CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 63Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionDigital Marketing and Social MediaMarketing and Advertising Strategies

The Future of Dataveillance in Advertising Theory and Practice

Open access
Strycharz, Joanna, Segijn, Claire M.·2022·Journal of Advertising
DOI 10.1080/00913367.2022.2109781
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Technological developments have changed the advertising landscape by extending the possibilities to collect, process, and share consumer data to optimize advertising. These developments have made data collection and consequently dataveillance—the automated, continuous, and sometimes unspecific collection, storage, and processing of digital traces—central concepts for advertising scholarship and practice. Studying the impact of consumers’ perceptions of dataveillance is important as perceptions about data collection practices have been shown to diminish the effects of data-driven advertising. This article advances advertising theory by conceptualizing the impact of consumers’ perceptions of dataveillance in digital data-driven advertising and applying long-standing advertising research theories to this new phenomenon to provide an overarching framework for future research. The current work presents the dataveillance effects in advertising landscape (DEAL) framework, with specific research directions for future research. This framework has practical implications as it shows how false or accurate beliefs about dataveillance impact consumer responses to digital data-driven advertising. Advertisers may adapt to ensure that digital data-driven advertising does not result in backlash or raise ethical questions. Finally, the framework has implications for privacy regulations, as consumer understanding of data collection is a core issue in current regulatory approaches to dataveillance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00913367.2022.2109781

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Multiple synced advertising exposures might be needed for the consumer to classify the synced ad as a surveillance episode.

    “Therefore, multiple synced advertising exposures might be needed for the consumer to classify the synced ad as a surveillance episode (Strycharz and Segijn 2022).”

    From The Role of Perceived Surveillance and Privacy Cynicism in Effects of Multiple Synced Advertising Exposures on Brand Attitude (2024) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn 2022

    The Experience-Driven Surveillance Beliefs and Development and Activation of Surveillance Beliefs sections say that exposure to a personalized ad can make consumers aware of data collection and can activate surveillance beliefs. They do not say that multiple exposures to synced ads might be needed before a consumer regards an ad as a surveillance episode; the discussion of exposure frequency concerns clicking on ads, not recognizing surveillance. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Following the DEAL framework, a surveillance episode increases perceived surveillance.

    “Following the DEAL framework, a surveillance episode increases perceived surveillance.”

    From The Role of Perceived Surveillance and Privacy Cynicism in Effects of Multiple Synced Advertising Exposures on Brand Attitude (2024) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn 2022

    The DEAL framework section says a surveillance episode can activate surveillance beliefs, which can lead to perceived surveillance. It also says those beliefs must be present and activated; it does not claim that every surveillance episode increases perceived surveillance. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Consumers' understanding of personalized advertising can increase through experiences with advertising.

    “Alternatively, consumers' understanding of (personalized) advertising can also increase through consumers' experiences with advertising (Friestad and Wright 1994;Strycharz and Segijn 2022).”

    From The Role of Perceived Surveillance and Privacy Cynicism in Effects of Multiple Synced Advertising Exposures on Brand Attitude (2024) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn 2022

  • According to the DEAL framework, the level of perceived surveillance may be determined by people's knowledge or understanding about data collection and usage for persuasion.

    “According to the DEAL framework, the level of perceived surveillance may be determined by people's knowledge or understanding about data collection and usage for persuasion, as that understanding impacts what the individual will classify as a surveillance episode.”

    From The Role of Perceived Surveillance and Privacy Cynicism in Effects of Multiple Synced Advertising Exposures on Brand Attitude (2024) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn 2022

  • According to the DEAL framework, perceived surveillance could affect how consumers feel toward a surveillance episode.

    “According to the DEAL framework, perceived surveillance could affect how consumers feel (e.g., attitudes) toward a surveillance episode (e.g., personalized ad) (Strycharz and Segijn 2022).”

    From The Role of Perceived Surveillance and Privacy Cynicism in Effects of Multiple Synced Advertising Exposures on Brand Attitude (2024) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 84

  1. Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., and Loewenstein, G. 2015. "Privacy and Human Behavior in the Age of Information." Science, 347 (6221):509-14. doi:10.1126/science.aaa1465 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Acquisti, A., L. K. John, and G. Loewenstein. 2013. "What Is Privacy Worth?" The Journal of Legal Studies 42 (2): 249-74. doi:10.1086/671754 · DOI
  3. Aguirre, E., D. Mahr, D. Grewal, K. De Ruyter, and M. Wetzels. 2015. "Unraveling the Personalization Paradox: The Effect of Information Collection and Trust-Building Strategies on Online Advertisement Effectiveness." Journal of Retailing 91 (1):34-49. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2014.09.005 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Ahluwalia, R., H. R. Unnava, and R. E. Burnkrant. 2001. "The Moderating Role of Commitment on the Spillover Effect of Marketing Communications." Journal of Marketing Research 38 (4):458-70. doi:10.1509/2Fjmkr.38.4.458.18903 · DOI
  5. Andrejevic, M. 2006. "The Discipline of Watching: Detection, Risk, and Lateral Surveillance." Critical Studies in Media Communication 23 (5):391-407. doi:10. 1080/07393180601046147 · DOI
  6. Araujo, T., J. Ausloos, W. van Atteveldt, F. Loecherbach, J. Moeller, J. Ohme, D. Trilling, B. van de Velde, C. de Vreese, and K. Welbers. 2021. OSD2F: An Open-Source Data Donation Framework. SocArXiv. doi:10.31235/osf. io/xjk6t · DOI
  7. Baek, T. H., and M. Morimoto. 2012. "Stay Away from Me." Journal of Advertising 41 (1):59-76. doi:10.2753/ JOA0091-3367410105 · DOI
  8. Baruh, L., E. Secinti, and Z. Cemalcilar. 2017. "Online Privacy Concerns and Privacy Management: A Meta- Analytical Review." Journal of Communication 67 (1): 26-53. doi:10.1111/jcom.12276 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Boerman, S. C., S. Kruikemeier, and F. J. Zuiderveen Borgesius. 2017. "Online Behavioral Advertising: A Literature Review and Research Agenda." Journal of Advertising 46 (3):363-76. doi:10.1080/00913367.2017. 1339368 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Boerman, S. C., S. Kruikemeier, and F. J. Zuiderveen Borgesius. 2021. "Exploring Motivations for Online Privacy Protection Behavior: Insights from Panel Data." Communication Research 48 (7):953-77. doi:10.1177/ 2F0093650218800915 · DOI
  11. Boerman, S. C., and C. M. Segijn. 2022. "Awareness and Perceived Appropriateness of Synced Advertising in Dutch Adults." Journal of Interactive Advertising 22 (2): 187-94. doi:10.1080/15252019.2022.2046216 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Boerman, S. C., L. M. Willemsen, and E. P. Van Der Aa. 2017. ""This Post Is Sponsored": Effects of Sponsorship Disclosure on Persuasion Knowledge and Electronic Word of Mouth in the Context of Facebook." Journal of Interactive Marketing 38:82-92. doi:10.1016/j.intmar. 2016.12.002 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Bol, N., T. Dienlin, S. Kruikemeier, M. Sax, S. C. Boerman, J. Strycharz, N. Helberger, and C. H. de Vreese. 2018. "Understanding the Effects of Personalization as a Privacy Calculus: Analyzing Self-Disclosure across Health, News, and Commerce Contexts." Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 23 (6):370-88. doi: 10.1093/jcmc/zmy020 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Brandimarte, L., A. Acquisti, and G. Loewenstein. 2013. "Misplaced Confidences: Privacy and the Control Paradox." Social Psychological and Personality Science 4 (3):340-7. doi:10.1177/2F1948550612455931 · DOI
  15. Brehm, S. S., and J. W. Brehm. 1981. Psychological Reactance: A Theorv Offreedom and Control. San Diego. CA: Academic Press
  16. B€ uchi, M., N. Festic, and M. Latzer. 2022. "The Chilling Effects of Digital Dataveillance: A Theoretical Model and an Empirical Research Agenda." Big Data & Society 9 (1):205395172110653. doi:10.1177/2F20539517211065368 · DOI
  17. B€ uchi, M., E. Fosch-Villaronga, C. Lutz, A. Tam o-Larrieux, and S. Velidi. 2021. "Making Sense of Algorithmic Profiling: user Perceptions on Facebook." Information, Communication & Society, 1-17. doi:10.1080/1369118X. 2021.1989011 · DOI
  18. Campbell, J. E., and M. Carlson. 2002. "Panopticon.com: Online Surveillance and the Commodification of Privacy." Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46 (4):586-606. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4604_6 · DOI
  19. Choi, H., J. Park, and Y. Jung. 2018. "The Role of Privacy Fatigue in Online Privacy Behavior." Computers in Human Behavior 81:42-51. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.001 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Dahlen, M., and S. Rosengren. 2016. "If Advertising Won't Die, What Will It Be? Toward a Working Definition of Advertising." Journal of Advertising 45 (3):334-45. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2016.1172387 · DOI
  21. Davis, F. D., R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw. 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models." Management Science 35 (8): 982-1003. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · DOI · Paper page
  22. De Cock Bunning, M. 2018. "A Multi-Dimensional Approach to Disinformation: Report of the Independent High Level Group on Fake News and Online Disinformation." Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2018. Retrieved from Cadmus, European University Institute Research Repository, at: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/70297.
  23. Dedehayir, O., and M. Steinert. 2016. "The Hype Cycle Model: A Review and Future Directions." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 108:28-41. doi:10.1016/j. techfore.2016.04.005 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Degeling, M., C. Utz, C. Lentzsch, H. Hosseini, F. Schaub, T. Holz. 2019. "We Value Your Privacy … Now Take Some Cookies: Measuring the GDPR's Impact on Web Privacy." In NDSS 2019. doi:10.14722/ndss.2019.23xxx · DOI
  25. De Keyzer, F., N. Dens, and P. 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. doi:10.1080/15252019.2015. 1082450 · DOI
  26. DeVito, M. A., D. Gergle, and J. Birnholtz. 2017, May. ""Algorithms Ruin Everything" # RIPTwitter, Folk Theories, and Resistance to Algorithmic Change in Social Media." In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3163-3174).
  27. Dinev, T., and P. Hart. 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for e-Commerce Transactions." Information Systems Research 17 (1):61-80. doi:10.1287/ isre.1060.0080 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Duffy, B. E., and N. K. Chan. 2019. ""You Never Really Know Who's Looking": Imagined Surveillance across Social Media Platforms." New Media & Society 21 (1): 119-38. doi:10.1177/2F1461444818791318 · DOI
  29. Farman, L., M. L. Comello, and J. R. Edwards. 2020. "Are Consumers Put off by Retargeted Ads on Social Media? Evidence for Perceptions of Marketing Surveillance and Decreased Ad Effectiveness." Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 64 (2):298-319. doi:10.1080/08838151. 2020.1767292 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Fransen, M. L., P. W. Verlegh, A. Kirmani, and E. G. Smit. 2015. "A Typology of Consumer Strategies for Resisting Advertising, and a Review of Mechanisms for Countering Them." International Journal of Advertising 34 (1):6-16. doi:10.1080/02650487.2014.995284 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Gelman, S. A., and C. H. Legare. 2011. "Concepts and Folk Theories." Annual Review of Anthropology 40:379-98. doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-081309-145822 · DOI
  32. Ham, C. D. 2017. "Exploring How Consumers Cope with Online Behavioral Advertising." International Journal of Advertising 36 (4):632-58. doi:10.1080/02650487.2016. 1239878 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Ham, C. D., and M. R. Nelson. 2016. "The Role of Persuasion Knowledge, Assessment of Benefit and Harm, and Third-Person Perception in Coping with Online Behavioral Advertising." Computers in Human Behavior 62:689-702. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.076 · DOI
  34. Helberger, N., J. Huh, G. Milne, J. Strycharz, and H. Sundaram. 2020. "Macro and Exogenous Factors in Computational Advertising: Key Issues and New Research Directions." Journal of Advertising 49 (4): 377-93. doi:10.1080/00913367.2020.1811179 · DOI
  35. Hess, N. J., C. M. Kelley, M. L. Scott, M. Mende, and J. H. Schumann. 2020. "Getting Personal in Public!? How Consumers Respond to Public Personalized Advertising in Retail Stores." Journal of Retailing 96 (3):344-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2019.11.005 · DOI
  36. Hudders, L., P. De Pauw, V. Cauberghe, K. Panic, B. Zarouali, and E. Rozendaal. 2017. "Shedding New Light on How Advertising Literacy Can Affect Children's Processing of Embedded Advertising Formats: A Future Research Agenda." Journal of Advertising 46 (2):333-49. doi:10.1080/00913367.2016.1269303 · DOI
  37. Huh, J., and E. C. Malthouse. 2020. "Advancing Computational Advertising: Conceptualization of the Field and Future Directions." Journal of Advertising 49 (4):367-76. doi:10.1080/00913367.2020.1795759 · DOI
  38. Jung, A. R. 2017. "The Influence of Perceived Ad Relevance on Social Media Advertising: An Empirical Examination of a Mediating Role of Privacy Concern." Computers in Human Behavior 70:303-9. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.008 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Kim, H., and J. Huh. 2017. "Perceived Relevance and Privacy Concern regarding Online Behavioral Advertising (OBA) and Their Role in Consumer Responses." Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising 38 (1):92-105. doi:10.1080/10641734.2016. 1233157 · DOI
  40. Kim, T., K. Barasz, and L. K. John. 2019. "Why Am I Seeing This Ad? The Effect of Ad Transparency on Ad Effectiveness." Journal of Consumer Research 45 (5): 906-32. doi:10.1093/jcr/ucy039 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Kim, Y. J., and J. Han. 2014. "Why Smartphone Advertising Attracts Customers: A Model of Web Advertising, Flow, and Personalization." Computers in Human Behavior 33: 256-69. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.015 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Klayman, J. 1995. "Varieties of Confirmation Bias." Psychology of Learning and Motivation 32:385-418. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60315-1 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Laufer, R. S., and M. Wolfe. 1977. "Privacy as a Concept and a Social Issue: A Multidimensional Developmental Theory." Journal of Social Issues 33 (3):22-42. doi:10. 1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01880.x · DOI · Paper page
  44. Lee, H., and C. H. Cho. 2020. "Digital Advertising: Present and Future Prospects." International Journal of Advertising 39 (3):332-41. doi:10.1080/02650487.2019.1642015 · DOI
  45. Li, H. 2019. "Special Section Introduction: Artificial Intelligence and Advertising." Journal of Advertising 48 (4):333-7. doi:10.1080/00913367.2019.1654947 · DOI
  46. Lin, C. A., and X. Xu. 2021. "Exploring Bottled Water Purchase Intention via Trust in Advertising, Product Knowledge, Consumer Beliefs and Theory of Reasoned Action." Social Sciences 10 (8):295. doi:10.3390/socsci10080295 Lineup. 2021. "Overcoming the Ad Blindness of Millennials and Gen Z." https://lineup.com/blog/overcoming-ad-blindness/ · DOI
  47. Liu-Thompkins, Y., and E. C. Malthouse. 2017. "A Primer on Using Behavioral Data for Testing Theories in Advertising Research." Journal of Advertising 46 (1): 213-25. doi:10.1080/00913367.2016.1252289 · DOI
  48. Lutz, C., C. P. Hoffmann, and G. Ranzini. 2020. "Data Capitalism and the User: An Exploration of Privacy Cynicism in Germany." New Media & Society 22 (7): 1168-87. doi:10.1177/1461444820912544 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Lyon, D. 2017. "Surveillance Culture: Engagement, Exposure, and Ethics in Digital Modernity." International Journal of Communication 11:824-42. doi: 1932-8036/20170005
  50. McDonald, A. M., and L. F. Cranor. 2010, October. "Americans' Attitudes about Internet Behavioral Advertising Practices." In Proceedings of the 9th Annual ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (pp. 63-72). Chicago, Illinois, USA. doi:10.1145/1866919. 1866929 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Nickerson, R. S. 1998. "Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises." Review of General Psychology 2 (2):175-220. doi:10.1037/2F1089-2680.2.2.175 · DOI
  52. Richards, J. I., and C. M. Curran. 2002. "Oracles on "Advertising": Searching for a Definition." Journal of Advertising 31 (2):63-77. doi:10.1080/00913367.2002.10673667 · DOI
  53. Rip, A. 2019. "Folk Theories of Nanotechnologists." In Nanotechnology and Its Governance, edited by A. Rip, 56-74. London: Routledge.
  54. Rodgers, S. 2021. "Themed Issue Introduction: Promises and Perils of Artificial Intelligence and Advertising." Journal of Advertising 50 (1):1-10. doi:10.1080/00913367. 2020.1868233 · DOI
  55. Segijn, C. M. 2019. "A New Mobile Data Driven Message Strategy Called Synced Advertising: Conceptualization, Implications, and Future Directions." Annals of the International Communication Association 43 (1):58-77. doi:10.1080/23808985.2019.1576020 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Segijn, C. M., E. Kim, A. Sifaoui, and S. C. Boerman. 2021. "When Realizing That Big Brother Is Watching You: The Empowerment of the Consumer through Synced Advertising Literacy." Journal of Marketing Communications, 1-22. doi: 10.1080/13527266.2021.2020149 · DOI · Paper page
  57. Segijn, C. M., J. Strycharz, A. Riegelman, and C. Hennesy. 2021. "A Literature Review of Personalization Transparency and Control: Introducing the Transparency-Awareness-Control Framework." Media and Communication 9 (4):120-33. doi: 10.17645/mac.v9i4.4054 · DOI
  58. Segijn, C. M., and I. Van Ooijen. 2022. "Differences in Consumer Knowledge and Perceptions of Personalized Advertising: Comparing Online Behavioural Advertising and Synced Advertising." Journal of Marketing Communications 28 (2):207-20. doi:10.1080/13527266. 2020.1857297 · DOI
  59. Sifaoui, A. 2021. ""We Know What You See, So Here's an Ad!" Online Behavioral Advertising and Surveillance on Social Media in an Era of Privacy Erosion." Doctoral diss., University of Minnesota). https://hdl.handle.net/ 11299/224475.
  60. Smit, E. G., G. Van Noort, and H. A. Voorveld. 2014. "Understanding Online Behavioural Advertising: User Knowledge, Privacy Concerns and Online Coping Behaviour in Europe." Computers in Human Behavior 32:15-22. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.008 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Solove, D. J. 2007. "I've Got Nothing to Hide and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy." San Diego Law Review 44:745.
  62. Song, J. H., H. Y. Kim, S. Kim, S. W. Lee, and J. H. Lee. 2016. "Effects of Personalized e-Mail Messages on Privacy Risk: Moderating Roles of Control and Intimacy." Marketing Letters 27 (1):89-101. doi:10.1007/ s11002-014-9315-0 · DOI
  63. Stasson, M., and M. Fishbein. 1990. "The Relation between Perceived Risk and Preventive Action: A within-Subject Analysis of Perceived Driving Risk and Intentions to Wear Seatbelts." Journal of Applied Social Psychology 20 (19):1541-57. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1990.tb01492.x · DOI
  64. Strycharz, J., and B. Duivenvoorde. 2021. "The Exploitation of Vulnerability through Personalised Marketing Communication: Are Consumers Protected?" Internet Policy Review 10 (4):1-27. doi:10.14763/2021.4.1585 · DOI
  65. Strycharz, J., and C. M. Segijn. 2021. "Personalized Advertising and Chilling Effects: Consumers' Change in Media Diet in Response to Corporate Surveillance." The International Conference on Research in Advertising, Virtual Conference.
  66. Strycharz, J., E. Smit, N. Helberger, and G. van Noort. 2021. "No to Cookies: Empowering Impact of Technical and Legal Knowledge on Rejecting Tracking Cookies." Computers in Human Behavior 120:106750. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2021.106750 · DOI
  67. Strycharz, J., G. Van Noort, E. Smit, and N. Helberger. 2019. "Protective Behavior against Personalized Ads: Motivation to Turn Personalization off." Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace 13 (2) doi:10.5817/CP2019-2-1 · DOI
  68. Swire-Thompson, B., and D. Lazer. 2020. "Public Health and Online Misinformation: Challenges and Recommendations." Annual Review of Public Health 41: 433-51. doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040119-094127. · DOI · Paper page
  69. Tan, B. J., M. Brown, and N. Pope. 2019. "The Role of Respect in the Effects of Perceived Ad Interactivity and Intrusiveness on Brand and site." Journal of Marketing Communications 25 (3):288-306. doi:10.1080/13527266. 2016.1270344 · DOI
  70. Toff, B., and R. K. Nielsen. 2018. ""I Just Google It": Folk Theories of Distributed Discovery." Journal of Communication 68 (3):636-57. doi:10.1093/joc/jqy009 · DOI · Paper page
  71. Van Dijck, J. 2014. "Datafication, Dataism and Dataveillance: Big Data between Scientific Paradigm and Ideology." Surveillance & Society 12 (2):197-208. doi:10. 24908/ss.v12i2.4776 · DOI · Paper page
  72. Van Gogh, R., M. Walrave, and K. Poels. 2020. "Personalization in Digital Marketing: Implementation 1793 Strategies and the Corresponding Ethical Issues." In The SAGE Handbook of Marketing Ethics, edited by L. Eagle, S. Dahl, P. De Pelsmacker, and C. R. Taylor, 411-23. London: Sage.
  73. Van Noort, G., E. G. Smit, and H. A. Voorveld. 2013. "The Online Behavioural Advertising Icon: two User Studies." In Advances in Advertising Research, Vol. IV, 365-78. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.
  74. Van Ooijen, I. 2022. "When Disclosures Backfire: Aversive Source Effects for Personalization Disclosures on Less Trusted Platforms." Journal of Interactive Marketing 57 (2):178-97. doi:10.1177/2F10949968221080499 · DOI
  75. Van Ooijen, I., and H. U. Vrabec. 2019. "Does the GDPR Enhance Consumers' Control over Personal Data? An Analysis from a Behavioural Perspective." Journal of Consumer Policy 42 (1):91-107. doi:10.1007/s10603-018- 9399-7 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Von Pape, T., S. Trepte, and C. Mothes. 2017. "Privacy by Disaster? Press Coverage of Privacy and Digital Technology." European Journal of Communication 32 (3):189-207. doi:10.1177/2F0267323117689994 · DOI
  77. Vraga, E. K., and L. Bode. 2020. "Defining Misinformation and Understanding Its Bounded Nature: Using Expertise and Evidence for Describing Misinformation." Political Communication 37 (1):136-44. doi:10.1080/10584609. 2020.1716500 · DOI
  78. Wojdynski, B. W., and N. J. Evans. 2016. "Going Native: Effects of Disclosure Position and Language on the Recognition and Evaluation of Online Native Advertising." Journal of Advertising 45 (2):157-68. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2015.1115380 · DOI
  79. Wojdynski, B. W., and N. J. Evans. 2020. "The Covert Advertising Recognition and Effects (CARE) Model: Processes of Persuasion in Native Advertising and Other Masked Formats." International Journal of Advertising 39 (1):4-31. doi:10.1080/02650487.2019.1658438 · DOI
  80. Ytre-Arne, B., and H. Moe. 2021. "Folk Theories and Algorithms: Understanding Digital Irritation." Media, Culture & Society 43 (5):807-24. doi:10.1177/ 2F0163443720972314 · DOI
  81. Yun, J. T., B. R. Duff, P. T. Vargas, H. Sundaram, and I. Himelboim. 2020. "Computationally Analyzing Social Media Text for Topics: A Primer for Advertising Researchers." Journal of Interactive Advertising 20 (1): 47-59. doi:10.1080/15252019.2019.1700851 · DOI
  82. Yun, J. T., C. M. Segijn, S. Pearson, E. C. Malthouse, J. A. Konstan, and V. Shankar. 2020. "Challenges and Future Directions of Computational Advertising Measurement Systems." Journal of Advertising 49 (4):446-58. doi:10. 1080/00913367.2020.1795757 · DOI · Paper page
  83. Zhang, D., M. van der Goot, H. Hendriks, S. C. Boerman, T. Araujo, and H. Voorveld. 2021. "They Know Everything": Folk Theories, Thoughts, and Feelings about Surveillance in Media Technologies." The International Conference on Research in Advertising, Virtual Conference.
  84. Zhu, H., C. X. Ou, W. J. A. van den Heuvel, and H. Liu. 2017. "Privacy Calculus and Its Utility for Personalization Services in e-Commerce: An Analysis of Consumer Decision-Making." Information & Management 54 (4):427-37. doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.10.001 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Strycharz, J., & Segijn, C. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Strycharz, Joanna
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Advertising
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2022-09-16
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
574-591
ISSN
  • 0091-3367 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7805
DOI
10.1080/00913367.2022.2109781
OpenAlex
W4296042324
Cited by
63
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
FWCI
17.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Advertising (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Marketing and Advertising Strategies
Keywords
dataveillance, data-driven advertising, consumer perception, digital data collection, consumer privacy, consumer backlash, advertising ethics, privacy regulation, digital traces

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review