MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409178246 · doi:10.1080/00218499.2025.2464281

The Effectiveness of Background Blurriness in Video Advertisements: How Video Background Blurriness and Construal Level Shape Consumer Perception

2025· article· en· W4409178246 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advertising Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionPsychologyConstrual level theoryAdvertisingSocial psychologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on perspectives from spatial distance perceptions and construal-level theory, we investigate how the use of blurry versus clear backgrounds affects the effectiveness of video advertisements. We demonstrate that the use of blurry (clear) backgrounds is more effective when paired with concrete (abstract) messages, thereby increasing purchase likelihood. The underlying mechanism behind this effect is that the alignment between background types and message types enhances information processing fluency. As the importance of presenting a favorable visual impression is increasingly emphasized, we offer novel insight into how practitioners and consumers can utilize background blurriness in their video advertisements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it