Usability testing and interviews 4 key factors that are important: - Recognizability - Credibility of the advertiser - Perceived control - Information utility Readers prefer native advertisements over paying for online news. Most readers also prefer native ads over banner ads and pre-roll video ads, due to perceived control (banner ads and video ads are more intrustive).

2. Exploring readers’ evaluations
of native advertisments in
a mobile news app
Simone Krouwer, Karolien Poels & Steve Paulussen
University of Antwerp
simone.krouwer@uantwerpen.be
@SimoneKrouwer

3.  Non-disruptive advertising
 Look and feel of news article
 More attention towards the ad &
more positive evaluations
(versus traditional online advertising)
But…
 Are readers aware that it’s an ad?
 Disclosures are mandatory!
NATIVE ADVERTISING
(Wojdynski and Evans 2015, Becker-Olsen 2003, Van
Reijmersdal et al. 2005’; Kim et al. 2001)

4. 4
Disclosure characteristics & recognition
(e.g. “sponsored by…” “partner content”)
 Persuasion Knowledge
 Ad Recognition
 Evaluations of advertisements
 Evaluations of advertiser
 Evaluations of news medium
 Mixed results  (Wojdynski and Evans 2015, Becker-Olsen 2003, Amazeen
and Muddiman 2017, Van Reijmersdal, Fransen et al.
2016, Krouwer Poels and Paulussen 2017)
PAST RESEARCH: MAINLY FOCUSED ON AD RECOGNITION:

5. IS IT JUST (THE LACK) OF AD RECOGNITION?
 Only a few experimental studies have tested
the influence of other factors…:
 Involvement with the topic (Krouwer & Poels, 2016)
 Information utility (Sweetser, 2016)
 Brand presence in text (Krouwer, Poels & Paulussen, 2017)
Which other factors play a role?
 Readers often do not recognize disclosures… (< 25%)
(E.g. Wojdysnki, 2015, 2016)
 Disclosure- and ad recognition do not always
lead to negative evaluations…
(E.g. Becker-Olsen, 2003; Carr and Hayes, 2014’; Krouwer, Poels & Paulussen, 2017)

6.  All studies on native ad recognition have
displayed static web pages…
 What about the disclosures before readers
click on a native ad?
▸ All previous studies have been conducted
on computers …
▸ 72% of the US news readers access news via
mobile devices!
(Reuters Digital News Report, 2016)
▸ Mobile environment might influence ad
recognition & evaluations:
 Smaller screen sizes
 Different user experience
 Different user motivations
(e.g. Ghose, Goldfarb, & Han, 2012; Grewal, et al., 2016)
STATIC PAGE  CLICKING ON AD
COMPUTER  MOBILE PHONE

7. READERS’ EVALUATIONS OF NEWS MEDIA?
 So far: only experimental measurements of credibility
(e.g. Amazeen and Muddiman, 2016)
 What are readers’ underlying thoughts about news
media with native ads?
 Does this influence the perceived autonomy of
journalists? (e.g. Deuze, 2005)
 To what extent do readers feel deceived?
(e.g. Einstein, 2016)

8. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
I. To what extent and how do readers recognize native
advertisements in a mobile news environment?
II. How do readers evaluate native ads in a mobile news
app and which factors influence these evaluations?
III. What are the consequences of native advertising for
readers’ evaluations of the news outlet?

9. STUDY
Methodolody:
 Usability testing (think aloud protocol)
 In-depth interviews (broad variety of topics)
24 users of a national mobile news app
 Mage = 40, 54% male, 70% daily user
 Invited via market research company
 Invited to “help improve the news app NU.nl”

10. 10© Duarte, Inc. 2014
USABILITY TEST
 15 minutes on average
 Smartphone with an offline version of the news app
 Screen-capturing software
 Think aloud protocol
 All participants were directed to the same elements
(news articles, native ad, news video and video ad, banner ad)

11. 11© Duarte, Inc. 2014
SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS
 We discussed different elements of the news app
 reduced priming & social desirability bias
 Native advertising:
- Understanding of authorship?
- Attention & avoidance?
- Evaluations of advertisements?
- Evaluations of advertisers & news website?
- Acceptance?
 Evaluations of different advertising formats
 45 minutes on average

12. 12© Duarte, Inc. 2014
RESULTS

13. HIGH MOBILE AD RECOGNITION (ON THE HOME PAGE!)
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp
 Do readers actively mention that they are looking at an ad?
Results usability test:
 The majority of the
readers identified the
article as advertising
 Mainly on the front
page, before clicking
on the ad
 The grey color &
logo of the disclosure
were most helpful

14. ”
Disclosure language (“sponsored by…”)
“I consider this more as news, as information. The article is ‘sponsored
by brand x’, but that doesn’t tell anything about the author of the
article, right?” (Male, age 47)
Positioning between the news
“I don’t think this is advertising because it is just part of the economic
news on the front page.”
(R14, female, age 49)
SOME CONFUSION...

15. 4 KEY FACTORS THAT INFLUENCED EVALUATIONS…
Native
Advertising
Simone Krouwer – University of Antwerp
Readers’
Evaluations
1. Utility
of the ad
2. Credibility of
the advertiser
3. Perceived control
4. Recognizability

16. ”
“Sometimes I see an interesting headline, and then I see that it’s
sponsored content. But oh well, if it’s interesting… It just depends on
whether it’s interesting.”
(female, age 24)
“I quickly recognise advertisements. However, sometimes you are
looking for certain information and if the advertisement provides me
that information, I am interested in reading it anyway.”
(male, age 34)
1. INFORMATION UTILITY
 Information Utility theory (Ducoffe, 1995)
 Media uses & gratifications

17. ”
“This advertisement is provided by a cooperation for home owners,
which is interesting to me. But as soon as it is a very commercial
organization that only wants to sell me a product, I will not read it”
(Male, age 34)
2. PRE-EXISTING ATTITUDES TOWARDS ADVERTISERS
 Source credibility (Pornpitakpan 2004)
 Credibility of the advertiser could possibly
outweigh perceived information utility(?)

18. ”
“I can choose whether I click on a native advertisement or not,
whereas banner advertisements are annoyingly present in the app. I
am also always scared that I will click on a banner. With native
advertisements you know that they may be sponsored, but you also
know that at least they contain information.”
(female, age 56)
3. PERCEIVED CONTROL
 Native advertising = less intrusive than banner &
pre-roll video advertisements
 In line with research on ad avoidance
(e.g. Cho & Cheon, 2004)

19. ”
“The first time I saw a native advertisement, I did recognize it, but I
also thought: it is annoying that you expect an article and end up
with something else.”
(Male, age 30)
4. RECOGNIZABILITY
 Negative effect of deception (e.g. Carr & Hayes, 2014)

20. EVALUATIONS OF THE NEWS OUTLET
Social contract perspective: (Gordon & De Lima‐Turner, 1997)
 “I simply realize that the advertisements are
necessary. They generate revenue that is needed
to maintain the news app.”
(male, age 29)
Little impact on credibility news outlet…
…But autonomy of journalists = key:
▸ Some readers thought that: “Journalists are
involved in the production of native ads”
▸ Majority of the readers:
“Any involvement of journalists in the production
of native ads would jeopardize my trust”

21. DISCUSSION / CONCLUSION
1. Mobile phones: high disclosure recognition
 We need more (experimental) research in mobile environments
 There’s more than (the lack) of ad recognition…
2. Readers’ evaluations depend on several factors
I. Information utility
II. Source credbility: pre-existing attitudes towards the advertiser
III. Perceived control
IV. Recognizability
▹ Future research: - more explicit disclosure language
- more- and less credible advertisers
- interaction effects with PK
3. News media: maintain the ‘chinese wall’ between
editorial & commercial departments
▹ Future research: - free versus paid online news media
- increase readers’ media literacy

22. QUESTIONS / COMMENTS?
Simone Krouwer, Dr. Karolien Poels & Dr. Steve Paulussen
Simone.krouwer@uantwerpen.be
@SimoneKrouwer

23. Simone Krouwer
simone.krouwer@uantwerpen.be

24. LIMITATIONS
 The readers we had invited for the study turned out to be all rather
experienced with, and quite positive about the news app
 Free digital-only publisher
 Only one type of mobile device
 Biases resulting from exposing readers to three specific native
advertisements could have affected their evaluations
 We used one news app as a case study for this explorative
research, and therefore generalizations should be made with
caution.

25. FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA
Mobile Native advertising:
 Experimental research on mobile devices
 Take the context into account!
Test content & contextual factors
 Moderating effect  PK?
 Source credibility & information utility
 Different types of news websites:
Free versus paywall