: Does Customization Affect Attitudes and Behavior?,” Journal of Communication, 56, 10–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer, Thomas, Suri Spolter-Weisfeld, and Maneesh Thakkar (2007), “The Effect of Cultural Orientation on Consumer Responses to Personalization,” Marketing Science, 26 (2), 246–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreuter, Matthew W., Victor J. Strecher, and Bernard Glassman (1999), “One Size Does Not Fit All: The Case for Tailoring Print Materials,” Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21, 276–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Doohwang, and Robert LaRose (2011), “The Impact of Personalized Social Cues of Immediacy on Consumers' Information Disclosure: A Social Cognitive Approach,” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 337–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mack, Arien, and Irvin Rock (1998), “Inattentional Blindness: Perception Without Attention,” in Visual Attention, Richard D. Wright, ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 55–76.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, Brett A.S., Christina Kwai-Choi Lee, and Feng Yang (2004), “The Influence of Ad Model Ethnicity and Self-Referencing upon Attitudes: Evidence from New Zealand,” Journal of Advertising, 33, 27–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maslowska, Ewa, Bas van den Putte, and Edith G. Smit (2011), “The Effectiveness of Personalized E-Mail Newsletters and the Role of Personal Characteristics,” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14 (12), 765–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGuire, William J. (2013), “McGuire's Classic Input–Output Framework for Constructing Persuasive Messages,” in Public Communication Campaigns, Ronald E. Rice and Charles K. Atkin, eds., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 133–45.
   Google Scholar
• Megehee, Carol M. (2009), “Advertising time expansion, compression, and cognitive processing influences on consumer acceptance of message and brand,” Journal of Business Research, 62 (4), 420–31.
   Google Scholar
• Mittal, Banwari (1989), “A Theoretical Analysis of Two Recent Measures of Involvement,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 16, K. Srull, ed., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 697–702.
   Google Scholar
• Montgomery, Alan, and Michael D. Smith (2009), “Prospects for Personalization on the Internet,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23 (2), 130–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuttin, Jozef M. (1985), “Narcissism Beyond Gestalt and Awareness: The Name–Letter Effect,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 15 (3), 353–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters, Guido, and Janusz Czapinski (1990), “Positive–Negative Asymmetry in Evaluations: The Distinction Between Affective and informational Negativity Effects,” European Review of Social Psychology, 1 (1), 33–60.
   Google Scholar
• Petty, Richard E., Pablo Briñol, and Joseph R. Priester (2009), “Mass Media Attitude Change: Implications of the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” in Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, Jennings Bryant and Mary Beth Oliver, eds., New York: Routledge, 125–64.
   Google Scholar
• ———, Thomas M. Ostrom, and Timothy C. Brock (1981), “Historical Foundations of the Cognitive Response Approach to Attitudes and Persuasion,” in Cognitive Responses in Persuasion, Richard E. Petty, Thomas M. Ostrom, and Timothy C. Brock, eds., New York: Erlbaum, 5–29.
   Google Scholar
• ———, S. Christian Wheeler, and George Y. Bizer (1999), “Is the Persuasion Process or More? Lumping versus Splitting in Attitude Change Theories,” Psychological Inquiry, 10 (2), 156–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postma, Oeds J., and Marlon Brokke (2001), “Personalisation in Practice: The Proven Effects of Personalization,” Journal of Database Marketing, 9,137–42.
   Google Scholar
• Reed, Americus, II (2004), “Activating the Self-Importance of Consumer Selves: Exploring Identity Salience Effects on Judgments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 286–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonson, Itamar (2005), “Determinants of Consumers' Responses to Customized Offers: Conceptual Framework and Research Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 69 (1), 32–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunikka, Anne, and Johanna Bragge (2009), “Promotional Messages in Multichannel Banking: Attractive or Annoying?,” Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 14, 245–63.
   Google Scholar
• Tsang, Melody M., Shu-Chun Ho, and Ting-Peng Liang (2004), “Consumers' Attitudes Toward Mobile Advertising: An Empirical Study,” International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8, 65–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vesanen, Jari (2007), “What Is Personalization? A Conceptual Framework,” European Journal of Marketing, 41, 5/6, 409–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ———, and Mika Raulas (2006), “Building Bridges for Personalization: A Process Model for Marketing,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 20, 5–20.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, Monica S., Vani N. Simmons, and Thomas H. Brandon (2005), “Tailored Interventions for Motivating Smoking Cessation: Using Placebo Tailoring to Examine the Influence of Expectancies and Personalization,” Health Psychology, 24 (2), 179–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, Tiffany B., Debra L. Zahay, Helge Thorbjørnsen, and Sharon Shavitt (2008), “Getting Too Personal: Reactance to Highly Personalized Email Solicitations,” Marketing Letters, 19, 39–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, Jay (Hyunjae), and Brenda Cude (2009), “Hello, Mrs. Sarah Jones! We Recommend This Product!' Consumers' Perceptions About Personalized Advertising: Comparison across Advertisements Delivered via Three Different Types of Media,” International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 503–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar