Week 12 - Consumer Empowerment

Buzeta et al. (2020)

Eigenraam et al. (2018)

Thomas & Fowler (2021)

Guest Lecture - Joanna Strycharz

COBRAs Framework - Three Stages of Engagement


Consumption - Users are passively exposed to brand-related content (shared by other consumers or the brand) without further participation or interaction. (e.g., viewing a brand-related video, reading product reviews). Reach or “impressions”


Contribution - Activities with a moderate engagement level, where consumers respond to branded stimuli by their peers or the brand. (e.g., rating products and/or brands, engaging in branded conversations). Provoking an active brand-related response that increases the organic reach of a campaign.


Creation - Content that is (co-)created by consumers, and that may stimulate further consumption and contribution by other peers. (e.g., writing brand-related articles, uploading brand-related videos, audios, pictures, or images). Provoking an active brand-related response that increases the organic reach of a campaign.

Level of interactivity increases across three stages


Consumption - Low


Contribution - Medium


Creation - High

Motivations and drivers of COBRAs


General - Empowerment and Remuneration


Consumption - Entertainment and Information


None of the three COBRAs - Personal Identity

How brands could satisfy each motivation


Empowerment - Opening co-creation environments for their users


Entertainment - Diversify the content to include more engaging and fun formats such as memes, games, videos, etc. Could also involve well-known influencers and content creators.


Integration and Social Interaction - Create a strong sense of community which encourages sharing and discussing content. Could even host real life events to further develop this aspect.


Personal Identity - Encourage users to create content that represents them and make a contest out of it. Create a brand image / culture that is clear and unique that users may then relate to.


Information - Incorporate AIs that can answer quick simple questions. Create engaging and interactive guides for products / services that can be posted on social media.


Remuneration - Include gamification aspects to encourage users to contribute and create content. This links to the previously mentioned contest which could incentivise users by offering discounts or free products if they win.

Definitions of Motivations


Entertainment - The emotional relief generated by temporarily recreating or recessing from daily routines


Integration and Social Interaction - The users' feeling of connection (to an online community, for instance) that enables them to increase their knowledge about other people's circumstances and augment individuals' socializing capabilities


Personal Identity - The need for shaping one's identity by providing an image of one's personality and by receiving peer recognition


Information - Individuals' understanding of relevant events and conditions in the world around


Remuneration - Users' intention to obtain some future benefit or external reward that basically stands apart from the behavior


Empowerment - Individuals' purpose of exerting their influence or power on others' perceptions (e.g., consumers, companies, brands), by voicing their opinions and by demanding improvements in products, services, and corporate policies

Social Media Classification


Two Dimensions


Level of Customization of Messages - From Customized (Facebook and Reddit) to Broadcast (Instagram and Youtube)


Nature of Connections - From Content-Based (Reddit and Youtube) to Profile-Based (Facebook and Instagram)

Motives for COBRAs

Nature of Connections

Profile-Based


Consumption - Entertainment, Remuneration, Empowerment


Contribution - Remuneration, Empowerment


Creation - Remuneration, Empowerment

Level of Customization of Messages

Customized


Consumption - Entertainment, Integration and Social Interaction, Information, Remuneration, Empowerment


Contribution - Integration and Social Interaction, Empowerment


Creation - (negative) Integration and Social Interaction, Remuneration, Empowerment

Broadcast


Consumption - Entertainment, Integration and Social Interaction, Information, Remuneration, Empowerment


Contribution - Remuneration, Empowerment


Creation - Remuneration, Empowerment

Content-Based


Consumption - Information, Remuneration, Empowerment


Contribution - Integration and Social Interaction, Empowerment


Creation - Remuneration, Empowerment

Customer Engagement - A psychological state that occurs by virtue of interactive, cocreative customer experiences with a brand


Types of Customer Engagement


Cognitive engagement - cognitive processing; a consumer’s level of brand-related thought processing and elaboration


Emotional engagement - affection; a consumer’s level of positive brand-related affect.


Behavioural engagement - a consumer’s level of energy, effort, and time spent on using a brand.


Digital Customer Engagement Practices - Consumers’ online behavioural manifestations of brand engagement that go beyond purchase


Types of Digital Customer Engagement Practices - Phase 1 - Inventory of practices - literature review - expert panels with scholars and practitioners - Phase 2 - consumer-based taxonomy of the digital practices - having fun - learning - providing customer feedback - working for a brand - talking about a brand - Phase 3 - interaction with customer engagement


Associations


For Fun Practices most strongly associated with Emotional Engagement


Cognitive Engagement is most strongly associated with Learning Practices


For Fun Practices and Working For Practices are not associated with Behavioural Engagement

Main benefits for (brand) managers of
using the taxonomy present in this paper


Their taxonomy is robust to changes in the media landscape and enables brands to make an inventory of their existing digital engagement practices — linking each of their employed practices to one of the 17 practices, and one of the five types in the taxonomy. By analyzing their portfolios of digital engagement practices, blind spots and opportunities for employing or facilitating new practices can be revealed. For instance, a brand may decide to create an advergame instead of a video (if not already done), to reach consumers in a different way.

Taxonomy of digital customer engagement practices


For Fun (B2C) - Play a game, participate in a contest


Learn about the brand (B2C) - View a video, watch pictures, sign up for updates


Customer Feedback (C2B) - Provide feedback, fill out a customer survey, make suggestions for service improvements, write a recommendation


Work for the brand (C2B) - Provide assistance, make an advertisement


Talk about the brand (C2C) - Blog, interact with other consumers, recommend to a friend, engage in conversations, help other customers


AI influencers are non-human, AI powered influencers with human-like visual representations. Although they both endorse brands and influence the masses, AI influencers are technically not human and they rely on softwares and algorithms, while regular influencers are human and rely on more natural processes.

Study 1 & 2


Study 1 serves to test the initial premise that AI influencers and celebrity endorsers are perceived similarly and positively by consumers and tests the hypothesis that when an AI influencer commits a transgression, attitudes and purchase intentions toward the sponsoring brand decrease.


To determine an appropriate response when a transgression is committed by an AI influencer, Study 2 was conducted.

Main Findings


Study 1 - The results demonstrate that, regardless of whether an endorser is an AI influencer or a celebrity, when the endorser commits a transgression it has a negative effect on the brand, reducing both attitudes toward the brand and purchase intentions. This study also provides support for the premise that AI influencers are initially perceived similarly to celebrity endorsers.


Study 2 - The results support hypotheses 2 and 3. When an AI influencer commits a transgression, replacing the AI influencer with a celebrity endorser results in more positive attitudes toward the brand and higher purchase intentions, relationships which are then mediated by perceptions of responsibility. This bolsters the argument that AI influencers, unlike celebrities, are perceived as less distinct and more interchangeable. Further, the brand’s culpability for the endorser’s transgression is reduced as perceptions of responsibility are weakened. As no significant differences arose between the control condition and the AI influencer replacement strategy, this suggests that participants failed to view this as an appropriate form of repentance and still held the brand responsible.


What should a brand do whenever one of
their AI influencers commits a transgression?


Replace the AI influencer with a celebrity endorser as it will result in more positive attitudes toward the brand and higher purchase intentions.

Ethical perspective on brands using AI influencers


From an ethical perspective I think that AI influencers are not too problematic as long as users are aware that they are indeed AI. This way users might be more skeptical of what they say and may not take it too seriously. Nevertheless, Thomas and Fowler (2021) bring up a concerning point “an AI influencer may confirm some of these preconceived negative notions, as the algorithms used by AI influencers to create posts and respond to followers rely on unverified inputs and, therefore, may result in the spread of misinformation”. Although the same can be said about human influencers, this does raise some serious ethical concerns nonetheless.

Less likely to be viewed as unique entities


Similar positive brand benefits expected to those of human celebrity endorsers


Transgressions lead to negative attitudes and purchase intentions


Replacing the AI influencer with a celebrity endorser decreases negative brand perceptions

Computational Advertising


Broad, data-driven advertising approach relying on or facilitated by enhanced computing capabilities, mathematical models/algorithms, and the technology infrastructure to create and deliver messages and monitor/surveil an individual’s behaviors

Personalized Communication


The strategic creation, modification, and adaptation of content and distribution to optimize the fit with personal characteristics, interests, preferences, communication styles, and behavior.

Personalization process

Message Delivery

Interaction (Data Generation)

Data Collection

Data Processing

Message Creation

Personalization Paradox


Consumers who value information transparency are also less likely to participate in personalization

Privacy Calculus


Assumes that people weigh perceived privacy risks and benefits before disclosing personal information

Protection Motivation


Internet users’ desire to adjust the settings offered by advertising platforms so that they do not receive personalized ads

Benefits


Convenience 56 (16.4%)


Economic benefits 26 (7.6%)


Personal relevance 175 (51.2%)


Added advertising value 43 (12.6%)


Less advertising 5 (1.5%)


Higher brand relatedness 6 (1.8%)

Concerns


Privacy risk 202 (36.2%)


Intrusiveness 37 (6.6%)


Message processing costs 35 (6.3%)


Discrimination 10 (1.8%)


Loss of control / Resignation 85 (15.2%)


Manipulation 40 (7.2%)


Lack of agency 2 (0.4%)


Stereotyping 4 (0.7%)

GDPR - Transparency and Control


Ensure appropriate protection for individuals in all circumstances


Increase transparency for data subjects


Enhance control over one's own data


Raise awareness


Ensure informed and free consent


Protect sensitive data


Make remedies and sanctions more effective

Conclusions on Empowerment and Technical Knowledge


No empowering effect of technical knowledge in context of Google


Knowledge actually lowers severity


High threat appraisal, low coping appraisal


Severity and efficacy of opt-out increase motivation


Self-efficacy and attitude lower motivation


Motivation strong driver of opt-out behavior


Technical intervention does not have anticipated empowering effect

Conclusions on Empowerment and Legal Knowledge


No empowering effect of technical knowledge in context of cookies


Knowledge actually lowers severity


Empowering effect of legal knowledge


High threat appraisal, low coping appraisal


Legal intervention works a bit better

Transparency and choice = empowerment or reactance?


Yes, but


Technical knowledge lowers threat appraisal – ceiling effect? surveillance imaginaries?


Knowledge about rights increases coping appraisal

Surveillance Effect


It creates an environment of suspicion and threat, which can cause people who are not engaged in any wrongdoing to change their behaviour, including the way they act, speak and communicate

Dataveillance


The automated, continuous, and unspecific collection, retention, and analysis of digital traces by state and corporate actors.

Perceived Surveillance


The feeling of being watched, listened to, or having personal data recorded

Surveillance Responses

Affective


Feelings in response to
perceived surveillance


Privacy concerns


Privacy fatigue

Cognitive


Change in thoughts and beliefs


Privacy calculus

Behavioural


Change in behaviour


Privacy protection


Chilling effects

Chilling Effects


Refraining of individuals from conducting Internet searches, making purchases or using specific consumer services because of their data being used by organization

Data Collection for Synced Advertising


Watermarking - Picking up a sound signal in the media message through the microphone of your telephone.


Online Profiling - Dividing consumers into groups based on available personal data, such as demographic characteristics and preferences.


Low acceptance among consumers

Digital Vulnerabilities


It is the circumstances that consumers face that determine their vulnerability

Internal


Personal characteristics


Individual states

External


Access to goods and services


Environment

Data-driven communication and exploitation of digital vulnerabilities


Lack of personal control - not being able to make decisions and take actions voluntarily


So-called choice architecture - using information about consumers to “design” their choices


Psychological targeting - limited ability to act rationally

Future of consumer empowerment - protection of digital vulnerabilities


New EU regulations (DSA, AI Act) prohibit making people vulnerable or exploiting choice architectures

Take-aways


Personalized advertising can be seen as an instance of computational advertising.


Personalization paradox shows that it has both positive and negative effects on consumers.


According to privacy calculus, benefits of personalization have to outweigh its costs for it to be effective.


Empowerment through transparency and knowledge is one of the main aims of laws that regulate personalization. But it does not always work.


Shift from consumer empowerment to identification and protection of digital vulnerabilities will probably happen in the upcoming years.