Exploring the Effectiveness of Web Ads Via Greenwald and Leavitt’s Involvement Model

  • Silvia Dessì
  • Claudia Melis
  • Ernestina Giudici
Conference paper


Taking the continuous growth of online advertising into account, the necessity to adequately measure the effectiveness of web ads emerges, by having an approach broader than the Click Through Rate (CTR). As scholars underline web ads can be unconsciously processed even when not clicked on, and it is therefore necessary to consider the involvement level of the users and the elaboration level of the messages even though users do not interact with the advertisement by clicking on it. This paper presents a preliminary effort to verify the effectiveness of web advertisements using the involvement model elaborated by Greenwald and Leavitt, basing it on the analysis of how users interact with ads and the way in which they process the information contained in them. To pursue this goal we conducted a survey using an online questionnaire sent via e-mail to the Economics students at the University of Cagliari.


Implicit Memory Explicit Memory Site Editorial Graphical Element Online Advertising 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Greenwald AG, Leavitt C (1984) Audience involvement in advertising: four levels. Journal of consumer research 11: 581–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alijani GS, Mancuso LC, Kwun O, Omar A (2010) Effectiveness of on-line Advertisement factors in recalling a product. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal 14(1): 1–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhat S, Bevans M, Sengupta S (2002) Measuring Users’ Web Activity to Evaluate and Enhance advertising Effectiveness. Journal of advertising XXXI (3): 97–106.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Janoschka A (2004) Web advertising, new forms of communication on the internet. John Benjamins, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chatterjee P (2008) Are Unclicked ads wasted? Enduring Effect of Banner and Pop-Up Ad Expososures on Brand Memory and Attitudes. Journal of electronic commerce Research 9(1):51–59.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cho CH (1999) How Advertising work on the www: Modified Elaboration Likelihood Model. Journal of current issue and research in advertising 21(1): 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Janiszewski C (1998) The Influence of Display Characteristics on Visual Exploratory Search Behaviour. Journal of consumer Research 25: 290–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dreze X, Hussherr F (2003) Internet advertising: is anybody watching. Journal of interactive marketing 17(4): 8–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chan Yun Yoo (2007) Implicit memory measures for web advertising effectiveness. Journalism and mass communication quarterly 84(1): 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Plummer, Rappaport, Hall, Barocci (2007) The on line advertising playbook, proven strategies and tested tactics from the advertising search foundation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Korgaonkar PK, Wolin LD (1999) A multivariate Analysis of Web Usage. Journal of Advertising Research, 39(2): 53–68.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Severin WJ, Tankard W (1997) Communication Theories: Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media. Longman, White Plains, New York.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ruggiero TE (2000) Uses and Gratification Theory in the 21th Century. Mass Communication and Society 3(1): 3–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Agarwal, Karahanna (2000) Time flies when you are having fun. Cognitive absorption and Beliefs about information technology usage. MIS quarterly 24(4): 665–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Csikszentmihaly M (1990) Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hoffman DL, Novak TP (1996) Marketing in Hypermedia Computer Mediate Environments: Conceptual Foundations. Journal of Marketing 60: 50–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yoon SJ (2002) An Experimental Approach to Understanding Banner Adverts’ Effectiveness Journal of Targeting, Measurement and analysis form Marketing 11: 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bezjian-Avery A, Calder B, Lacobucci D (1998). New media interactive advertising vs. traditional advertising. J. Advert. Res. 38(4): 23–32.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nielsen, Net Ratings Ad relevance, Most popular Ad size 2006,
  20. 20.
    Casadio L (2006) L’umorismo. Il lato comico della conoscenza. Franco Angeli, Milano.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brehm S, Brehm JW (1981) Psychological Reactance: A theory of Freedom and Control. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Finn A (1988) Print ad recognition Readership Scores: An Information Processing Perspective. Journal of Marketing Research XXV: 168–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoon SJ (2002) An Experimental Approach to Understanding Banner Adverts’ Effectiveness. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and analysis form Marketing 11: 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Menon S, Soman D (2002) Managing the power of curiosity for effective web advertising strategies. Journal of Advertising XXXI (3): 1–13.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvia Dessì
    • 1
  • Claudia Melis
    • 1
  • Ernestina Giudici
    • 2
  1. 1.University of CagliariCagliariItaly
  2. 2.Department of Business EconomicsUniversity of CagliariCagliariItaly

Personalised recommendations