A scale of hindrance in mobile in-app advertising.

Abstract

This paper develops and tests a scale for hindrance in the context of in-app mobile advertising. With the changes in mobile advertising capabilities, research on attitudes towards mobile advertising has mainly focused on SMS advertising. However, the formats in mobile advertising have increased since the introduction of smartphones and mobile internet capabilities. We propose that within in-app mobile advertising, current models on attitudes towards this type of advertising do not reflect the use and perception of users of these platforms. Using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, we explore the role that hindrance within mobile advertising plays towards the attitudes of consumers. We then develop and test quantitatively a scale that measures the construct hindrance and its four dimensions (stoppage, distraction, delay and interruption).

Full text

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
1
A scale of hindrance in mobile in-app advertising
Shanzeh Nadeema, Lilia Carolina Rodríguezb and Rodrigo Pérez-Vegaa
a School of Management and Languages, Heriot-Watt University, Dubai Campus, UAE.
b Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Campus Querétaro, México.
Abstract
This paper develops and tests a scale for hindrance in the context of in-app mobile advertising.
With the changes in mobile advertising capabilities, research on attitudes towards mobile
advertising has mainly focused on SMS advertising. However, the formats in mobile
advertising have increased since the introduction of smartphones and mobile internet
capabilities. We propose that within in-app mobile advertising, current models on attitudes
towards this type of advertising do not reflect the use and perception of users of these platforms.
Using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, we explore the role that hindrance
within mobile advertising plays towards the attitudes of consumers. We then develop and test
quantitatively a scale that measures the construct hindrance and its four dimensions (stoppage,
distraction, delay and interruption).
Keywords: hindrance, mobile advertising, in-app advertising, mobile applications, scale
development.
Introduction
The evolution in mobile phone technology and the emergence of smartphones in the last decade
has revolutionized the role of mobile phones in the lives of consumers globally. Today, one in
five people around the world own a smartphone (Heggestuen, 2013). For consumers,
smartphones play the role of the most personal equipment a person would hold, and spend 85%
of the time using mobile applications (Perez, 2015). In addition, the importance of smartphones
to consumers allow businesses to reach them anytime, anywhere (Hameed et al., 2010). Thus,
the mobile medium, especially with the emergence and continued development of smartphone
technology continues to serve as a crucial platform for communication, for both consumers and
businesses
For marketers, a popular marketing objective is to reach and engage consumers at each level
effectively and efficiently, from awareness to advocacy (Shetty, 2015). The mobile medium
holds the potential to allow marketers to achieve this. The increasing advancements in the
technological features through enhanced multimedia, larger screens and the increasing

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
2
efficiency of mobile network coverage, means marketers and advertisers can target consumers
anytime, anywhere, and a more personalized and interactive manner (Khan, 2013).
With time, marketers are increasingly realizing the growing importance of mobile medium
(Leppäniemi and Karjaluoto, 2008). The increase of worldwide consumer adoption of mobile
phones and smartphones is fueling the increase mobile ad spending. It is expected that by 2016
the global mobile advertising market will reach new levels, accounting for more than 50% of
the digital advertising expenditure (Media Buying, 2015). The rise in the global adoption and
use of mobile devices is thus slowly shifting the concentration of advertising from desktop
reach to the mobile medium to make use of the always-on consumers (Media Buying, 2015).
While consumer adoption of smartphones and the increasing global mobile advertising
spending are evident, there is limited literature on mobile advertising as this concept is still
relatively new (Tsang et al., 2004). Furthermore, the majority of the literature stems from the
pre-smartphone era in which the main form of advertising through the mobile channel was
through SMS messaging (Watson et al., 2013). However, Persaud and Azhar (2012) emphasize
the increased capabilities of smartphones have presented marketers with a much larger set of
possibilities to communicate with the consumers that researchers should investigate. This paper
aims to contribute to the marketing and to mobile advertising literature by providing insights
on the consumer views of in-app advertising, a new form of mobile advertising stemming from
smartphone technology.
As with any other medium, the understanding of consumer perceptions, attitudes, intentions
and behaviors is a crucial prerequisite in order to effectively advertise via the mobile medium
(Noor et al., 2013). In addition, as the majority of the literature stems from the pre-smartphone
era, attitudinal studies have drawn conclusions based on studies where mobile advertising was
equated with the concept of SMS advertising. Researchers such as Varnali and Toker (2010)
and Persaud and Azhar (2012) have all suggested that the emergence of smartphones and the
increase use of mobile applications bring new opportunities for marketers around the globe to
implement more innovative and effective mobile marketing strategies for consumer markets
around the globe. Thus, with the introduction of smartphones, it is imperative to understand
the attitudes of consumers towards these new forms of mobile advertising such as in-app
advertising for consumer markets.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
3
Mobile advertising in the MENA region
Mobile advertising is at an experimental phase in MENA region where marketers in the region
are simply just “trying it out” and hold the attitude that the mobile “doesn’t work yet” (Shetty,
2015). The smartphone penetration rate in MENA is among the highest in the world while, the
expenditure allocated towards mobile advertising is among the lowest in the world. The
evolution of mobile advertising with the introduction of the digital ad formats such as video,
banners and popups makes it a powerful media channel. Thus it is counterintuitive that such a
promising channel is not used to its full potential (Shetty, 2015). Among the MENA region,
the UAE is a consumer market that stands out today as one of the countries with the highest
smartphone penetrations around the globe, with a smartphone penetration as high as 77%
(Nielsen, 2014).
The consumer trends in the UAE market are highly positive and show potential. The highest
increase in the adoption of smartphones is seen for ages between 16-34. Smart phone users are
increasingly using the mobile devices and applications for day to day activities in the region.
The high importance of smartphones and their associate applications, especially for young
consumers presents a large number of opportunities for marketers targeting the UAE consumer
market. Despite the UAE being viewed as an attractive consumer market for new forms of
mobile advertising such as in-app advertising, the main source of mobile ad recall is still is
SMS based advertising for consumers (Nielsen, 2014).
While various studies have focused on consumer attitudes mobile advertising, Tsang et al.’s
study (2004) stands out as the first attitudinal study in relation to mobile advertising which
assesses the impact of various factors that influence attitude as well as the relationship between
attitude, intention and behavior for SMS advertising. While this theoretical framework and the
consequent empirical study have provided useful theoretical and managerial contributions to
mobile advertising literature by providing an understanding of the factors that govern consumer
attitudes and could lead to positive intentions and behavior, mobile advertising remains a fast-
moving and understudied field as very few researchers have attempted to make contributions
to this theoretical framework (Raines, 2013). In order to gain a better insight of consumer
attitudes in this area of literature, this study aims to make a theoretical contribution to Tsang et
al’s (2004) framework by proposing the addition of a new factor influencing attitudes towards
mobile advertising in mobile applications.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
4
This paper provides evidence that support an addition to the original Tsang et al. (2004)
framework in the context of mobile applications. We explored how the hindrance caused by an
advertisement affects attitudes towards mobile advertising in this context using qualitative
methods. From the results of our qualitative study, four main dimensions for hindrance were
identified and a scale was developed and tested in order to provide a validated measurement
mechanism for further empirical testing under Tsang et al’s (2004) framework.
Literature Review
Mobile Advertising
Mobile advertising refers to any paid content, communicated through the mobile medium that
is made with the intent to influence attitudes, intentions and behavior (Leppäniemi and
Karjaluoto, 2008). Mobile advertising differs from the traditional forms of advertising as it
allows marketers to advertise their product in a personalized and interactive manner (Yuan and
Tsao, 2003). This medium has an increasing potential in the field of advertising with the
growing penetration rate of mobile phone (Chang and Villegas, 2008). There are several
advantages of mobile advertising such as the ubiquity, personalization, two-way
communication and localization that mobile devices offer, allowing advertisers to extend the
time and space limitation that has been found in other traditional mass media (Muk, 2007).
In earlier marketing literature, the term mobile advertising was used interchangeably with SMS
advertising as most of the literature on mobile advertising focused on SMS advertising (Scharl
et al., 2005). However, Dou and Li (2008) claim that with the advancements in mobile phone
technology and with emergence on smartphones with its many applications, marketers are
moving away from the dominance of SMS marketing and will utilize many other channels for
communication using both the push and pull strategy. However with the emergence of new
technologies such as smartphones and tablets, a wider range a pull-based and push-based
services are made available for advertisers (Persaud and Azhar, 2012). Consequently, new
types of mobile advertising placements are now available for companies and current
capabilities are illustrated in
Table 1.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
5
Table 1- Advertising types and mobile advertising placement
Mobile advertising
placement
Advertising types
SMS
Call-
only
Text
Image
App
promoti
on
Image
app
Video
app
Smartphones and tablets
•
•
•
•
In-app advertising in
smartphones and tables
•
•
•
•
•
Mobile devices without
full browsers
•
•
Mobile devices without
Internet access
•
Adapted from: (Google, 2015)
Attitudes in Advertising
Attitudes towards advertising are conceptualized as learned predisposition to respond in a
consistently favorable or unfavorable manner towards advertising in general (MacKenzie and
Lutz, 1989). In marketing literature, attitudes are considered a strong measure of advertising
effectiveness with implications for the understanding of consumer behavior. For this reason,
both academic and managerial importance is given to understand the antecedents for attitude
formation in different advertising contexts.
Earlier studies in attitudes towards advertising illustrate positive public attitudes towards
advertising (Mehta and Purvis, 1995; O’Donohoe, 1995). In contrast, recent empirical literature
on attitudes as well behavior towards advertising in general suggest that over the years attitudes
towards advertising in general are increasingly becoming unfavorable (Brackett and Carr,
2001; Cheung et al., 2008; Ducoffe, 1996) However, a large amount of academic literature on
consumer attitudes towards traditional advertising media exists (Cyril De Run et al., 2010;
Fennis and Stroebe, 2010; Gordon and De Lima-Turner, 1997; Paliwoda et al., 2007), with
limited research of new media, specifically mobile phones (Cheung et al., 2008) Thus, by
focusing on attitudes towards mobile advertising, this research aims to add valuable
contributions to advertising literature overall.
Consumer attitudes in Mobile advertising
Understanding the attitudes of consumers towards mobile advertising is a key element to make
this type of advertising more relevant to them (Bauer et al., 2005). Literature on consumer

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
6
attitudes towards mobile advertising has resulted in mixed findings and there is limited
literature that covers the new types of advertising that are available with the adoption of new
types of mobile devices (e.g. smartphones and tablets). In this matter, studies covering new
forms of mobile advertising placements such as in-app advertising or advertising in
smartphones remain an understudied field (Table 2).
Table 2- Focus of studies on mobile advertising based on placement and type
Year
Authors
Mobile advertising placement
Type of mobile advertising
2002
Barwise and Strong
Mobile devices
SMS
2003
Yuan and Tsao
Mobile devices
SMS
2004
Tsang et al.
Mobile devices
SMS
2006
Jingjun Xu
Mobile devices
SMS
2007
Yang, 2007
Mobile devices
SMS
2012
Sung and Cho
Mobile devices without full
browsers
Image advertising
2012
Varnali et al.
Mobile devices
SMS
2013
Bhave et al.
In-app advertising
Text and image advertising
2013
Raines
In-app advertising
Text and image advertising
2013
Yang et al.
Smartphones and tables
SMS, Text and image
advertising
However, it is evident from Table 2 that the majority of consumer attitude studies have been
focused on SMS advertising or mobile advertising in general. Currently, very few studies exist
that take into account the enhance capabilities of the smartphones, despite the fact that there is
some evidence that suggest that this type of mobile advertising elicits different attitudes than
other traditional forms. For example, Chen et.al (2013) highlight that Chinese consumers are
less critical towards the new forms of mobile advertising through apps. Similarly, Persaud and
Azhar (2012) found that consumers in Canada across various age groups display positive
attitudes towards innovative mobile marketing using smartphones. Thus there is a clear need
to keep expanding the empirical body of research done in this context.
Factors affecting consumers’ attitudes to mobile advertising
Literature on consumer attitudes towards mobile advertising is extensive and keeps growing,
as a reflection of the increased penetration of smartphones worldwide. In this context, Tsang
et.al (2004) proposed a theoretical framework in which the factors of entertainment,

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
7
informativeness, credibility and irritation were identified as factors that influence attitudes,
while displaying as well a direct relationship between attitude, intention and behavior based on
the Theory of Reasoned Acion (TRA). Informativeness is defined as the ability of the
advertising to inform the consumers about the product, the product alternatives, so the greatest
level of satisfaction for consumers can be achieved (Ducoffe, 1996). This construct is
characterized as one of the central drivers of attitudes for advertising in the mobile devices
(Bauer et al., 2005). Advertising credibility is defined as the consumers’ perceptions of the
truthfulness and believability of the advertising (Brackett and Carr, 2001). There is increasing
evidence that suggests a positive correlation between the perceptions of a mobile
advertisement’s credibility and the overall attitude (Brackett and Carr, 2001; Ducoffe, 1996;
Tsang et al., 2004). Irritation relates to a type of advertising that employs tactics that annoy,
overwhelm, or overly manipulate consumers (Ducoffe, 1996). In the context of mobile
advertising, advertisements may provide an array of information that confuses the recipient,
are overwhelming as well as annoying; messages commonly known as spam (Scharl et al.,
2005). Negative attitudes may arise due to the consumers feeling confused and annoyed. The
negative relationship between attitude and irritation has been empirically supported in various
studies (Bracket and Carr, 2001, Tsang et al, 2004).
The concept of hindrance in mobile advertising
Changes in mobile technologies have been followed with changes in mobile advertising
capabilities and formats. New mobile technologies are allowing for new advertisement
locations (
Table 1) and some industry studies suggest that consumers are willing to accept this type of
advertising in exchange of free services (e.g. games, news, etc.) (Lewis, 2001). In this matter,
Bhave, et al (2013) identified several factors that affect attitudes towards this type of
advertising, and the concept of hindrance emerged as a factor affecting attitudes towards this
type of advertising. There is some evidence that suggest that when in-app advertisements
hinder the mobile application experience of users, it can lead to irritation (Bhave et al., 2013).
It is important however to distinguish between hindrance and irritation as two independent
factors. Based on the framework from Tsang et.al (2004), the irritation factor in the advertising
context refers to advertising content and format that annoy or manipulate the consumers and
thus cause negative attitudes (Bracket and Carr, 2001; Tsang et.al 2004). In contrast, the

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
8
construct of hindrance is conceptualized more in relation to the level of stoppage and
distraction that the advertising generates to the user experience when navigating online or using
their mobile devices (Table 3). For example, many mobile applications have a banner section
at the bottom of the display, and consumers are not irritated by it as they understand that this
can allow them enjoy the application free of charge (Paliwoda et al., 2007).
Table 3- Conceptualization of Hindrance in the marketing literature
Bhave, Jain and Roy
(2013)
Hindrance is defined with factors of:
 Stoppage: The format of the advertisement causes disturbance
the current activity when the user is redirected outside the app.
User often stops their current activity and starts looking at
information about the product/brand, thus their app experience is
hindered.
 Distraction: Ad’s located in the middle of the activity and those
that are animated in format are too noticeable, cause distraction.
Yoo and Kim (2005);
Zhang (2006)
 Distraction: Flashing and animated advertisements grab
unwanted attention for users involved.
Jain et al. (2010)
 Delay and Distraction: Users feel advertisements such as pop-up
and video advertisements are a waste of time hinder the user
experience.
Limitations with current mobile marketing models
Current models on attitudes towards mobile advertising have several limitations. Firstly, the
context in which they have been tested do not correspond with the new formats that are
available, in particular there is very limited understanding of how these factors affect in-app
mobile advertising. Secondly, since these models do not account for the use that consumers are
giving to mobile applications, they do not take into consideration the negative effects that these
type of advertising can have in the experience of the app. Tsang et al. (2004) already found
support for the negative effect on consumer attitudes towards advertising when no explicit
consent is given. However, new business models such as freemium are increasingly being
adopted to promote online applications (Liu et al., 2012). Several of these application use in-
app advertising as the means to make this business model sustainable (Wagner et al., 2013).
There is some evidence that one of the major factors causing a negative attitudes towards in-
app advertisements is that it causes hindrance to experience of the users (Bhave et al., 2013;
Wayne, 2007). This study aims to further explore the construct of hindrance in the context of
in-app mobile advertising and to develop a scale that can be used and tested for further studies
in other mobile marketing contexts.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
9
Methodology
Our study is divided in two phases, and we followed the methodology suggested by Churchill
(1979) for scale development. Stage 1 is the conceptualization and item generation of the
construct while Stage 2 is the scale validation stage.
Stage 1 procedures – Conceptualization and item generation
From the literature review, key elements of the construct of hindrance were identified and used
as guidance for the development of a focus group guide. Focus groups are considered a good
method for learning about the participant’s conceptualizations of a particular phenomenon, and
it has the advantage that it allows for interaction between members of the group. Steward et
al. (2006) further suggest that through participant interaction it is possible to gain deeper
insights into individual experiences. A convenience sampling strategy of seven undergraduate
students was utilized. Undergraduate students are suitable for this study as research illustrates
that young age demographic from ages 18-24 has been identified as the strongest predictor in
mobile application usage (Purcell, 2011)
The discussion focused on in-app advertising and it aimed to gain an insight on what the
participants defined as hindrance in this context. Before conducting the focus group, the
questions were pre-tested with 3 peers and minor adjustments on the wording and style of the
questions were made to enhance the clarity of the topics of discussion. Respondents were
encouraged to share their insights through examples and personal experiences.
The order of questions was set out in a way in which the discussion began with an icebreaker
to make the participants comfortable with the moderator (on of the researchers) and with the
other participants. The order of the formal questions (Appendix A) were set out in a way in
first the participants were asked about what the term hindrance meant to them. Next, the
participants were asked to comment on their usage of their smartphones and what role their
smartphones and the apps they use play on their lives. The discussion was then moved to
questions about what hindrance meant in the in-app advertising context and how ad
characteristics and app usage played a role in the participants’ perception of the level of
hindrance in-app advertisements cause. The final questions focused on gaining an insight on
how the participants thought in-app advertising could be improved in order to be perceived as
less hindering to their smartphone and app experience. However, it must be noted that although

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
10
guiding questions were prepared, the focus group was semi-structured in nature in which there
was flexibility in the discussion and there was room for new topics to arise.
Stage 2 procedures – Scale validation
Following Stage 1 for item generation, we looked to develop and validate a scale using
quantitative methods. Researchers can accomplish empirical validity by testing the initial items
generate on recruited participants and by applying factor analysis on the responses (Turley and
Milliman, 2000). Thus, the data from the previous qualitative stage was used to develop a
survey with the items identified from the qualitative study. The recruited participants were
provided with a copy of the self-administered survey. The survey simply gave a basic
description about the topic of the survey and asked the participants to rate the statements given
using a Likert scale. Prior to handing out the survey to the main participants, the survey was
pre-tested in a pilot study. The survey was given to 10 people with an explanation of the
purpose of the research and a definition of the hindrance construct. The participants were asked
to complete the survey and comment on the wording and relevance of the items.
The process of factor analyses is generally performed with large sample sizes. Literature
suggests that while performing factor analysis researchers must aim to stay away from sample
sizes that are too small to present the patterns and correlations that factor analysis tries to
present, however a sample of 50 participants is considered the reasonable absolute minimum
to yield a clear recognizable factor pattern and was the sample size selected for this study
(Arrindell and Van der Ende, 1985; Velicer and Fava, 1998).
Findings and discussion
Stage 1: Focus group for conceptualization and item generation
For the analysis in this stage, content analysis of the focus group is used. Content analysis is a
technique highly suitable with exploratory research, which extracts desired data from a body
of material by systematically, and objectively identifying specified characteristics of material
(Smith, 2000). In this process, the focus groups discussions were first transcribed, then read,
and then were coded in order to reduce the data into relevant categories (Table 4).

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
11
Table 4- Focus Group Results for Scale Item Generation
Factor under
Hindrance
Focus Group Discussion
Comments
Scale Items Generated
Stoppage
“The ones that redirect me to a
different website are perceived with
high hindrance. They interrupt me,
sometimes I accidently click on
them, and afterword and restart the
app I was using which ruins the
experience”
“Sometimes you click on the in-app
advertisement by mistake and it just
takes you somewhere else”.
“The most hindering types would be
the ones that take you out of the app
activity you are involved in”
 In-app advertisements that take me
away from the app when I click cause
me to start over the task I was currently
performing.
 In-app advertisements deviate me away
from my current activity.
 In-app advertisements allow me to
perform my desired activity in the
desired app without any stoppages.
 In-app advertisements are a barrier to
my goals within an app
Distraction
“If the length of the advertisement is
more than a few seconds, I perceive
it as a hindrance and a disruption to
my concentration”
“Relevant advertisement to the
situation or app I’m in. They catch
my attention and I find that
hindering.
“The banner ads would be with least
hindrance perceived as you don't
have to consciously notice them.
The most would be the one that’s
pop-up in front of your face in the
middle"
“Pop-up ads are distracting most of
the time in in-app advertising
because we are usually highly
involved with our phones".
 In-app advertisements break my
concentration when I am actively
involved with an app.
 In-app advertisements are not a
disturbance to my app experience.
 In-app advertisements that are relevant
to the app I’m involved are not a
distraction.
 In-app advertisements that are
irrelevant to the app I’m involved in
distract me.
 In-app advertisements that are placed in
the middle of what I’m involved in (eg.
Pop-up ads) are disruptive.
 In-app advertisements that are located
in the same area as my current activity
(eg. banner ads) are distracting.
Delay
“Keep the ads brief and innovative,
it’s less hindering if the duration is
short”
“When I’m working on my phone,
even if it’s relevance, I see these ads
as a waste of time”
“Target me when I’m using low
involvement apps that I used in my
spare time such as 9gag. They
should focus on timing”.
 In-app advertisements allow me to
continue my app activity without
unnecessary delay.
 In-app advertisements are a waste of
time.
 In-app advertisements that appear
before I proceed to the next step in my
activity postpone my desired goal.
Interruption
“In my experiences, I keep refusing
to interact but it seems they just
don’t get me.
“The hindrance caused in personal
related apps like blackberry
messenger apps is really annoying.”
 In-app advertisements allow me to be in
control of my app experience.
 In-app advertisements intrude my
personal space and desired app
experience.
 In-app advertisements lead to forceful
interaction

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
12
We classified our findings based on the four dimensions found in the literature (Table 3) and
these dimensions were later used to the process of item generation of the second stage of this
study.
Stoppage:
During the course of the focus group, when the participants were asked to discuss what
hindrance in this context was to them and what they perceived as the most hindering some
participants expressed:
“The ones that redirect me to a different website are perceived with high hindrance.
They interrupt me, sometimes I accidently click on them, and afterword and restart the
app I was using which ruins the experience” (Participant 6)
“Sometimes you click on the in-app advertisement by mistake and it just takes you
somewhere else” (Participant 2).
The insights provided by the participants are consistent with Bhave et al (2013)’s research on
in-app advertisements. While the participants illustrate situations of where their app activity is
being hindered when their current task is stopped and they are redirected to another location,
Bhave et al (2013) expresses that the format of the advertisement plays an important role in the
hindrance caused by the advertisement. He further goes on to state that in-app advertisements
which redirects the consumers out of their activity, in some situations stops their current work
and leads them to start browsing the brand and product information on their cellphones instead,
hence hinders their app experience.
Distraction
The discussion of the type of advertisements that cause the most hindrances also provided
useful insights for the purpose of this study. Respondents expressed:

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
13
“The banner ads would be with least hindrance perceived as you don't have to
consciously notice them. The most would be the one that’s pop-up in front of your face
in the middle" (Participant 4)
“For me the banner ads are the least hindering, however I have seen some banner ads
that when you scroll down, they keep coming down” (Participant 7)
“Pop-up ads are distracting most of the time in in-app advertising because we are
usually highly involved with our phones" (Participant 2)
Thus, in-app advertisements are perceived hindering when they catch the attention of the
consumers and when they cause them to notice them when the participants are actively
involved in their activity based on location and format. Literature also suggests that Pop-up
ads, flashing ads and animated ads grab unwanted attention (Yun Yoo and Kim, 2005; Zhang,
2006). In addition, Bhave et al (2013) discuss that noticeable advertisements such as pop-up
ads and animated ads hinder the user’s primary task.
Delay
During the discussion, when asked about what would make the in-app advertisements less
hindering the main concerns participants expressed was the time wasted due to the in-app
advertisements:
“Keep the ads brief and innovative, it’s less hindering if the duration is short”
(Participant 6)
“When I’m working on my phone, even if it’s relevant, I see these ads as a waste of
time”, Target me when I’m using low involvement apps that I used in my spare time
such as 9gag. They should focus on timing”. (Participant 2)
The concerns of the time wasted due to in-app advertisements are consistent with Jain et al.
(2010) findings on online advertising in which they find that the waste of time, especially in
between games, hinders the users’ experience.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
14
Interruption
During a discussion in which participants were sharing negative experiences of in-app
advertising participants expressed:
“In my experiences, I keep refusing to interact but it seems they just don’t get me"
(Participant 3).
“The hindrance they cause in personal related apps like the blackberry messenger app
is really annoying" (Participant 7)
Participants suggest that their app activity and experience is hindered as in-app advertisements
are an interruption that cause consumers to forcefully interact as well as cause hindrance in
their experience during personal activities in personal and social apps. Thus, the additional
dimension of interruption was added as part of the hindrance construct.
The final outcome of this process resulted in four factors in the hindrance construct:
Distraction, Stoppage, Delay and Interruption. Furthermore, the initial item generation
produced 16 items with 6 items under the Distraction factor, four items for Stoppage, 3 Items
for Delay and 3 Items for Interruption (Table 4). The initial pool of 16 items then was submitted
to a scale purification process that will be described in the next stage.
Stage 2: Scale validation
The data collected through the survey with the 16 items was put in the process of exploratory
factor analysis on SPSS with maximum likelihood extraction. The exploratory factor analysis
(EFA) is recommended in order to continue the process for scale refinement and validations
with high level of construct validity. The items loadings on the factors can be examined to
determine if specific items need editing or deletion (Worthington and Whittaker, 2006). The
main objective of EFA is to statically explore the factors that define the hindrance scale for in-
app advertising and to reduce the initial items generated. Factor analysis is an accepted method
to establish construct validity. The main criterion of item selection was based on the screen
plot, Eigen values, and the factor loadings (Burton and Mazerolle, 2011). Factor analysis based

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
15
on the extraction Maximum Likelihood was chosen suitable for this study as the researcher’s
purpose was to understand the latent structure of the set of variables as simultaneously
exercising item reduction based on the structure (Conway and Huffcutt, 2003). Rotation
produces a more interpretable and simplified solution in matrix. It maximizes high item
loadings and minimizes low item loading. The recommended rotation method is oblique, and
it is the method used in this research. This method produces factors that are correlated
(Worthington and Whittaker, 2006). A KMO and Barlett test of Sphericity was conducted to
verify sampling adequacy. The results were significant (2 (120) = 253.68, p < .01). While
running analysis, four factors were predicted to explain the construct based on the initial item
generation process derived through secondary qualitative research and focus groups. The
screen plot and the results indicated that the final solution was a three-factor solution. As the
aim for this factor analysis was to develop a scale for hindrance that could be put together with
other scales which on average contained three items, a strict view was taken in item reduction
leaving only the factors with the highest factor loadings of over 0.6. This produced results in
which 4 factors explained 44.64% of the variance. In total nine items out of the initial 16 could
be used (Table 5).

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
16
Table 5- Factor loadings
Factor
Distraction/
Delay
Interruption/
Delay
Stoppage
Interruption/
Delay
In-app advertisements that are irrelevant to the
app I'm involved in distract me
.744
In-app advertisements that are placed in the
middle of what I'm involved in (e.g. Pop-up ads)
are disruptive
.660
In-app advertisements allow me to continue my
app activity without unnecessary delay
.625
In-app advertisements break my concentration
.604
In-app advertisements that are located in the same
area as my current activity (e.g. banner ads) are
distracting
In-app advertisements lead to forceful interaction
.668
In-app advertisements that appear before I
proceed to the step in my activity postpone my
desired goal
.601
In-app advertisements are barrier to my goals
within an app
In-app advertisements that take me away from the
app when I click cause me to start over the task I
was current performing
In-app advertisements cause me to deviate from
my current activity
In-app advertisements allow me to perform my
desired activity in the desired app without any
stoppages
.625
In-app advertisements that are relevant to the app
I'm involved in are not a distraction
In-app advertisements are not a disturbance to my
app experience
In-app advertisements intrude my personal space
and desired app experience
In-app advertisements are a waste of time
.924
In-app advertisements allow me to be in control of
my app experience
.691
Overall, this analysis indicates that the dimensions of hindrance of distraction and interruption
are also associated to elements of delay, as items that relate to this construct were found in
these factors. The factor stoppage on the other hand, was found to be distinct from the others
and was not associated with elements of delay.
Conclusion
This paper presents a critical review of literature on mobile advertising and highlights the need
for theoretical contributions in this area of marketing, specifically to suit the new forms of
technology in this field. While the original Tsang et al. al (2004) framework emphasizes the

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
17
factors of entertainment, credibility, irritation and informativeness, this research challenges the
use of a framework made for SMS advertising in the in-app advertising context and emphasizes
the need for additional factors to be added. A theoretical contribution to the Tsang et al. (2004)
is made by adding the factor of hindrance as something that plays a role in formulating negative
consumer attitudes in the in-app advertising context. Four factors were identified to generate
hindrance in this context: distraction, interruption, delay and stoppage. It is proposed that that
if consumers perceive in-app advertisements as something that hinder their activities within an
app and/or their overall app experience, negative attitudes are formed.
As with any research, a number of limitations are associated with this study and these should
be considered for a more practical use of this study as well as before conducting future research
based on this. First, while aiming to generate scale through the use of focus groups, only one
focus group was used to aid the initial item generation. Using only one focus group limits the
reliability of the patterns that have been drawn out. In an attempt to increase reliability, multiple
sessions of the focus groups should be conducted (Walden, 2009). This will ensure that clear
recognizable reoccurring patterns are seen. In addition, after the scale item generation through
focus groups, factor analysis was used to validate the scale. While this research uses an
acceptable minimum sample, it still acts a major limitation for this research as academics have
recommended large sample sizes for factor analysis as a large sample can help determine
whether or not the factor structure and individual items are valid (Costello and Osborne, 2005).
There are many recommendations on literature that can be followed for more accurate sampling
for factor analysis. O’Rourke and Hatcher (2013) recommends that the number of subjects
should be the larger than 5 times the number variables. Comree and Lee (2013) suggested that
100= poor, 200- fair, 300= good, 500= very good and a 1000 or more= excellent. We aim to
further develop this study to reach more optimal levels of reliability and encouraged other
scholars in the field of mobile advertising to do the same. By addressing these limitations, the
reliability and validity of the hindrance scale proposed can be improved.
Overall, this paper adds on to the under-researched area of in-app advertising by proposing a
new factors to the original Tsang et.al (2004) framework. Marketing academics can build on
this by testing this scale on populations to see if these factors are statistically significant as
compared to other factors in the framework. In addition, the proposed scale is one attempt to
measuring hindrance in the in-app advertising context.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
18
Appendices
Appendix A
Focus Group
1) Welcome Note/ Introduction
2) Purpose of the Focus group
- Reason of the focus group explained in the context of the dissertation and how the participants
can make valuable contributions
3) Ice breaker: Complete the following sentence in a comedic manner. I spend more time on my
smartphone and it’s apps than ___________.
4) Questions
1. What does the term “Hindrance” means to you overall?
2. In the advertising context?
3. Comment on your usage of apps. What are your favorite and most use apps and why? Comment
on your app experiences.
4. Do you consider in-app advertising a hindrance to your desired activity/outcome and overall
experience? (Onscreen banner ads, inserted ads, click to expand ads /pop-up /video and out of
app ads?
5. In defining hindrance in the in-app advertising context-what is it about in-app advertising that
makes you perceive it as an advertising form that will cause hindrance? Can you list and explain
any factors? (Keep in mind (interference due to location, disruption caused by format, and
distraction caused by irrelevance)
6. In which situations are hindrance caused by in-app advertising higher than others? (Location,
involvement, personal and social apps)
7. How does hindrance affect your attitude, intention and behavior in the in-app advertising
context?
8. Any additional comments on in-app advertising and the hindrance they can cause. Things you
want changed which will reduce the hindrance caused?
5) Debriefing/ Thank participants for attending and hand out incentives.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
19
Appendix B
Hindrance Survey
This a survey about the level of hindrance an in-app advertisement causes. Please rate the following
statements provided below by selecting your chosen option.
1.In-app advertisements break my concentration when I am actively involved with an app.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
2.In-app advertisements that are relevant to the app I’m involved in are not a distraction.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
3.In-app advertisements that are irrelevant to the app I’m involved in distract me.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
4. In-app advertisements that are placed in the middle of what I’m involved in (e.g. Pop-up ads) are
disruptive.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
5. In-app advertisements that are located in the same area as my current activity (e.g. banner ads) are
distracting.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
6. In-app advertisements are not a disturbance to my app experience.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
7.In-app advertisements are a barrier to my goals within an app.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
20
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
8.In-app advertisements cause me to deviate from my current activity.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
9. In-app advertisements that take me away from the app when I click cause me to start over the task I
was currently performing.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
10.In-app advertisements allow me to perform my desired activity in the desired app without any
stoppages.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
11. In-app advertisements allow me to continue my app activity without unnecessary delay.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
12.In-app advertisements are a waste of time.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
13.In-app advertisements that appear before I proceed to the next step in my activity postpone my
desired goal.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
14.In-app advertisements intrude my personal space and desired app experience.
(1) Strongly Disagree

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
21
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
15.In-app advertisements allow me to be in control of my app experience.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree
16.In-app advertisements lead to forceful interaction.
(1) Strongly Disagree
(2) Disagree
(3) Neutral
(4) Agree
(5) Strongly Agree

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
22
References
Arrindell, W.A., Van der Ende, J., 1985. An empirical test of the utility of the observations-to-
variables ratio in factor and components analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement
9, 165–178.
Barwise, P., Strong, C., 2002. Permission-based mobile advertising. J. Interactive Mark. 16,
14–24. doi:10.1002/dir.10000
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, 181–192.
Bhave, K., Jain, V., Roy, S., 2013. Understanding the Orientation of Gen Y Toward Mobile
Applications and in-App Advertising in India. International Journal of Mobile
Marketing 8, 62–74.
Brackett, L.K., Carr, B.N., 2001. Cyberspace advertising vs. other media: Consumer vs. mature
student attitudes. Journal of advertising research 41, 23–32.
Burton, L., Mazerolle, S., 2011. Survey Instrument Validity Part I: Principles of Survey
Instrument Development and Validation in Athletic Training Education Research.
Athletic Training Education Journal 6, 27–35.
Chang, H.J., Villegas, J., 2008. Mobile Phone User’s Behavior: The Motivation Factors of the
Mobile Phone User. International Journal of Mobile Marketing 3, 4–14.
Chen, H., Liu, F., Dai, T., 2013. Chinese Consumers Perceptions Towards Smartphone and
Marketing Communication on Smartphone. Mobile Marketing International Journal of
38.
Cheung, L., Harker, D., Harker, M., 2008. The state of the art of advertising from the
consumers’ perspective: A generational approach. The Marketing Review 8, 125–146.
Churchill, G.A., Jr., 1979. A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing
Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research 16, 64–73. doi:10.2307/3150876
Comrey, A.L., Lee, H.B., 2013. A first course in factor analysis. Psychology Press.
Conway, J.M., Huffcutt, A.I., 2003. A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis
practices in organizational research. Organizational research methods 6, 147–168.
Cyril De Run, E., Mohsin Butt, M., Fam, K.-S., Yin Jong, H., 2010. Attitudes towards offensive
advertising: Malaysian Muslims’ views. Journal of Islamic Marketing 1, 25–36.
Dou, X., Li, H., 2008. Creative use of QR Codes in consumer communication. International
Journal of Mobile Marketing 3.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
23
Ducoffe, R.H., 1996. Advertising value and advertising on the web. Journal of advertising
research 36, 21–35.
Fennis, B.M., Stroebe, W., 2010. The Psychology of Advertising. Psychology Press.
Google, 2015. Types of mobile ads [WWW Document].
Gordon, M.E., De Lima-Turner, K., 1997. Consumer attitudes towards Internet advertising: A
social contract perspective. International Marketing Review 14, 362–375.
Hameed, K., Shaf, H., Ahsan, K., Yang, W., 2010. An Enterprise Architecture Framework for
Mobile Commerce. International Journal of Computer Science Issues 7, 6–51.
Heggestuen, J., 2013. One In Every 5 People In The World Own A Smartphone, One In Every
17 Own A Tablet [CHART] [WWW Document]. Business Insider. URL
http://www.businessinsider.com/smartphone-and-tablet-penetration-2013-10
(accessed 8.13.15).
Jain, K., Czerwinski, M., Song, Y., He, L., 2010. Evaluating the unaccounted cost of distraction
of display ads to the users.
Jingjun Xu, D., 2006. The Influence of Personalization in Affecting Consumer Attitudes
Toward Mobile Advertising in China. Journal of Computer Information Systems 47, 9–
19.
Khan, M., 2013. Mobile sets the stage for evolving business models, Mobile Outlook 2013.
Leppäniemi, M., Karjaluoto, H., 2008. Mobile marketing: From marketing strategy to mobile
marketing campaign implementation. International Journal of Mobile Marketing 3, 50–
61.
Lewis, S., 2001. M-commerce: ads in the ether. Asian Business 37, 31.
Liu, C., Au, Y., Choi, H., 2012. An Empirical Study of the Freemium Strategy for Mobile
Apps: Evidence from the Google Play Market. ICIS 2012 Proceedings.
MacKenzie, S.B., Lutz, R.J., 1989. An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of
attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context. The Journal of Marketing
48–65.
Media Buying, 2015. Mobile Ad Spend to Top $100 Billion Worldwide in 2016, 51% of Digital
Market - eMarketer [WWW Document]. URL
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Mobile-Ad-Spend-Top-100-Billion-Worldwide-
2016-51-of-Digital-Market/1012299 (accessed 8.14.15).
Mehta, A., Purvis, S.C., 1995. When attitudes towards advertising in general influence
advertising success, in: Conference of the American Academy of Advertising. Waco,
TX: Baylor University, Norfolk, VA.

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
24
Muk, A., 2007. Consumers’ Intentions to Opt into SMS Advertising. International Journal of
Advertising.
Nielsen, 2014. Decoding the UAE smartphone usage [WWW Document].
Noor, M.N.M., Sreenivasan, J., Ismail, H., 2013. Malaysian Consumers Attitude towards
Mobile Advertising, the Role of Permission and Its Impact on Purchase Intention: A
Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Asian Social Science 9, 135–153.
O’Donohoe, S., 1995. Attitudes to Advertising: A Review of British and American Research.
International Journal of Advertising 14, 245–261.
doi:10.1080/02650487.1995.11104615
O’Rourke, N., Hatcher, L., 2013. A Step-by-Step Approach to Using SAS for Factor Analysis
and Structural Equation Modeling, Second Edition. SAS Institute.
Paliwoda, S., Marinova, S., Petrovici, D., Marinov, M., 2007. Determinants and antecedents of
general attitudes towards advertising: A study of two EU accession countries. European
Journal of Marketing 41, 307–326.
Perez, S., 2015. Consumers Spend 85% Of Time On Smartphones In Apps, But Only 5 Apps
See Heavy Use. TechCrunch.
Persaud, A., Azhar, I., 2012. Innovative mobile marketing via smartphones: are consumers
ready? Marketing Intelligence & Planning 30, 418–443.
Purcell, K., 2011. Half of adult cell phone owners have apps on their phones. Pew Research
Center: Internet, Science & Tech.
Raines, C., 2013. In-App Mobile Advertising: Investigating Consumer Attitudes Towards Pull-
Based Mobile Advertising Amongst Young Adults In the UK. Journal of Promotional
Communications 1.
Scharl, A., Dickinger, A., Murphy, J., 2005. Diffusion and success factors of mobile marketing.
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 4, 159–173.
doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2004.10.006
Shetty, S., 2015. Mobile: Present or Future? Gulf Marketing Review June.
Smith, C.P., 2000. Content analysis and narrative analysis. Handbook of research methods in
social and personality psychology 313–335.
Stewart, D., Shamdasani, P., Rook, 2006. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice, 2nd edition. ed.
SAGE Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks.
Sung, J., Cho, K., 2012. The Influence of Media Type on Attitude Toward Mobile
Advertisements Over Time. CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking 15, 31–
36. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0061

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
25
Tsang, M.M., Shu-Chun Ho, Ting-Peng Liang, 2004. Consumer Attitudes Toward Mobile
Advertising: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 8, 65–
78.
Turley, L.W., Milliman, R.E., 2000. Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a review of
the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research 49, 193–211.
Varnali, K., Toker, A., 2010. Mobile marketing research: The-state-of-the-art. International
Journal of Information Management 30, 144–151. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.08.009
Varnali, K., Yilmaz, C., Toker, A., 2012. Predictors of attitudinal and behavioral outcomes in
mobile advertising: A field experiment. Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications 11, 570–581.
Velicer, W.F., Fava, J.L., 1998. Affects of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern
recovery. Psychological methods 3, 231.
Wagner, T.M., Benlian, A., Hess, T., 2013. The Advertising Effect of Free – Do Free Basic
Versions Promote Premium Versions within the Freemium Business Model of Music
Services?, in: 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
Presented at the 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(HICSS), pp. 2928–2937. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2013.21
Watson, C., McCarthy, J., Rowley, J., 2013. Consumer attitudes towards mobile marketing in
the smart phone era. International Journal of Information Management 33, 840–849.
doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.06.004
Wayne, H., 2007. Global Mobile Commerce: Strategies, Implementation and Case Studies:
Strategies, Implementation and Case Studies. IGI Global.
Worthington, R.L., Whittaker, T.A., 2006. Scale development research a content analysis and
recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist 34, 806–838.
Yang, B., Kim, Y., Yoo, C., 2013. The integrated mobile advertising model: The effects of
technology- and emotion-based evaluations. Journal of Business Research 66, 1345–
1352. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.035
Yang, K.C.C., 2007. Exploring Factors Affecting Consumer Intention to Use Mobile
Advertising in Taiwan. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 20, 33–49.
doi:10.1300/J046v20n01_04
Yuan, S.-T., Tsao, Y.W., 2003. A recommendation mechanism for contextualized mobile
advertising. Expert Systems with Applications 24, 399–414. doi:10.1016/S0957-
4174(02)00189-6

International Conference on Organization and Management 2015
26
Yun Yoo, C., Kim, K., 2005. Processing of animation in online banner advertising: The roles
of cognitive and emotional responses. Journal of Interactive Marketing 19, 18–34.
Zhang, P., 2006. Pop-up Animations: Impact and Implications for Website Design and Online
Advertising, in: Galleta, D., Zhang, P. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction an
Management Information Systems: Applications. M.E. Sharpe, New York.