Personalizing communication means creating persuasive messages that refer to aspects of a person's self. Although the use of personalization is increasing, research on its effectiveness is limited and the results are mixed. This study examined the persuasiveness of personalized e-mail newsletters in terms of increased attention, cognitive activity, evaluation, attitude, intention, and behavior by means of an experiment (n=109). Participants randomly received either a personalized or a generic newsletter advertising a sports center. Personalization triggered a more positive evaluation of the message; however, it did not influence the other effect variables. The effects were moderated by consumers' need for uniqueness, trust, and privacy concerns, suggesting that personalization is a good strategy to increase message evaluation only among individuals who have a high need for uniqueness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SackmannS, StrükerJ, AccorsiR. Personalization in privacy-aware highly dynamic systems. Communications of the ACM, 2006; 49:22–38.
2.
DijsktraA. Working mechanisms of computer-tailored health education: evidence from smoking cessation. Health Education Research, 2008; 20:527–539.
3.
Jupiter Research. 2007. www.emailstatcenter.com. 2010 Oct 21.
4.
WundermanE. Direct marketing: leading today's digital world. Brandweek, 2010; 51:1–2
5.
BullFC, HoltCL, KreuterMWet al.Understanding the effects of printed health education materials: which features lead to which outcomes?Journal of Health Communication, 2001; 6:265–279.
6.
KreuterMW, BullFC, ClarkEMet al.Understanding how people process health information: a comparison of tailored and untailored weight-loss materials. Health Psychology, 1999; 18:487–494.
7.
WogalterMS, RacicotBM, KalsherMJet al.Personalization of warning signs: the role of perceived relevance on behavioral compliance. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 1994; 14:233–242.
8.
WebbMS, SimmonsVN, BrandonTH. Tailored interventions for motivating smoking cessation: using placebo tailoring to examine the influence of expectancies and personalization. Health Psychology, 2005; 24:179–188.
9.
LinC-P, HuangH-N, JoeS-Wet al.Learning the determinants of satisfaction and usage intention of instant messaging. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2008; 11:262–267.
10.
DijkstraA. Working mechanisms of computer-tailored health education: evidence from smoking cessation. Health Education Research, 2005; 20:527–539.
11.
KreuterMW, WrayRJ. Tailored and targeted health communication: strategies for enhancing information relevance. American Journal of Health Behavior, 2003; 27:227–232.
12.
HeerweghD, VanhoveT, MatthijsKet al.The effect of personalization on response rates and data quality in web surveys. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2005; 8:85–99.
13.
ShenA, BallAD. Is personalization of services always a good thing? Exploring the role of technology-mediated personalization (TMP) in service relationships. Journal of Services Marketing, 2009; 23:80–92.
14.
YuJ, CudeB. “Hello, Mrs Sarah Jones! We recommend this product!” Consumers' perceptions about personalized advertising: comparisons across advertisements delivered via three different types of media. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 2009; 33:503–514.
15.
PorterSR, WhitcombME. The impact of contact type on web survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 2003; 67:579–588.
16.
BullFC, KreuterMW, ScharffDP. Effects of tailored, personalized, and general health messages on physical activity. Patient Education and Counseling, 1999; 36:181–192.
17.
Bernett WhiteTB, ZahayDL, ThorbjørnsenHet al.Getting too personal: reactance to highly personalized email solicitations. Market Letters, 2008; 19:39–50.
18.
HoSY, DavernMJ, TamKY. Personalization and choice behavior: the role of personality traits. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 2008; 39:32–47.
19.
KalyanaramanS, OlivierM, MageeR. 2010. The interplay between customization and cognition in web portals: the multiple role hypothesis explanation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Suntec City, Singapore.
20.
HawkinsRP, KreuterM, ResnicowKet al.Understanding tailoring in communicating about health. Health Education Research, 2008; 23:454–466.
21.
CherryEC. Some experiments on the recognition of speech with one and with two ears. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1953; 25:975–979.
22.
PettyRE, CacioppoJT. Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979; 37:1915–1926.
23.
RogersTB, KuiperNA, KirkerWS. Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997; 35:677–688.
24.
HuntRR, McDanielMA. The enigma of organization and distinctiveness. Journal of Memory and Language, 1993; 32:421–445.
25.
CacioppoJT, KaoCF, PettyREet al.Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: an individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986; 5l:1032–1043.
26.
PettyRE, BriñolP. Psychological processes underlying persuasion: a social psychological approach. Diogenes, 2008; 55:52–67.
27.
SnyderCR, FromkinHL. 1980. Uniqueness: the human pursuit of difference. New York: Plenum Press.
28.
SimsonI, NowlisSM. The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: unconventional choices based on reasons. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000; 27:49–68.
29.
CodolJP, JarymowiczM, Kaminska-FeldmanMet al.Asymmetry in the estimation of interpersonal distance and identity affirmation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1989; 19:11–22.
30.
TianKT, BeardenWO, HunterGL. Consumers' need for uniqueness: scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 2001; 28:50–66.
31.
KalyanaramanS, SundarSS. The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: does customization affect attitudes and behavior?Journal of Communication, 2006; 56:110–132.
32.
SnyderCR. Product scarcity by need for uniqueness interaction: a consumer catch-22 carousel?Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1992; 13:9–24.
33.
LangheinrichM, NakamuraA, AbeNet al.Unintrusive customization techniques for Web advertising. Computer Networks, 1999; 31:1259–1272.
34.
NowakGJ, PhelpsJ. Direct marketing and the use of individual-level consumer information: determining how and when “privacy” matters. Journal of Direct Marketing, 1997; 11:94–108.
35.
RubiniD. Overcoming the paradox of personalization: building adoption, loyalty, and trust in digital markets. Design Management Journal, 2001; 12:49–54.
36.
PittaDA, FranzakF, LaricM. Privacy and one-to-one marketing: resolving the conflict. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2003; 20:616–628.
37.
WinerRS. A framework for customer relationship management. California Management Review, 2001; 43:89–105.
38.
DommeyerCJ, GrossBL. What consumers know and what they do: an investigation of consumer knowledge, awareness, and use of privacy protection strategies. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 2003; 17:34–51.
39.
KoufarisM, Hampton-SosaW. The development of initial trust in an online company by new customers. Information & Management, 2004; 41:377–397.
40.
De PechpeyrouP, DesmetP. 2007. The role of trust in consumers' evaluations of Website personalization. ANZMAC Conference. University of Otago: New Zealand.
41.
KaplanSE, NieschwietzRJ. A Web assurance services model of trust for B2C e-commerce. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 2003; 4:95–114.
42.
ErdfelderE, FaulF, BuchnerA. GPOWER: a general power analysis program. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 1996; 28:1–11.
43.
CacioppoJT, PettyRE. 1981. Social psychological procedures for cognitive response assessment: the thought listing technique. MerluzziT, GlassC, GenestM. Cognitive assessment. New York: Guilford, 309–342.
44.
RuvioA, ShohamA, Makovec BrenčičM. Consumers' need for uniqueness: short-form scale development and cross-cultural validation. International Marketing Review, 2008; 25:33–53.
45.
MalhotraNK, KimSS, AgarwalJ. Internet users' information privacy concerns (IUIPC): the construct, the scale, and a causal model information systems research, 2004; 15:336–355.
46.
PettyRE, CacioppoJT. 1986. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. BerkowitzL. Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press, 123–205.
47.
RiemerK, TotzC. 2003. The many faces of personalization; An integrative economic overview of mass customization and personalization. TsengMM, PillerFT. The customer centric enterprise advances in mass customization and personalization. New York, Berlin: Springer, 35–51.
