The Role of Perceived Surveillance and Privacy Cynicism in Effects of Multiple Synced Advertising Exposures on Brand Attitude
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Technological advancements have made it possible to personalize advertising messages across media in real time based on consumers' offline media behavior (i.e., synced advertising).This is thought to positively influence consumers' brand attitudes.However, consumers encountering multiple synced advertising exposures could decrease the strategy's effectiveness by increasing the perceptions of surveillance among consumers.Moreover, these effects may differ depending on privacy cynicism; consumers may decrease their privacy protection behaviors as a result of feeling hopeless and frustrated by the high demands and lack of control of their data being used for personalized advertising purposes.An online experiment (N = 527) showed the more that ads were synchronized, the higher the perceived surveillance, which led to less positive brand attitudes for participants with the lowest levels of privacy cynicism and positive brand attitudes only for participants with intermediate to high levels of privacy cynicism.The results advance theory on the direct effects, underlying mechanisms, and consumer-related factors that play a role in synced advertising effects.It shows that synced advertising could be a promising advertising strategy but that considerations around privacy and ethics are essential.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it