1.A Comprehensive.full

A COMPREHENSIVE MODEL OF FACTORS INFLUENCING CONSUMER ATTITUDE

TOWARDS AND ACCEPTANCE OF SMS ADVERTISING: AN EMPIRICAL

INVESTIGATION IN JORDAN

MOHAMMADHAMDI AL KHASAWNEH1 & AHMED SHUHAIBER

2

1Assistant Professor, Al Zaytoonah University of Jordan, Jordan

2Senior Lecturer, Al Zaytoonah University of Jordan, Jordan

ABSTRACT

As one of the mobile marketing instrument, SMS (Short Message Service) advertising is gaining popularity in

accessing consumers through their mobile devices. The success of this advertising instrument depends largely on its

acceptance by consumers. However, little is known regarding the factors contributing to the success of SMS advertising

from customers‟ perspectives. This research aims to empirically investigate the significant factors that influence consumers

attitude towards and acceptance of SMS advertising in Jordan. A conceptual model and hypotheses are tested with a

sample of 220 Jordanian mobile phone users, and analysed quantitatively. The findings indicate that SMS informativeness,

entertainment, credibility, clarity, incentive, personalization, relevancy, as well as subjective norms have positive

significant influence on consumer attitude and acceptance of SMS advertising, whereas message irritation, brand

familiarity and consumer control have negative significant influences. Based on the results, this paper rounds off with

conclusions, recommendations for future marketing research and practice into SMS advertising.

KEYWORDS: Mobile Marketing, SMS, Advertising, Consumer Attitude and Acceptance, Jordan

INTRODUCTION

Definitions and Statistics

We have entered a new „all mobile‟ era, in which mobile phones assist humans in many fields and applications.

Utilizing mobile technology in the marketing field leads to the concept of mobile marketing. One popular part of the

mobile-marketing technology is the use of SMS (Short Message Service). SMS is an instant messaging system that allows

mobile phone users to send, store and forward alphanumeric text messages of up to 160 characters to any GSM phone

(Bamba & Barnes, 2006; Leung, 2007; Xu, 2006). The channel through which marketing messages are delivered to

consumers about products and services through SMS is referred to SMS advertising (Tsang, Ho,& Liang 2004). The use of

SMS as an advertising medium has received widespread attention in recent years (Leung, 2007). Along with the emergence

of high development of telecommunication technologies and the increasing market penetration of mobile devices, the

interest of global advertising industries in using this medium as a means of marketing communication is rising (Bauer,

Barnes, Reichardt,& Neumann, 2005).

According to SMS Marketing Statistics (2012), with four billion mobile phones in today's world, 86% of mobile

users said that they receive or send at least one text message per week, though often it is much more. In 2012 alone, more

than 9.6 trillion SMS messages were sent. In the SMS advertising context, 95% of all mobile users (both smartphone and

non-smartphone users) have been connected to by brands that are using SMS marketing to reach their customers. In Jordan,

and according to the latest regulatory data for the mobile market related to the end of December 2011, there were 7.482

million mobile subscribers (Jordan Telecommunications Report Q3 2012, 2012). SMS advertising is further expected to

International Journal of Sales & Marketing Management

Research and Development (IJSMMRD)

ISSN 2249-6939

Vol.3, Issue 2, Jun 2013, 1-22

© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.,

© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.,

2 MohammadHamdi Al Khasawneh & Ahmed Shuhaiber

grow rapidly with increasing mobile phone penetration and declining tariff rates, the thing that significantly impact the

usage of mobile phone services; including SMS.

Characteristics of SMS Advertising

Some specific characteristics of SMS advertising are behind the high global and local usage rate of SMS

advertising. Table 1 shows how consistent these characteristics with the SMS advertising literature.

Ubiquity. Mobile phone users typically have their devices with them at all times and may leave it on standby for

an average of 15 hours a day. In addition, nearly 100 percent of mobile phones can support SMS messages, with

the high likelihood of them being read soon after receipt. Since all mobile phones can receive SMS and people

hold their mobile devices whole the day, SMS advertising can reach them approximately anytime and anywhere.

This can create new opportunities for advertisers.

Interactivity. The nature of the bi-directional mobile phones enables their users to reply immediately to SMS

messages. This interactivity makes it possible for advertisers to establish a direct catalogue with their potential

customers, and to gain marketing campaign results quickly.

Localization. Some geographic technologies such as Geographic information systems (GIS) and Global

Positioning Systems (GPS) enable telecom operators to localize users and identify their current positions. These

technologies enable advertisers to identify their potential consumers and send marketing impulses based on their

locations. Consequently, consumers receive offers of close-by product and service providers, which increases the

response rate to SMS advertising and makes it more useful and fruitful.

Personalization (one-to-one marketing). A very personal relationship is maintained between mobile phone users

and their devices as a mobile phone is always attributable to one single person. This one-to-one relationship leads

to one-to-one marketing attribute. Personalizing SMS advertisements can be achieved by using information

provided by consultancies' databases at an early stage or by the history of users‟ purchasing patterns. This results

in attracting consumers' attentions and gaining highly personalized marketing measures. Therefore, SMS

advertising can be considered as a direct and personalized consumer communication.

Viralmarketing. Although SMS advertising is considered as a direct marketing channel, it has viral effects to

move from one recipient to another. An SMS recipient may forward the message to others who feel they would

gain benefit from it.

The SMS received from a familiar sender can be expected to have greater influence on the receiver than a

message sent directly from the advertiser. As a result, viral effects can enlarge the consumers-reach base and

increase the SMS effectiveness.

Table 1: Characteristics of SMS Advertising

Characteristic Found in Literature

Ubiquity

Bauer et al. (2005); Bulander, Decker,

Schiefer and Kölmel (2005); Jamieson et al.

(2010); Mirbagheri (2010)

Interactivity

Bauer et al. (2005); Bulander et al. (2005);

Haghirian and Madlberger (2005);

Mirbagheri (2010); Van der Waldt, Rebello

and Brown (2009), Xu (2006)

Localization

Bauer et al. (2005); Haghirian and

Madlberger (2005); Wunker& Hughes

(2001); Xu (2006)

A Comprehensive Model of Factors Influencing Consumer Attitude towards 3 and Acceptance of SMS Advertising: An Empirical Investigation in Jordan

Table 1: Contd.,

Personalization

Bauer et al. (2005); Jamieson et al. (2010);

Haghirian and Madlberger (2005); Rettie,

Ruth, Grandcolas, and Deakins (2005);

Saadeghvaziri and Seyedjavadain (2011); Xu

(2006)

Viral marketing

Bauer et al. (2005); Mirbagheri (2010);

Karjaluoto, Lehto, Leppäniemi, and

Mustonen (2007)

The features presented above support the great potential of SMS advertising as a convenient customer-oriented

marketing instrument. Despite the continued growth and future potential of SMS as an advertising tool, the success of this

advertising instrument depends largely on its acceptance by consumers. Little research has been conducted on the

acceptance of this advertising medium by consumers, and the factors that may influence this acceptance. Furthermore, this

study have focused on Jordanian perspective is yet to be understood. This is particularly important in the Jordan context

where the success of a new medium such as SMS advertising relies on the acceptance of the medium by consumers.

Therefore, this study aims to close this gap by providing insights to this important arena, through the examination of

factors that impact consumer attitude towards and acceptance of SMS advertising. Next section(2) presents relevant

literature of SMS advertising research, through which hypotheses and a conceptual model were developed. Sections 3 and

4 demonstrate testing the model, the research methodology and findings consequently. Last section (5) rounds off with

conclusions, recommendations for future marketing research and practice into SMS advertising.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT

Based on the parent disciplines of mobile advertising and consumer attitude discussed in the existing literature,

this section presents a theoretical model that conceptualises the relationship amongst the focal constructs, that is, the

impact of SMS advertising value factors, SMS message content factors and other related factors on consumer attitude

towards and acceptance of SMS advertising (See Figure 1).

Informativeness

Informativeness can be defined as “the ability of advertising to inform consumers of product alternatives so that

purchases yielding the greatest possible satisfaction can be made” (Ducoffe, 1996, p.22 ; Waldt et al. 2009) and the ability

to successfully give related information (Oh & Xu, 2003). In the context of this study, informativeness can be viewed as

the ability of advertising to deliver information to customers in order tosatisfy their needs. Advertising plays a major role

in delivering information (Ling et al., 2010). Thus, advertisers in general want to transmit information via advertising

messages (Gordon & Turner, 1997). Information received by consumers through mobile devices must demonstrate

qualitative features like accuracy, timeliness, and usefulness for consumers (Siau & Shen, 2003). Accordingly, Varshney

(2003) suggested that information is considered a valuable motivation that leads recipients to react very positively to

advertisements.

Previous research demonstrated that informativeness of the advertising message in the traditional and mobile

context, was found to be among the strongest influential factor on consumers perceptions and attitudes (Bauer et al., 2005;

Ducoffe, 1996; Haghirian et al., 2005; Luong, 2007; Merisavo&Kajalo, 2007; Oh & Xu, 2003; Siau & Shen, 2003; Sultan,

Gao, & Rohm, 2010; Tsang et al., 2004; Xu, Liao, & Li, 2008). For example, Oh and Xo (2003) found that the advertising

message is perceived as valuable as long as it provides information and thus creates some benefit for the consumer. Taking

this point further, Haghirian et al. (2005) found that the higher the informativeness of mobile advertising messages, the


higher the perceived advertising value of the consumer. According to Tsang et al. (2004), perceived informativeness of

mobile advertising has a direct positive effect on attitude toward mobile advertising. Consistent with this view, other

studies conducted by Baueret al.(2005) and Merisavo and Kajalo (2007) identified information value as one of the

strongest drivers of mobile advertising acceptance. They further argued that consumers develop a positive attitude toward

mobile advertising, which in turn leads to the behavioural intention to use mobile services only if mobile advertising

messages are providing a high information value. Based on the previous discussion, the following hypothesis is suggested:

H1: Informativeness of SMS advertisements has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards

SMS advertising.

Entertainment

Entertainment is defined as the ability to fulfil an audience needs for aesthetic enjoyment, fun diversion, or

emotional pleasure (Ducoffe, 1996). Entertainment is considered as a promotional mechanism to encourage mobile

marketing communication. The very nature of texting, with its own particular form of abbreviated language and more

casual forms of communication (such as text flirting) was seen as entertainment in its own right (Grant & O‟Donohoe,

2007). In addition, the impulsive nature of phone-based entertainment supports this construct (Wilska, 2003), as especially

young people use of telephony services for fun and enjoyment (Williams, Rice,& Rogers, 1998).

Entertainment is also considered as a crucial factor for mobile marketing. It is essential that the message is concise

and funny, and thus immediately captures consumers‟ attention (Haghirian &Madlberger, 2005; Katterbach, 2002).

Entertainment services can increase customer loyalty and add value for the customer (Haghirian & Madlberger, 2005).

Previous studies show that consumers utilize SMS on the basis of fun and entertainment (Grant & O‟Donohoe, 2007;

Haghirian &Madlberger, 2005; Van der Waldtet al., 2009). For instance, an empirical study conducted by Tsang et al.

(2004) shows that entertainment is a significant factor affecting respondents‟ attitudes toward mobile advertising.

Moreover, it is found that consumers‟ perceived entertainment utility of mobile marketing has a positive influence on

consumers‟ perceptions of the overall utility of mobile marketing, which in turn has a positive influence on consumer

attitudes towards mobile marketing (Bauer et al., 2005). Therefore, we conclude that an entertaining advertising SMS is

being perceived more positive by the recipient. Thus, it hypothesized that:

H2: Entertainment has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMSadvertising.

Irritation

Irritation refers to any offending effects that may go against what a user values (Oh & Xu, 2003). In the context of

advertising, irritation has been defined as employing tactics in the advertising that annoy, offend, insult, or are overly

manipulative (Ducoffe, 1996; Waldt et al., 2009). The tactics advertisers use when competing for consumers‟ attention can

be annoying to the audiences. Taking this point further, irritation is a phenomenon whereby consumers tend to refuse

advertisements if they have the feeling that the advertisement is too intrusive. If an individual feel indignity when being

addressed by advertisements, this can mainly have an effect on their attitude toward advertising (Shavitt, Lowrey &

Haefner, 1998).

Moving in the mobile advertising context, most consumers are still quite uncomfortable with the concept of

mobile business and they are sceptical whether these businesses are feasible and secure (Siau & Shen, 2003). Mobile

advertising may provide an array of information that confuses the recipient and can be distracting and overwhelming the

consumer with information (Stewart & Pavlou, 2002; Xu, 2006). Consumers may feel confused about them and react


negatively. Another point of possible annoyance is unwanted messages, commonly known as spam (Dickinger, 2005),

Spam intrudes into consumers‟ privacy and hinder consumer acceptance. According to Haghirian et al.‟s (2005) findings,

complex mobile advertising message can cause irritation among consumers, and this disturbance decrease the value of the

advertising for consumers and may cause negative reaction toward mobile advertising. This finding has been previously

confirmed by Tsang et al. (2004) who asserted that there is a negative relation between attitude toward mobile advertising

and irritation. Time–related information is closely linked with the location dimension. We therefore conclude that irritation

caused by an incomprehensive or unwanted mobile advertising message may reflect negatively on consumers‟ attitudes

and the perceived advertising value of mobile marketing. Therefore, it is proposed that:

H3: Irritation of SMS advertisements has a significant negative influence on consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising.

Credibility

In the context of advertising business, McKenzie and Lutz (1989) defined advertising credibility as consumer‟s

perception of the truthfulness and believability of advertising in general. In addition, Daugherty et al. (2007) viewed

advertising credibility as an expression of the consumers‟ expectations regarding the fairness and factualness of

advertising. Advertising credibility was proved to be significantly relevant to advertising value of web advertising

(Brackett & Carr, 2001). Relevant research found that perceived advertisement credibilitywas among the first constructs

that were empirically tested and found to exert influence on consumers‟ attitudes towards the advertising (MacKenzie &

Lutz, 1989). Taking this point further, research conducted by various researchers has identified that there is a positive

correlation between consumer perceptions of the credibility of an advertisement and consumer attitudes towards the

advertisement (Brackett & Carr, 2001; Dahlén & Nordfält, 2004). If consumers do not find the ad to be credible, this will

negatively affect their attitude towards the ad (Dahlén & Nordfält, 2004). Moving into the credibility concept within the

mobile marketing context, it was found that consumers‟ perceptions of the credibility value of SMS advertisements are

positively correlated to consumers‟ overall attitudes towards SMS advertisements (Friman, 2010; Haghirian & Madlberger,

2004; Tsang et al., 2004; Waldt, et al., 2009). Taking the above discussion into consideration, we suggest that the

credibility of SMS advertising has a positive influence on consumers‟ attitude toward SMS advertising and on the

perceived advertising value of the consumer. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

H4: Credibility of SMS advertising has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising.

Message Clarity

Advertising message clarity contributes to readability, though it deals more with whether the advertisement has an

obvious, concise message than with how the message is actually presented. In consumer advertising, it is widely

recognised that messages can be either poorly comprehended or mistakenly comprehended (Jacoby J & Hoyer, 1990).

Despite advertisers' best efforts, consumers frequently misunderstand the specific claims that are made, the general

conclusions reached, and/or the sponsors of the advertisements (Pechmann, 1996). Hence, it is commonplace for

advertisers to test consumers' comprehension of advertisements in rough cut and/or final form, to rectify any problems that

might arise (Pechmann & Stewart, 1990). Subtle changes in wording or dramatization can make a substantial difference in

whether a message is generally understood by target audience members.

Previous research has found that message clarity was considered as a significant factor to the success of

advertising particularly in the context of billboard advertising (Taylor et al., 2006). Despite the importance of message


clarity in the context of mobile advertising and taking into consideration that SMS advertisement has a brief moment to

influence consumers, scant research attention has been given to how message clarity influences consumers‟ attitudes and

acceptance of SMS advertising. Given the above discussion and the need to advance our understanding regarding the

influence of message clarity on consumers attitudes in the area of SMS advertising, it is hypothesised that:

H5: Message clarity has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising.

Incentives

Incentives are values or benefits from which consumers can advantage when receiving SMS advertisements

(Hanley, Martinsen,& Pryor, 2005; Pastore, 2002). Incentive-based advertising provides specific financial rewards to

individuals who agree to receive ads into their mobile devices (Pietz&Storbacka, 2007). The main advantage of this

approach is that mobile users are provided with a tangible reason for receiving SMS advertisements. A survey from the

United States showed that 66% of consumers will accept cell phone ads if they are paid to accept them and 59 percent

would want at least $1.00 or more per mobile advertising (Hanley et al., 2006). By sending incentive-based advertising,

advertisers create value to the massage, make it active and create good feeling for customer (Iddris, 2006).

Incentive-based SMS advertising can be executedthrough many approaches. For instance, Tsang et al., (2004)

suggest extra points or minutes or any other form of sales promotion, or free connection time for listening to voice

advertisements, offered by mobile companies. Another approach is that consumers get something back in return, a

reduction in the cost of advertised products or services, as suggested by Pastore (2002). Hanley et al. (2005) suggest some

typical forms of value include offering of contextually sensitive services, offering of coupons, free minutes, or monetary

incentives. According to Hanley, Becker and Martinsen (2006), Free ringtones and airtime were the most popular

incentives for college students.

Mobile marketing research support the relationship between incentives and attitude towards SMS advertising.

Incentives are considered to have an impact on consumer intentions to receive mobile advertising under a given attitude,

and consumers are more willing to accept incentive-based mobile advertising (Tsang et al., 2004). According to Hanley et

al. (2006), college students‟ attitude towards SMS advertisements were affected and were tended to accept mobile

advertising if they were given incentives. Furthermore, Rettie et al. (2005) analysed the acceptance of 26 different SMS

ads and found that monetary incentives was one of the main reasons that encouraged consumer acceptance, whereas

Varshney (2003) found that SMS recipients react very positively towards advertisement that transfer incentives. Based on

the previous literature, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H6: Providing incentives for receiving SMS ads has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards

SMS advertising.

Brand Familiarity

Generally, brand familiarity has been identified, by Alba and Hutchinson (1987), Hoch and Deighton (1989), and

Kent and Allen (1994), as the consumers‟ level of direct and indirect experience with products or brands. More recently,

Pieters, Warlop, and Wedel, (2002) identified brand familiarity as an individual‟s subjective experience. This definition

was supported by Campbell et al. (2003), who suggest that brand familiarity captures the consumers‟ brand knowledge

structures and brand associations that exist within consumers‟ minds. However, for the purpose of the current research,

familiarity of brands included in the advertising is viewed as the extent to which importance is attached by consumers to

the familiar brands contained within the advertising message (Simonin & Ruth, 1998).


The relevant marketing literature also identifies brand familiarity as influencing the process of consumers‟

decision-making (Bettman & Park, 1980; Coates, Butler,&Berry, 2006; Martinez, Polo,& Chernatony, 2008; Park &

Lessig, 1981), advertising effectiveness (Campbell and Keller, 2003), and behavioural responses (Soderlund, 2002).

Further, extensive research has demonstrated that the familiarity of brands included in the advertising, influences consumer

engagement with, and processing of advertisements (Keller, 1991; MacKenzie & Spreng, 1992). For example, Keller

(1991) found that the consumers‟ processing of advertising for familiar brands may be described as less extensive and

more confirmatory in comparison to advertising for unfamiliar brands. Similarly, advertisements for familiar brands were

found to be more effective in terms of achieving the desired communication goals compared to advertisements for

unfamiliar brands (Alba & Hutchinson, 1987; Coates et al., 2006; Kent & Allen, 1994; Snyder, 1989).These findings are

consistent with Park and Stoel (2005), who suggest that brand familiarity increases the consumers‟ level of confidence,

leading them to perceive a lower degree of risk.

Within the mobile marketing literature, a study shows that the one of strongest determinant ofmobile advertisings

adoption isbrand familiarity (Okazaki, 2005). Similarly, a survey using popular brands‟ trial mobile advertising found that

as many as 84 per cent of 500 young British adults are likely to recommend the service to their friends, while only 7 per

cent are likely to abandon the service (Barwise & Strong, 2002). This means that consumers are likely to respond SMS ads

if they are sent from the company that they know or are familiar. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H7: SMS advertisements for familiar brands have a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards

SMS advertising.

SMS ad Relevancy

Advertising relevancy has been defined as the degree to which the advertising and its message content are

pertinent, applicable, and related to consumers‟ needs (Lastovicka, 1983). It was noted that relevance is a key concept in

understanding advertisements, because it is a primary component of all aspects of human communication.In general,

consumersexpect SMS advertising to be highly relevant to them as the mobile phone has a personal nature (Barwise &

Strong, 2002). High relevance can only be achieved by using reliable information related to the consumers. Researchers

have evaluated relevance of content of SMS advertisements from two viewpoints: first, sending SMS ads relevant to end

users‟ fields of interest will have a significant influence on perceiving SMS advertising as valuable service (Haghirian,

Madlberger, & Tanuskova, 2005; Merisavo, et al., 2007; Vatanparast, 2007; Xu et al.,2008). Second, SMS ads will provide

more value for end users if they are received at the appropriate times and locations (Merisavo, et al., 2007; Carroll, Barnes,

Scornavacca, & Fletcher, 2007; Vatanparast, 2007; Xu et al., 2008); however, there are few empirical researches do not

support the second viewpoint (Muk & Babin, 2006; Drossos, Giaglis, Lekakos, Kokkinaki, & Stavraki, 2007). Other

researchers such as, Carroll et al. (2007), Pagnani (2004) and Nasco and Bruner (2008), found that consumers were more

likely to accept the messages when the content was relevant to them. In particular, it is suggested that the relevancy of

SMS ads is found to have a significant positive influence on consumers‟ attitudes towards SMS advertising.

H8: Relevancy of SMS advertisements has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising.

Personalization

Personalization of SMS advertising means customizing the content of the message precisely to match individual

preferences (Bauer et al., 2005). Personalized SMS are more relevant to the consumer than non-personalized messages

because of its ability to provide consumers with personalized information according to where they are and their


needs.Thereby, persuading the receiver not only to accept the message, but also to take some action, now or in the future,

about goods, services and ideas (Saadeghvaziri & Seyedjavadain, 2011).

Personalization, also called message customization, generates significant potential for this innovative form of

SMS advertising (Xu, 2006), and is considered as a prime prerequisite for consumers‟ willingness to permit the reception

of advertising messages on their mobile phones (Bauer et al., 2005). If thoroughly personalized, SMS advertisements may

become perceived as valuable information services as opposed to bothersome interrupt marketing (Barnes & Scornavacca,

2004). Such customization helps to reduce the likelihood of a negative reaction (Bauer et al., 2005). Scharl, Dickinger and

Murphy (2005) indicate out the positive relationship between SMS personalization and consumer acceptance of this

message. In addition, Xu (2006) empirically found that personalization is significant factor that influences consumer

attitude towards SMS advertising. Thus, it hypothesized that:

H9: Personalized SMS message has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising.

Subjective Norms

Subjective norms are defined as “the person‟s perception that most people who are important to him think he

should or should not perform the behaviour in question” (Fishbein & Ajzen 1975, p. 302). Subjective norms are intended to

account for social influences that the person‟s attitude is exposed to. Thus, performing a particular behaviour is influenced

by other‟s opinions about the behaviour (Mansour, 2012). The relationship between subjective norms and intention to

behave is originally depicted in the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), developed by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), and

illustrates that intentions are shaped through attitudes and social norms which in turn shape or even dictate an individual‟s

behaviour.

Several studies indicated that subjective or social norms influence consumer acceptance of SMS advertising. For

instance, in their empirical studies, Mansour (2012) found that subjective norms which were positively and significantly

related to attitude toward mobile advertising, whereas Bauer et al. (2005) implied that mobile marketing social norms have

only a slight direct influence on the behavioural intention towards it. Another study conducted by Soroa-Koury and Yang

(2010) demonstrates that misperceptions of social norms predicted consumers' perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived

ease of use (PEOU) of mobile advertising, where both PU and PEOU are critical variables predicting consumers' attitude

towards SMS advertising. Therefore, the factor social norms are sufficient for this study. By reflecting these

considerations, the following hypotheses can be formulated:

H10: Social norms has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising.

Consumer Control

Consumer control in the context of mobile marketing has been extensively examined in the relevant literature

(Tsang et al., 2004, Scharl et al., 2005; Standing, Benson, & Karjaluoto, 2005). It was noted that users should be able to

control advertising whereby consumers can control over when, where, what and how much advertising to receive into the

mobile (Pietz, Storbacka, &Muller, 2007). This point is further explained by Shimp (2007) who stated that successful

advertisers must gain the consumers‟ permission on receiving an advertisement via their mobile phones. In addition,

consumers must have control over setting of SMS advertising such as, time of receiving and frequency.

The vast majority of previous studies within the extant relevant literature have found that consumers seek to

control the number and types of advertising messages they receive, and provide permission before receiving them (Bamba


& Barnes 2007; Barnes & Scornavacca 2004; Bauer et al. 2005; Carroll et al. 2007; Dickinger et al. 2004; Grant and

O‟Donohoe 2007; Hanley & Becker 2008; Leppäniemi & Karjaluoto 2005; Krishnamurthy, 2001; Maneesoonthorn &

Fortin 2006; Merisavo et al., 2007; Okazaki, Li, & Hirose, 2009; Rettie & Brum, 2001; Usta, 2009). Based on this, it can

be said that consumer attitudes towards and acceptance of SMS advertisements are likely to be influenced by the perceived

control that consumers have over the advertising messages they receive. Tsang et al. (2004) supported the results indicating

that consumers will have positive attitudes toward SMS advertising if permission based implemented while there were a

negative attitude in the case of receiving unauthorized spam advertisements. Therefore, it is proposed that:

H11: Consumer control towards SMS advertising has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude

towards SMS advertising.

Consumer Attitudes towards SMS Advertising

Although, there is some debate regarding a precise definition of attitude, there is a general agreement that attitude

towards advertising can be viewed as “…a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favourable or unfavourable

manner to advertising in general” (Lutz, 1985, p. 53).

Over the past two decades, attitudes toward advertising have been studied more than any other concept in the

marketing area (Mittal, 1994; Pollay & Mittal, 1993; Shavitt, Lowrey, & Haefner, 1998; Wang et al., 2002). In particular,

consumer attitude toward advertising has been largely examined because of its relation to consumer responses towards

advertisements (Schlosser et al., 1999) and its influence on behavioural intentions (Bruner & Kumar, 2000; Goldsmith &

Lafferty, 2002; Lutz, 1985; McMillan et al., 2003; Mehta, 1994; Poh & Adam, 2002). Moving into the Internet advertising

context, existing perspectives of Internet advertising research suggest that consumer attitude towards advertising is an

important determinant of their responses and behaviours (Abd Aziz et al., 2008; Chen & Wells, 1999; Stevenson, Bruner,

& Kumar, 2000; Wolin, Korgaonkar, & Lund 2002).

For example, Stevenson et al. (2000) found that a negative attitude towards advertising was related with a

negative consumer behavioural response towards the advertising, while Wolin et al. (2002) found that consumers, who

held positive attitude towards Internet advertising, were more likely to respond favourably towards the advertisements.

Indeed, Mehta (2000) argued that consumers who had positive attitudes towards advertising were more likely to be

persuaded by advertising. Support for this view is provided by Korgaonkar and Wolin‟s (2002) finding that positive

attitudes towards Internet advertising were more likely to foster higher behavioural intentions.

Moving into the mobile marketing context, consumer attitude toward mobile marketing has been a popular topic

among several researchers with a particular focus on SMS advertising (Tsang et al., 2004; Xu, 2007; Haghirian &

Madlberger, 2005; Haghirian et al., 2008; Brackett et al., 2001; Dickinger et al., 2004). For example, Haghirian and

Madlberger (2005) found that attitude toward mobile advertising and advertising value are strongly related to message

content as entertainment, informativeness and credibility have positive effect and irritation has a negative effect.

In a more recent study, Xu (2006) found that the entertainment, credibility and personalization are the important

factors that affect the attitude toward mobile advertising, while informativeness and irritation are not important factor.

Other studies have demonstrated that there is a direct relationship between consumer attitudes and consumer behavior

within the SMS advertising context (Haghirian & Madlberger, 2005; Tsang et al. 2004; Xu et al., 2007). This view was

further supported by Lee and Jun‟s (2007) findings that consumer attitudes are directly linked to behavioural intentions for

mobile advertising, such as getting free coupons, calling back, sending text messages, visiting specific shops, and allowing

messages.


In sum, consumers‟ attitude is an important variable for evaluating the effectiveness of advertising message and

advertising campaigns. Therefore the focus has been on attitude towards SMS advertising as the central construct to

determine the acceptance of SMS among Jordanian users. Based on the preceding discussion, it is postulated that:

H12: Consumer attitude towards SMS advertising has a significantpositive influence on consumer acceptance of

SMS advertising.

Figure 1: A Conceptual Model of Consumer Attitude towards and Acceptance of SMS Advertising

Source: Developed for this Research

METHODOLOGY

Research Methodology

A quantitative approach was used in this research. An examination of the literature assisted in the development of

a conceptual model of the consumer attitude and acceptance of SMS advertising.

Data Collection

In order to empirically test the hypotheses developed in the previous section, data were collected using a

convenience sampling approach via an online self-administered survey. During a five-week period, 238 respondents

completed the survey. The survey was mainly promoted online and hosted by SurveyMonkey website; a provider of web-

based survey solutions(www.surveymonkey.com).Respondents were invited to take the questionnaire by sending them the

link of the survey webpage on their email addresses, Facebook pages, and via a popular mobile-device application called

Whatsapp. As an incentive for participation, respondents were given the chance to enter a prize draw of mobile-device

accessories through a gift voucher with a value of 25JD. A total of 238 responses were collected in both languages Arabic

and English. Eighteen responses were discarded due duplicate submissions or incompletion, a net sample of 220 usable

questionnaires remained.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/


Measurement and Scaling

The conceptualization and development of the questionnaire was based on the existing literature, resulted in total

of 53 items. Additional four items were included for capturing demographic information (gender, age, educational level,

and marital status). A typical 5-point Likert scale was used to measure the constructs presented in the proposed model

(scores were ranged from 1=‟strongly agree ‟ to 7=‟strongly disagree‟ with „neutral‟ score= 4), following many marketing

scholars, such asBamba and Barnes (2006), Haghirian and Madlberger (2005),Saadeghvaziri and Seyedjavadain (2011),

and Tsang et al. (2004). The survey instrument was refined during a pre-test to ensure the internal consistency of the

measured instrument, with the involvement of 33 respondents. Consequently, the wording of some questions was modified,

and the instrument was reduced to 44 items by deleting items with high cross-loadings, and in order to use less complex

measurement items. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 19.0. Part of it was descriptive, while the inferential

part of the statistical analysis examined the factors that impact consumer attitude towards and acceptance of SMS

advertising. Analysis is shown in the scenario below.

RESULTS ANALYSIS

Sample Profiles

As mentioned before, data were gathered from a convenience sample of 220 respondents via an online survey.

The data relating to respondents‟ profiles were tabulated to get a better feel of the data, as recommended by Sekaran

(2003). Therefore the respondents‟ demographic profiles were tabulated for gender, age, education level and marital status

(Table 1). As shown in Table 1, male respondents accounted for the majority of the sample (61%) and the age of the

respondents ranged from 18 to 70 years whereby the higher range was between 21 to 29 years. In relation to the

educational level, 25% of the respondents reported completed higher education, while 68% reported achieving a university

degree. For marital status, over 60% of the respondents reported to be married, while over 36% of the respondents were

single.

Table 1: Demographics of the Studied Sample

Variable Category

Response

Information

N= 220

Gender Male 61%

Female 39%

Age

Less than 20 39.40%

21-29 26.80%

30-39 24.90%

40-49 6.10%

50-59 0.90%

Above 60 1.90%

Education

Less than high school 2.50%

High School 5.30%

University Degree 68%

Higher Education 25%

Marital Status

Single 12.60%

Married 29.50%

Divorced 32.90%

Reliability testing using Cronbach‟s Alpha found all constructs to be reliable at the acceptable lower limit of 0.6

(Hair et al., 2008; Nunnally, 1978).Multiple regression analysis was used to test the relationships between the independent


variables including informativeness, entertainment, irritation, SMS advertising credibility, message clarity, incentives,

brand familiarity, SMS ad relevancy, personalisation, subjective norms and consumer control and the dependentvariable,

attitude towards SMS advertising. The eleven constructs accounted for 50.5% of the varianceof consumer attitude towards

SMS advertising as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1 .711a .505 .479 2.686

A significant, positive relationship between informativeness and consumer attitude towards SMS advertising was

found (Sig. = 0.002, β = 0.112), indicating Hypothesis 1 is supported. Next, a positive, significant relationship between

entertainment and attitude towards SMS advertising was found (Sig. = 0.047, β = 0.125), meaning Hypothesis 2 is

supported. Thirdly, a significant negative relationship between irritation and attitude towards SMS advertising was found

(Sig. =0.025, β = -0.120), indicating that hypothesis 3 is supported. The result for H4 indicates that SMS advertising

credibility has a significant positive effect on consumers‟ attitudes towards SMS advertising (Sig. = .000, β = 0.250), thus,

the higher the credibility of SMS advertising, the more favourable the attitude towards SMS advertising. This finding

supports H4.

Table 3: Coefficients of the Regression Analysis

Model

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

Beta

Informativeness .112 1.459 .002

Entertainment .125 1.750 .047

irritation -.120 1.177 .025

SMS ad credibility .250 3.710 .000

Message Clarity .264 4.312 .000

Consumer Control -.168 -3.128 .002

Message incentives .109 .063 .001

Ad_ Relevancy .117 1.971 .045

Brand familiarity -.273 -4.894 .000

SMS ad

personalisation .197 .1.457 .035

Social influence .131 2.455 .015

As shown in Table 3, message clarity of the SMS advertisements has a significant positive effect on consumer

attitude towards SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.000, β = 0.264) suggesting that consumer attitude towards SMS advertising is

highly and positively influenced by the clarity of the message, thereby, supporting H5. Providing incentives for receiving

SMS advertisements has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.001, β =

0.109) suggesting that SMS recipients react very positively towards SMS advertisement that have incentives, providing

support for H6. Further, familiarity of brand included in the SMS advertisements has a significant negative effect on

consumer attitude towards SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.000, β = -0.273) suggesting that consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising is basically negative particularly for SMS advertisements that include familiar brands, thereby, rejecting H7.

As shown by the multiple regression analysis results, SMS message advertising relevancy has a significant

positive effect on attitude towards SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.045, β = 0.117) indicating that the higher the relevancy of

SMS advertisements‟ messages, the most positive the attitude towards SMS advertising. This finding supports H8. As


proposed in H9, personalized SMS advertising message has a significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards

SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.035, β = 0.197) providing support for H9. Consistent with H10, subjective norms have a

significant positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.015, β = 0.131) implying that others‟

opinions are significantly and positively related to consumer attitude towards SMS advertising, thereby supporting H10.

The result for H11 indicate that consumer control in regards to SMS advertising has a significant negative

influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.002, β = -0.168), thus, consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising is negatively influenced by the perceived control that consumers have over the advertising messages they

receive, thereby rejecting H11.

The model summary of the second regression as shown in Table 4 indicates that the R square value is .232 which

means that the attitude towards SMS advertising explains 23.2% of the variance in the acceptance of SMS advertising in

Jordan.

Table 4: Model Summary of the Regression

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1 .482a .232 .228 2.357

a. Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards SMS ad

The multiple regression analysis results as shown in Table 5, indicate consumer attitude towards SMS advertising

has a significant positive influence on consumer acceptance of SMS advertising (Sig. = 0.000, β = 0.482), indicating that

the more positive the attitude towardsSMS advertising, the greater the acceptance the consumer has of SMS advertising

supporting H12.

Table 5: Coefficients of the Second Regression

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 9.493 .498

19.059 .000

Attitude towards SMS ad .347 .043 .482 8.112 .000

a. Dependent Variable: Consumer Acceptance of SMS ad

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

The current study seeks to identify the most important factors influencing consumers‟ attitudes and acceptance of

SMS advertising in Jordan. For this purpose, a study model was developed which consisted of several factors including

informativeness, entertainment, irritation, SMS advertising credibility, message clarity, incentives, brand familiarity, SMS

advertising relevancy, personalisation, subjective norms, consumer control, consumer attitude towards SMS advertising,

and consumer acceptance of SMS advertising. This model has comprehensively integrated aspects from the parent

disciplines of SMS advertising and consumer attitude, together with exploratory, empirical, conceptual and anecdotal

literature conducted in the immediate discipline of SSA advertising. Thus, the proposed model was theoretically based.

The set of hypotheses, derived from the current study‟s mode, were developed based on the relevant literature and were

tested quantitatively using online survey as a mean for data collection.

A comparison of the results with the extant literature is framed within the context of the hypotheses developed to

address the major research objective which wasto determine the factors influencing consumer attitude towards and


acceptance of SMS advertising in Jordan.Moreover, this comparison provides brief discussion regarding the

confirmation/disconfirmation of each hypothesis in the existing literature, and determines whether it has been speculated

upon, or implied, or mentioned without empirical investigation, or has been/ has not been examined in prior research

studies. Furthermore, the discussion is presented regarding the contribution of this current study as being consistent or

inconsistent with previous research and whether it has advanced the existing theory through providing contributions to the

literature. Importantly, the current research made a number of academic and managerial contributions to the existing

relevant SMS advertising literature.

The data analysis of the first hypothesis of the study showed that informativeness of the SMS advertisement has a

positive influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising. Although SMS advertisements are limited by the 160

characters – 70 characters in case of Arabic – without any visualization, the sample of the current study indicated that the

nature of the information provided through SMS advertisements is considered as a valuable motivation that lead them to

react favourably and positively towards such advertisements. This finding is consistent with previous studies within the

SMS advertising context (Bauer etal., 2005; Ducoffe, 1996; Haghirian et al., 2005; Luong, 2007; Merisavo&Kajalo, 2007;

Oh & Xu, 2003; Siau & Shen, 2003; Sultan et al., 2010; Tsang et al., 2004; Xu et al., 2008). For example, Tsang et al.

(2004) found that perceived informativeness of mobile advertising has a direct positive effect on attitude toward mobile

advertising. This finding has previously been confirmed in the traditional media whereby it was found that informativeness

influences attitude toward the advertising (Ducoffe, 1995). Based on the research findings, SMS advertising should be

informative about new products and must demonstrate qualitative features like accuracy, timeliness, and usefulness for

consumers.

The data analysis of the second hypothesis indicated that the entertainment aspect of the SMS advertisements is

positively related to consumer attitude towards SMS advertising in Jordan. Many previous studies supported this finding

stating that the positive influence of entertainment on the consumers‟ attitude toward mobile advertising. For instance,

Tsang et al. (2004) found that entertainment is the major factor to influence the overall attitude towards mobile advertising.

Bauer et al. (2005) confirmed that there is a positive influence of entertainment on the overall attitude toward mobile

advertising. Further confirmation to this finding was presented by Haghirian and Madlberger (2005) who stated that the

entertainment is positively correlated to the advertising value and attitude toward mobile advertising. Taking this finding

into consideration, it may proposed that marketers should look at creating humorous SMS advertisements as these can help

to gain the attention of readers as suggested by Barwise and Strong (2002) and Van der Waldt et al. (2009). Furthermore,

marketers need to look at ways of increasing the entertainment as well as the level of enjoyment consumers‟ associate with

the receiving of SMS advertisements.

Irritation of SMS advertising was hypothesised to have a negative influence on consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising. The findings of the data analysis provided support for this hypothesis. In addition, this finding was found to be

supported in the literature in various contexts and situations. For example, in the offline media context, an early study by

Bauer and Greyser (1968) found that the main reason people criticize advertising was related to annoyance or irritation

caused by the advertising. This finding is also consistent with previous results within the mobile advertising context. for

instance, previous SMS advertising research found that irritation caused by unwanted mobile advertising messages affect

negatively the attitude toward mobile advertising (Haghirian & Madlberger, 2005; Tsang et al., 2004; Waldt et al., 2004;

Xu, 2006). For this reason, it is concluded that if SMS advertising is applied in a way that disturb and annoy the consumer,

it will reduce the acceptance of receiving advertising messages. That‟s why it is required to apply strategiesthat reduce the

irritation caused by SMS advertising messages.


The data analysis of the fourth hypothesis determined that credibility of SMS advertising has a positive influence

on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising. This result is consistent with prior research findings within the offline and

SMS advertising context (Brackett & Carr, 2001; Dahlén & Nordfält, 2004; MacKenzie & Lutz, 1989; Friman, 2010;

Haghirian & Madlberger, 2004; Tsang et al., 2004; Waldt, Rebello, & Brown, 2009). The credibility involves the truthful

and believable of the advisers and the medium. This implies that the message content must be carefully designed to support

high level of credibility to increase the consumer attitude toward mobile advertising.

The current study also found that Message clarity has a positive effect on consumer attitude towards SMS

advertising, and this result is consistent with previous research conducted within the context of billboard advertising

(Taylor et al., 2006). Taking into consideration that there is a scant research attention regarding the influence of message

clarity on consumer attitude in the SMS advertising context, the findings in the current research extend SMS advertising

research by demonstrating that SMS message clarity will influence positively consumer attitude towards SMS advertising.

The findings of the current study also found that incentives included in the SMS advertisements have a positive

influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising and this is consistent with Saadeghvaziri and Tsang et al. (2004)

studies. This is in line with similar research in Internet advertising, where most web surfers look for incentives to read an

advertisement before they click on it (Lohtia, Donthu, & Hershberger, 2003). Taking this point further, Tsang et al. (2004)

demonstrated that consumers were more willing to accept incentive-based SMS advertising. Importantly, a more recent

study by Saadeghvaziri and Seyedjavadain (2011) found that monetary benefit of mobile advertising has a direct influence

on consumer attitude toward mobile advertising. So mobile advertising must create value. In other words, consumers who

agree to receive ads into their mobile phones should be provided by financial rewards. The current research supports that

users expect a reward for receiving SMS advertisements.

Regarding the finding of the seventh hypothesis, the current research rejected this hypothesis indicated that SMS

advertising for familiar brand has a negative influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising which is inconsistent

with Okazaki (2005) and Barwise and Strong (2002) contention. This situation is surprising given that brand familiarity

increases the consumer‟s level of confidence within the offline advertising context as contended by Park and Stoel (2005).

We believe that the current research is the first empirical study linking brand familiarity and consumer attitude in the SMS

advertising context. As such, the findings here provide a richer perspective on brand familiarity as negatively influencing

consumer attitude and acceptance of SMS advertising.

The study‟s finding also illustrates that relevancy and the personalisation of SMS advertisements have a positive

influence on consumer attitude towards SMS advertising in Jordan. That is, relevancy and personalization are important

factors that affect the attitude enables marketer to arrange their mobile advertising messages to meet the time, location and

the preference of the consumers. This is consistent with Bauer et al. (2005), Scharl et al. (2005), Xu (2006), Carroll et al.

(2007), Pagnani (2004) and Nasco and Bruner (2008). For example, it was found that found that consumers were more

likely to accept the messages when the content was relevant to them (Nasco & Bruner, 2008). Further, Xu (2006)

empirically found that personalization is significant factor that influences consumer attitude towards SMS advertising.

The findings of the current study also found that subjective norms have a positive influence on consumer attitude

towards SMS advertising in the Jordanian market context which is consistent with previous research conducted by Bauer et

al. (2005), Mansour (2012) and Soroa-Koury and Yang (2010). As for the consumer control factor, the result of the current

study found that respondents have considered such factor to have no positive influence on their attitude and acceptance of

SMS advertising which is inconsistent with the vast majority of the studies within the extant relevant literature (for


example, Scharl et al., 2005; Tsang et al., 2004). However, the result of the current study is consistent with Merisavo et

al.‟s (2007) study in which Finland control of SMS advertising was not found to affect the consumers‟ acceptance of

mobile advertising. This result may be explained by the notion that consumers may take it for granted that advertisers do

not send consumers unsolicited messages. This is supported by the strict anti-spam law in Jordan, which state that

advertisers are not allowed to send SMS without prior permission.

Moreover, consumer attitude towards SMS advertising was found to have a positive influence on consumer

acceptance of SMS advertising in Jordan. This conclusion has been confirmed by many previous studies stating that there

is a direct relationship between consumer attitudes and consumer behaviour within the SMS advertising context (Haghirian

& Madlberger, 2005; Tsang et al., 2004; Xu et al., 2008). This view was further supported by Lee and Jun‟s (2007)

findings that consumer attitudes are directly linked to behavioural intentions for mobile advertising, such as getting free

coupons, calling back, sending text messages, visiting specific shops, and allowing messages.

In conclusion, this study is considered valuable to the Jordanian telecommunication sector as it provides a unique

and significant managerial and practical contribution as it has not only focused on the advertising value factors as the only

important factors influencing consumer attitude and acceptance of SMS advertising, but it has also incorporated different

message content factors in which some of these factors have not been previously examined such as brand familiarity and

message clarity. Advertisers in Jordan should attempt to create messages that have high information content, entertainment

value, not irritating in any aspect, relevant and personalised to the targeted consumer as well as incentive based, clear and

personalised. In addition, messages should be time and location relevant.Messages that take into account the time of day,

such as dinner vouchers, or location, such assending messages as consumers pass by a specific store, are likely to add value

for the consumerand result in higher levels of acceptance. Advertisers should also be mindful that they will gainthe greatest

acceptance of an advertising campaign from those consumers who respond favourably to advertising in general.

FUTURE RESEARCH

As the data collection has focused on Jordanian consumers, it could be suggested that the results may lead to

different findings in other countries. As such, the model of the current study could be tested in other developed and

developing countries. This replication would allow examine whether the findings hold true in other regions, and thus

provide greater support for the generalizability of the findings of the study. Another opportunity for future research is to

extend the model to include other variables such as the demographic variables.

REFERENCES

1. Abd Aziz, N., Yasin, N. M., &Kadir, S. L. S. A. (2008). Web advertising beliefs and attitude: Internet users‟

view. The Business Review, 9(2), 332-338.

2. Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research,

13(4), 411-454.

3. Bamba, F. & Barnes, S. (2006) Evaluating consumer permission in SMS advertising.Working papers on

information systems, 6 (41).

4. Barnes, S. J. and E. Scornavacca, (2004). Mobile Marketing: The Role of Permission and Acceptance.

International Journal of Mobile Communications, 2(2), 128-139.

5. Barwise, P., & Strong, C. (2002). Permission-based mobile advertising. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16(1),

14 - 24.


6. Bauer RA, Greyser, SA. (1968). Advertising in America: The Consumer View, Boston, MA: Harvard University,

Graduate School of Business Administration, Division of Research.

7. Bauer, H.H., Barnes, S.J., Reichardt, T. & Neumann, M.M. 2005. Driving consumer acceptance of mobile

marketing: A theoretical framework and empirical study. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6, (3), 181-

192.

8. Becker, H. &Martinsen, J. (2006). Factors Influencing Mobile Advertising Acceptance: Will Incentives Motivate

College Students to Accept Mobile Advertisements? International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(1), 50-58.

9. Bettman, J., & Park, W. (1980). Effects of prior knowledge and experience on consumer decision processes: a

protocol analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 234-248.

10. Brackett Lana K., Benjamin N. Carr, Jr., Cyberspace Advertising vs. Other Media: Consumer vs. iVIature Student

Attitudes, Journal of advertising research, (2001).

11. Bulander, R., Decker, M., Schiefer, G., &Kölmel, B. (2005). Comparison of Different Approaches for Mobile

Advertising. Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Workshop on Mobile Commerce and Services.

12. Campbell, M. C. & Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. Journal of

Consumer Research, 30 (2), 292-304.

13. Campbell, M. C., Keller, K. L., Mick, D. G., & Hoyer, W. D. (2003). Brand familiarity and advertising repetition

effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 292-304.

14. Carroll, A., Barnes, S. J., Scornavacca, E., & Fletcher, K. (2007). Consumer Perceptions and Attitudes towards

SMS Advertising: Recent Evidence From New Zealand, International Journal of Advertising, 26(1), 79-98.

15. Chen, Q., & Wells, W. D. (1999). Attitude toward the site. Journal of Advertising Research, 39(5), 27-37.

16. Coates, S. L., Butler, L. T., & Berry, D. C. (2006). Implicit memory and consumer choice: The mediating role of

brand familiarity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1101-1116.

17. Dahlén, M., & Nordfält, J. (2004). Interference Effects of a Purchase on Subsequent Advertising Within the

Category. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(1), 1-8.

18. Daugherty, T., Lagan, K., Chu, S. & Huang, S. (2007) Understanding consumerperceptions of advertising: a

theoretical framework of attitude and confidence. TheUniversity of Texas at Austin.

19. Dickinger A., Jamie Murphy, Arno Scharl. (2004). Diffusion and success factors of mobile marketing, Elsevier

B.V.,159-173.

20. Drossos, D., Giaglis, G. M., Lekakos, G., Kokkinaki, F., & Stavraki, M. G. (2007). Determinants of Effective

SMS Advertising: An Experimental Study. Journal of Interactive Advertising , 7 (2).

21. Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising Value and Advertising on the Web. Journal of Advertising Research,

36(September/October), 21 - 36.

22. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behaviour: An introduction to theory and

research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

23. Friman, J. (2010) Consumer Attitudes toward Mobile Advertising. Master‟s Thesis. Aalto University School of

Economic.

24. Goldsmith, R. E., & Lafferty, B. A. (2002). Consumer response to websites and their influence on advertising

effectiveness. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications & Policy, 12(4), 318-328.


25. Gordon, M. & Turner, K. (1997) Consumer attitudes towards internet advertising. International Marketing

Review, 14 (5), pp. 352-375.

26. Grant, I., and S. O‟Donohoe. 2007. Why young consumers are not open to mobile marketing communication.

International Journal of Advertising 26 (2), 223-246.

27. Haghirian, P. & Madlberger, M. (2005). Consumer Attitude toward Advertising via Mobile Devices - An

Empirical Investigation among Austrian Users. In Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information

Systems (ECIS 2005), Regensburg, Germany, 26-28 May 2005.

28. Haghirian, P., Madlberger, M. (2004). A Cross Cultural Analysis of Perceptions of Mobile Advertising. A Survey

amongAustrian and Japanese Students, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, 3-8.

29. Haghirian, P.,Madlberger, M., Tanuskova, A. (2005). Increasing Advertising Value of Mobile Marketing – An

Empirical Study of Antecedents. Proceedings of the 38th

Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

30. Hair, J., Lukas, B., Miller, K., Bush, R., &Ortinau, D. (2008). Marketing research (2nd

Ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin,

Sydney, Australia.

31. Hanley M, Becker M, Martinsen J.(2006). Factors influencing mobile advertising acceptance: will incentives

motivate college students to accept mobile advertisements? International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(1),50-

58.

32. Hanley, M., & M. Becker. (2008). Cell phone usage and advertising acceptance among college students: A four

year analysis. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 3(1), 67-80.

33. Hanley, M., Martinsen, J., & Pryor, L. (2005). College Cell Phone Advertising Survey., Department of

Journalism, Ball State University.

34. Hoch, S. J. & Deighton, J. (1989). Managing what consumers learn from experience. Journal of Marketing, 53(1),

1-20.

35. Iddris, F. (2006). Mobile Advertising in B2C Marketing. Master Thesis, Continuation Courses, Business

Administration and Social Sciences, Lulea University of technology. Retrieved February 1, 2013 from

http://epubl.ltu.se/1653-0187/2006/11/LTU-PB-EX-0611-SE.pdf

36. Jacoby, J., & Hoyer W. D. (1990) The miscomprehension of mass-media advertising claims: a re-analysis of

benchmark data. Journal of Advertising Research,(June/July), 9–16.

37. Jamieson, K. J., I. Y. Phau, & Dix, S. R. (2011). Consumer acceptance of SMS advertising ? evidence from

Australian consumers. Paper presented at Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference, Nov 28,

2010, Perth, Australia.

38. Jordan Telecommunications Report Q3 2012. (2012) Retrieved from http://www.marketresearch.com/Business-

Monitor-International-v304/Jordan-Telecommunications-Q3-7043877/

39. Karjaluoto, H., Lehto, H., Leppäniemi, M., &Mustonen, T. (2007). Insights into the Implementation of Mobile

Marketing Campaigns. International al Journal of Mobile Marketing , 2 (2), 10-20.

40. Katterbach, W. (2002). Die SMS-verkäufer. Impulse, 1st February, 76, pp. 76.

41. Keller, K. L. (1991). Cue compatibility and framing in advertising. Journal of MarketingResearch, 28(1), 42-57.

42. Kent, R. J., & Allen, C. T. (1994). Competitive interference effects in consumer memory for advertising: the role

of brand familiarity. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 97-105.

http://epubl.ltu.se/1653-0187/2006/11/LTU-PB-EX-0611-SE.pdf

http://www.marketresearch.com/Business-Monitor-International-v304/Jordan-Telecommunications-Q3-7043877/

http://www.marketresearch.com/Business-Monitor-International-v304/Jordan-Telecommunications-Q3-7043877/


43. Korgaonkar, P. K., & Wolin, L. D. (2002). Web usage, advertising and shopping: relationship patterns. Internet

Research: Electronic Networking Applications & Policy, 12(2), 191-204.

44. Krishnamurthy, S. (2001). A comprehensive analysis of permission marketing Journal of Computer Mediated

Communication, 6 (2).

45. Lastovicka, J. L. (1983). Convergent and discriminant validity of television commercial rating scales. Journal of

Advertising, 12 (2), 14-23.

46. Leppaniemi, M., Sinisalo, J., & Karjaluoto, H. (2006). A Review of Mobile Marketing Research.International

Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(1), 30-42.

47. Leung, L. (2007). Unwillingness-to-communicate and college students‟ motives in SMS mobile messaging.

Telematics and Informatics, 24, 115 – 129.

48. Ling, K., Piew, T., & Chai, L. (2010). The Determinants Of Consumers‟ Attitude Toward Advertising. Canadian

Social Science, 6 (4), 114-126.

49. Lohtia, R., Donthu, N., & Hershberger, E. K. (2004). The Impact of Content and Design Elements on Banner

Advertising Click-through Rates. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(04), 410-418.

50. Lutz, R. (1985). Affective and cognitive antecedents of attitude towards the ad: A conceptual framework.

Psychological procedure and advertising effects: Theory, Research, and Applications, Linda Allowed and Andrew

Mitchell, eds., Hillsdale, NJ.

51. MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. J. (1989). An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of attitude toward

the ad in an advertising pre-testing context. Journal of Marketing, 53(1), 48-65.

52. MacKenzie, S. B., & Spreng, R. A. (1992). How does motivation moderate the impact of central and peripheral

processing on brand attitudes and intentions?The Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 519-529.

53. Maneesoonthorn, C., &Fortin, D. ( 2006). Texting Behaviour and Attitudes towardPermission Mobile

Advertising. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1 (1), 66-72.

54. Mansour, I. H. F. (2012). Factors Affecting Consumers' intention to accept mobile Advertising in Sudan.

Journal of Management Studies, 5(1), 1-18.

55. Martinez, E., Polo, Y., & Chernatony, L. (2008). Effect of brand extension strategies on brand image.

International Marketing Review, 25(1), 107-137.

56. McManus, P., Scornavacca, E. (2005). Mobile marketing: Killer application or new hype? Proceedings of the

International Conference on Mobile Business (ICMB’05), Sydney, Australia.

57. McMillan, S. J., Hwang, J-S, & Lee, G. (2003). Effects of structural and perceptual factors on attitudes toward the

website . Journal of Advertising Research, 43(3), 400-409.

58. Mirbagheri, SeyedAlireza. (2010) SMS Advertising Business Model: Toward Finding Vital Elements of its Value

Model, 815-824. In 2010 European Applied Business Research Conference Proceedings.

59. Mehta, A. (1994). How advertising response modelling (ARM) can influence advertising effectiveness. Journal of

Advertising Research, 33(3), 62-74.

60. Mehta, A. (2000). Advertising attitudes and advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research, 40 (3),

67-72.

http://www.mendeley.com/research/sms-advertising-business-model-toward-finding-vital-elements-value-model/




61. Merisavo, M. Kajalo, S. (2007). An Empirical Study of the Drivers of Consumer Acceptance of Mobile

Advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 7(3).

62. Merisavo,M., Kajalo, S., Karjaluoto, H., Virtanen, V., Salmenkivi, S., Raulas, M., Leppäniemi ,M. (2007). An

Empirical Study of the Drivers of Consumer Acceptance of Mobile Advertising. Journal of Interactive

advertising, 7 (2).

63. Mittal, B. (1994). Public assessment of TV advertising: Faint praise and harsh critiscism. Journal of Advertising

Research, 34 , 35-53.

64. Muk, A., & Babin, B. J. (2006). U.S. consumers‟ adoption – Non adoption of mobile SMS advertising.

International Journal of Mobile Marketing , 1 (1), 21-29.

65. Nasco, S., & Bruner II, G.C. (2008). Comparing consumer responses to advertising and non-advertising mobile

communications. Psychology & Marketing, 25(8), 822–838.

66. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometrictheory, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

67. Luong , H. (2007) .Mobile Advertising. Case study of MindMatics and 12 Snap Lokomobi, Lulea University of

Technology, Advanced material Science and Engineering, Department of Business Administration and Social

Sciences. Master Thesis.

68. Oh, L. & Xu, H. (2003): Effects of Multimedia on Mobile Consumer Behavior: An Empirical Study of Location-

Aware Advertising. In Proceedings of Twenty-Forth International Conference on Information Systems. 679-691.

69. Okazaki, S. (2005). New perspectives on m-commerce research. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6(3),

160-164.

70. Okazaki, S., H. Li, & M. Hirose. (2009). Consumer Privacy Concerns and Preference for Degree of Regulatory

Control. Journal of Advertising, 38 (4), 63-77.

71. Pagnani, M. (2004). Determinants of adoption of third generation mobile multimedia services. Journal of

Interactive Marketing, 18(3), pp. 46–59.

72. Park, C. W., & Lessig, V. P. (1981). Familiarity and its impact on consumer decision biases and heuristics.

Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 223-230.

73. Park, J., & Stoel, L. (2005). Effect of brand familiarity, experience and information on online apparel purchase.

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33(2), 148-160.

74. Pastore M (2002). Incentives Still Key to Mobile Advertising. Clickz. Retrieved July 29, 2012 from

http://www.clickz.com/stats/sectors/wireless/article.php/10094_96506

75. Pechmann C, &Stewart D. W. (1990). The effects of comparative advertising on attention, memory, and purchase

intentions. Journal of Consumer Research 17, 180–191.

76. Pechmann C. (1996). Do consumers overgeneralize one-sided comparative price claims and are more stringent

regulations needed? Journal of Marketing Research, 33, 150–162.

77. Pietz, M., Olofsson, O., &Paulsson, A. (2009). Advertisement to Mobile Phones, Success or Failure? A study of

Swedish Youths acceptance towards Receiving Mobile Advertisement. Swedish University Essays, pp. 23.

78. Pietz, M.Storbacka, R.& Muller (2007). Driving Advertising into Mobile Medium, Study of Consumer Attitudes

towards Mobile Advertising and Factors Affecting on Them. Swedish University Essays, PP.12-31.

79. Pieters, R., Warlop, L., & Wedel, M. (2002). Breaking through the clutter: benefits of advertisement originality

and familiarity for brand attention and memory. Management Science, 48(6), 765-781.


80. Poh, D. M. H., & Adam, S. (2002). An exploratory investigation of attitude toward the website and the advertising

hierarchy of effects. Retrieved April 5, 2012, from http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/papers/refereed/poh/paper.html

81. Pollay R., & Mittal, B. (1993). Here‟s the beef: Factors, determinants, and segments in consumer criticism of

advertising, Journal of Advertising, 57 (3), 99-114.

82. Rettie, R., & Brum, M. (2001). M-commerce: the role of SMS text messages. COTIM-2001. Proceedings of E-

commerce to M-commerce. Editors: R.R. Dholakia, L. Kolbe, A. Venkatesh, and P. Zoche, Kingston, RI: RITIM,

University of Rhode Island, 2001.

83. Rettie, Ruth, Ursula Grandcolas, &BethanDeakins (2005). Text Message Advertising: Response Rates and

Branding Effects. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 13 (4), 304-312.

84. Saadeghvaziri, F., & S. Seyedjavadain, (2011). Attitude Towards Advertising: Mobile Advertising vs.

Advertising-in-general. European Journal of Economics., 28, 104-114.

85. Scharl, A., Dickinger, A. and Murphy, J. (2005). Diffusion and success factors of mobile marketing. Electronic

Commerce Research & Applications, 4(2), 159-173.

86. Schlosser, A. E., Shavitt, S., & Kanfer, A. (1999). Survey of Internet users‟ attitudes towards Internet advertising.

Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13(3), 35-54.

87. Shavitt, S., Lowrey, P. & Haefner, J. (1998) Public attitudes towards advertising: more favorable than you might

think, Journal of Advertising Research, 38 (4), 7-22.

88. Shimp. (2007). Integrated Marketing Communication Advertising and Promotion.(7th ed). Thomson.

89. Sekaran, U. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

90. Siau, K. & Shen, Z. (2003). Building Customer Trust in Mobile Commerce. Communications of the ACM. 46(4),

91 - 94.

91. Simonin, B. L., & Ruth, J. A. (1998). Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spillover

effects if brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(1), 30-42.

92. SkyGo, Inc. (2001). Ideas & Strategies for Implementing Mobile Marketing. WhitePaper.

http://www.wirelessdevnet.com/library/SkyGo_White_Paper.pdf.

93. SMS Marketing Statistics 2012, Posted by Emily Hubbman on Sun, Nov 11, 2012 @ 12:00 PM

http://marketing.anchormobile.net/blog/bid/178560/SMS-Marketing-Statistics-2012

94. Stevenson, J. S., Bruner, G. C., & Kumar, A. (2000). Webpage background and viewer attitudes. Journal of

Advertising Research, 40(1), 29-34.

95. Snyder, R. (1989). Misleading characteristics of implied superiority claims. Journal of Advertising, 18(4), 54-61.

96. Soderlund, M. (2002). Customer familiarity and its effect on satisfaction and behavioural intention. Psychology &

Marketing, 19 (10), 861-880.

97. Soroa-Koury, S., &Yang, K. C. C., (2010). Factors Affecting Consumers‟ Responses to Mobile Advertising From

a Social Norm Theoretical Perspective. Telematics and Informatics, (27), 103-113.

98. Standing, C. Benson, S. & Karjaluoto, S (2005). Consumer Perspectives on Mobile Advertising And Marketing.

Electronic Marketing,135-141.

http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/papers/refereed/poh/paper.html

http://www.wirelessdevnet.com/library/SkyGo_White_Paper.pdf

http://marketing.anchormobile.net/blog/?Author=Emily+Hubbman

http://marketing.anchormobile.net/blog/bid/178560/SMS-Marketing-Statistics-2012


99. Stewart, D. and Pavlou, P. (2002). From consumer response to active consumer: measuring the effectiveness of

interactive media. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30 (4), 376-396.

100. Sultan Fareena, Tao (Tony) Gao, Andrew Rohm (2010). Factors influencing Chinese youth consumers‟

acceptance of mobile marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27/7, 574–583.

101. Taylor, C. R., Franke, G. R., and Bang, H. (2006). Use and Effectiveness of billboards Perspectives from

Selective-Perception Theory and Retail-Gravity Models. Journal of Advertising, 35(4), 21-34.

102. Tsang M. M, Ho S. H., &Liang, T. P. (2004). Consumer Attitudes toward Mobile Advertising: An Empirical

Study. International Journalof Electronic Commerce., 8(3), 65-78.

103. Usta, R. (2009). Undergraduates Attitudes Toward Mobile Advertising. DogusÜniversitesiDergisi. 10(2), 294-

309.

104. Van der Waldt, D. L. R., Rebello, T. M. & Brown, W. J. (2009). Attitudes of young consumers towards SMS

advertising. African Journal of Business Management, 3, 444-452.

105. Varshney, U. (2003). Location Management for Mobile Commerce Applications in Wireless Internet

Environment. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 3(3), 236 -

106. Vatanparast, R. (2007). Piercing the Fog of Mobile Advertising. Proceedings of the Sixth International

Conference on the Management of Mobile Business.

107. Waldt, V. Rebello, T. & Brown, W. (2009). Attitudes of young consumers towards SMS advertising. African

Journal of Business Management, 3, 444-452.

108. Wang, C., Zhang, P., Choi, R., & D‟Eredita, M. (2002). Understanding consumers‟ attitude toward advertising.

Eighth Americas Conference on Information Systems. Retrieved April 05, 20012, from

http://melody.syr.edu/hci/amcis02_minitrack/RIP/Wang.pdf

109. Williams, F., Rice, R.E. & Rogers, E.M. (1998) Research Methods and the New Media. London: The Free Press.

110. Wilska, T.-A. (2003) Mobile phone use as part of young people‟s consumption. Journal of Consumer Policy,

26,441–463.

111. Wolin, L., Korgaonkar, P., Lund, D. (2002). Beliefs, attitudes and behaviour towards web advertising.

International Journal of Advertising, 21 (1), 87-113.

112. Wunker, S. & Hughes A. (2001). The next big thing and how to use it. Admap, 414.

113. Xu , J. D. ( 2007 ). The influence of personalization in affecting consumer attitudes toward mobile advertising in

China.Journal of Computer Information Systems, 4 , 2, 9 – 19.

114. Xu, D. J., Liao, S. S., & Li, Q. (2008). Combining empirical experimentation and modelingtechniques:A design

research approach for personalized mobile advertising applications. Decision Support Systems, 44, 710–724.

http://melody.syr.edu/hci/amcis02_minitrack/RIP/Wang.pdf

Documents

1.A Comprehensive.full