Interactivity

Heeter (2000) asserts that the concept of interactivity is both overused and also lacking in definition. This ambiguity has lead to the term being used in multiple

29

contexts although it is most widely accepted as Internet-related advertising. For example, Kaye and Medoff (2001) simply equate ‘interactive advertising’ to ‘online advertising’. Interactivity is principally researched as advertising via website, but has evolved to include social media (e.g. Rohm et al 2013, Shultz & Peltier 2013, Tsimonis & Dimitriadis 2014) and even interactive television advertising (e.g. Bellman et al 2012, Jennes & Van den Broeck 2014, Zorn et al 2016).

Heeter (2000, p.6) defines an interaction as “an episode or series of episodes of physical actions and reactions of an embodied human with the world, including the environment and objects and beings in the world”. This definition broadens the concept of interactivity beyond online advertising and allows offline advertising, including ambient, as capable of providing interactivity effects to consumers. Johnson et al (2006) champion the use of interactivity across platforms, asserting, “to be useful and valid, conceptualisations of interactivity need to transcend contexts and applications” (p.36).

Despite the relevance of ‘interactivity’ to Internet-based communications in advertising research, several parallels have been identified in interactivity between Web ads and ambient ads. As Liu and Shrum (2002) point out, traditional advertising communicates with consumers through interruption, whereas web advertising is integrated into a consumer’s web-surfing activity. This lack of interruption allows consumers to more easily avoid an ad than with traditional advertising. Ambient ads can be viewed in an identical manner, as ads are typically placed where consumers are engaging in other activities in the OOH environment. It would thus be useful to identify how consumers can be encouraged to interact with ambient ads, as Liu and Shrum indicate that consumers do not have to do anything in particular to avoid a non-interruptive ad.

The concept of two-way communication, as identified by Hutter (2015) in ambient advertising, is discussed as a dimension of interactivity (e.g. Sundar et al 1998, Lombard & Snyder-Duch 2001, Liu & Shrum 2002, Johnson et al 2006). Two-way communication typically refers to transmission of data between the brand and the consumers in both directions. From the perspective of online

30

advertising, feedback from the consumer to the brand includes ad-clicks, contacting the company online and making purchases through a website (Liu & Shrum 2002). Two-way communication has been demonstrated to produce positive affect (Sundar et al 1998). While the interactive elements of ambient ads are entirely different, the concept of interactivity can be translated to ambient media and thus can be suggested to influence consumer perceptions, or interest, as proposed by Hutter (2015).

Researchers highlight the varying levels of interaction that can be afforded to consumers (e.g. Heeter 2000, Liu & Shrum 2002, Johnson et al 2006, Liu & Shrum 2009). Lombard and Snyder-Duch (2001) identify five variables of interactivity: number of inputs from the user to medium, number and type of characteristics that can be modified by the user, extent to which each characteristic can be changed, speed with which user inputs effect change in medium, degree of communication between the user and the medium. While these variables are discussed in relation to Internet advertising, the first variable can easily be adapted to ambient ads. Bioca and Delaney (1995) describe a number of user inputs that can bring about a change in the medium, including voice/audio, haptic, kinetic, facial and eye movements, and psychophysiological. As these inputs are all physical motions, these can be integrated into ambient ads to bring about a change in the medium and allow consumers to become part of the ad message when they come into contact with an ad. However, Lombard and Snyder-Duch (2001) indicate that the effectiveness of each of these inputs has not been demonstrated with regards to providing consumers with an interactive experience. It would be useful to identify how marketers implement any of these inputs into ambient ads, and how this process might influence consumer engagement.

Lombard and Snyder-Duch (2001) also discuss, as their third variable of interactivity, the range of change that could be brought about by users. Within technological communication, interactivity can be manipulated, by controlling the quantity of features to which consumers are exposed, and their level of control over how they can respond to these messages. Similarly, with ambient ads, marketers are able to manipulate the ad features and placement of an ad to

31

encourage consumers to interact with an ad. However, researchers in the field of online advertising insist that higher levels of interactivity do not necessarily produce positive results in persuading consumers (Heeter 2000, Coyle & Thorson 2001, Sundar et al 2003, Liu & Shrum 2009). For ambient ads, the possibility exists that highly interactive ads may not be received positively by consumers. Furthermore, consumers may perceive highly interactive ads as intrusive when they have little control over their interactions with these ads.

Most researchers refer to interactivity as the ability of users to bring about a change in the message, medium or experience. By this definition, only a subset of ambient ads would be considered interactive, as not all ads implement channels for consumer input, to create a corresponding change in the ad. However, Lombard and Snyder-Duch’s (2001, p.59) concept of ‘engagement’ is more relevant for ambient ads than strict ‘interaction’. The pair defines engagement, or involvement, as occurring when “part or all of a person’s perception is directed toward objects, events, and/or people created by the technology, and away from objects, events and/or people in the physical world”. For research into ambient ads, ‘technology’ can simply be replaced by ‘ad’, with the concept retaining its identical meaning. Examining engagement effects, and interactivity effects, where possible, of ambient ads, would be helpful in developing an understanding of the features that encourage consumer engagement, the varying levels of consumer involvement, and how consumer perceptions are affected as a result.