skip to main content
research-article

Text Advertising Blindness: The New Banner Blindness?

Published:01 May 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Banner blindness, the phenomenon of website users actively ignoring web banners, was first reported in the late 1990s. This study expands the banner blindness concept to text advertising blindness and examines the effects of search type and advertisement location on the degree of blindness. Performance and eye-tracking analyses show that users tend to miss information in text ads on the right side of the page more often than in text ads at the top of the page. Search type (exact or semantic) was also found to affect performance and eye-tracking measures. Participant search strategies differed depending on search type and whether the top area of the page was perceived to be advertising or relevant content. These results show that text ad blindness occurs, significantly affects search performance on web pages, and is more prevalent on the right side of the page than the top.

References

  1. AdWords (2011). Advertise your business on Google. Retrieved April 11, 2011 from Google Adwords (https://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=6084)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. AdSense (2011). Google Adsense Ad Formats. Retrieved April 11, 2011 from Google Adsense (https://www.google.com/adsense/static/en/AdFormats.html)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Albert, W. (2002). Do web users actually look at ads? A case study of banner ads and eye-tracking technology. In Proceedings of the Usability Professionals Association 2002 Conference. Orlando, Florida.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (2007). ACCC alleges misleading and deceptive conduct by Trading Post and Google. Retrieved April 11, 2011 from Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/792088/fromItemId/142)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Benway, J. P. (1998). Banner blindness: The irony of attention grabbing on the world wide web. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting (pp. 463-467). Chicago, Illinois: HFES.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale. In P. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. Weerdmeester, & I. L. McClelland (Eds.). Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189-94). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Burke, M., Hornof, A., Nilsen, E., & Gorman, N. (2005). High-cost banner blindness: Ads increase perceived workload, hinder visual search, and are forgotten. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12(4), 423-445. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Buscher, G., Dumais, S., & Cutrell, E. (2010). The good, the bad, and the random: An eye-tracking study of ad quality in web search. In SIGIR 2010 (pp. 42-49). Geneva, Switzerland: ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Cooke, L. (2008). How do users search web home pages? An eye-tracking study of multiple navigation menus. Technical Communication, 55(2), 176-194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Fox, D., Smith, A., & Chaparro, B. S. (2009). Optimizing presentation of Adsense ads within blogs. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 53nd Annual Meeting (pp. 463-467). San Antonio, Texas: HFES.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Granka, L., Hembrooke, H., & Gay, G. (2006). Location location location: Viewing patterns on WWW pages. In Proceedings of the 2006 symposium on Eye-tracking research & applications (p. 43). San Diego, California: ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Grier, R., Kortum, P., & Miller, J. T. (2005). How users view web pages: An exploration of cognitive and perceptual mechanisms. HCI Research in Web Design and Evaluation, 22-41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Interactive Advertising Bureau (2010). IAB 2009 internet advertising revenue report {White Paper}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Mosconi, M., Porta, M., & Ravarelli, A. (2008). On-line newspapers and multimedia content: An eye-tracking study. In SIGDOC 2008 (pp. 55-64). Lisbon, Portugal: ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Nielsen, J. (2003, April 28). Will pain-text ads continue to rule? Retrieved April 11, 2011 from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030428.html)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Nielsen, J. (2007, August 20). Banner blindness: Old and new findings. Retrieved April 11, 2011 from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/banner-blindness.html)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Pagendarm, M., & Schaumburg, H. (2001). Why are users banner-blind. The impact of navigation styles on the perception of web banners. Journal of Digital Information, 2(1).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Prasada, Mahajan, & Bronnenberg (2003). Advertising versus pay-per-view in electronic media. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20, 13-30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Riegelsberger, J., Sasse, M. A., & McCarthy, J. D. (2002). Eye-catcher or blind spot? The effect of photographs of faces on e-commerce sites. In Proceedings of the 2nd IFIP Conference on e-commerce, e-business, e-government (i3e) (pp. 383-398), Lisbon, Portugal. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Shrestha, S., Owens, J. W., & Chaparro, B. S. (2009). The effect of location and congruency of text ads on information search. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 53nd Annual Meeting (pp. 463-467). San Antonio, Texas: HFES.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Wolfe, J. M., Butcher, S. J., Lee, C., & Hyle, M. (2003). Changing your mind: On the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 483-502.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15(3), 419-433.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Yesilada, Y., Jay, C., Stevens, R., & Harper, S. (2008). Validating the use and role of visual elements of web pages in navigation with an eye-tracking study. In WWW 2008, (pp. 11-19). Beijing, China: ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Zelinsky, G. J. (1996). Using eye saccades to assess the selectivity of search movements. Vision Research, 36, 2177-2187.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Zelinksy, G. J., & Sheinberg, D. L. (1997). Eye movements during parallel-serial visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 244-262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Text Advertising Blindness: The New Banner Blindness?

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader