Effect of visual cues on static advertisement viewing patterns

Full text

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
380
EFFECT OF VISUAL CUES ON STATIC ADVERTISEMENT VIEWING PATTERNS
Lina Pileliene1, PhD; Viktorija Grigaliunaite2
1,2Vytautas Magnus University
Abstract. In conditions of hard competition in consumer products markets, advertising becomes one of the
main measures helping business companies to encourage people to choose their products. In business as well
as in scientific societies, the elements enhancing advertising effectiveness becomes one of the most discussed
questions. Accordingly, this article deals with this topic by solving a scientific problem – is there and what is the
effect of visual cues on static advertisement viewing patterns? The aim of the research is to determine the
effect of visual cues on static advertisement viewing patterns. The neuromarketing research method – eye-
tracking – is performed to determine the most effective visual cues in static advertising; managerial
implications regarding the usage of visual cues are provided based on the research results.
Key words: advertising, advertising effectiveness, eye tracking, visual cues.
JEL code: M31, M37
Introduction
Advertising is a common practice used by companies to inform, persuade and remind
consumers about the products and services. If well performed, it can visibly elevate sales and
revenues. However, being used massively, many advertisements are facing ignorance or remain
unnoticed by potential consumers. Advertising research is keeping its popularity for many years.
According to Eisend M. and Tarrahi F. (2016), practitioners and scholars are concerned about
whether and to what degree advertising influences consumers, what consumer reactions
advertising can evoke, and how these reactions are related. Patrick V. M. and Hagtvedt H. (2011)
emphasize that the effectiveness of an advertisement is a function of what is said and how it is
said; therefore, several creative elements come together to form a successful advertisement. The
determination of latter elements and their combinations becomes an important task for advertisers
achieving to break through the information clutter.
A particular composition of elements in static advertisement is called advertising layout.
According to Chamblee R. and Sandler D. M. (1992), layouts represent the culmination of all the
components that make up print (in our case, static) advertisements. Evidently, some layouts are
superior compared with others (Pileliene L. and Grigaliunaite V., 2016a). Previous research
(Pileliene L. and Grigaliunaite V., 2016b) revealed that more complex advertisements received
more consumers’ visual attention than less complex ones; however, consumers’ visual attention to
a brand (or logotype) presented in an advertisement was decreasing when advertising complexity
increased. Despite the valid research results obtained in standard conditions, the existence of
extraordinary ways to elevate advertising effectiveness in terms of extending the brand viewing
time cannot be denied. As one of such ways, visual cues can be named. The problem solved by the
research is stated by the question: is there and what is the effect of visual cues on static
advertisement viewing patterns? This article aims to determine the effect of visual cues on static
advertisement viewing patterns.
Many methods for assessing advertising effectiveness were elaborated, validated and improved.
Pozharliev R., Verbeke W. I. and Bagozzi R. P. (2017) emphasize that traditional methods for
predicting the success of advertising are based on selfreports and largely depend on the willingness
and ability of consumers to describe their levels of attention, emotions, preferences, or future
buying behaviour in relation to the marketing campaign to which they have been exposed.

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
381
Therefore, the use of neuroscientific advertising research is emerging. To get more precise results,
eye-tracking experiment was provided.
Research results and discussion
1. Methodology of the research
The analysis and synthesis of scientific literature reveal that directional visual cues are powerful
means for orienting consumer’s visual attention to the most important parts of the advertisement’s
layout (e.g. brand presented in the advertisement) (Hutton, S. B. and Nolte, S., 2011). Hence,
directional visual cues in the advertisements are visual elements that direct consumer’s visual
attention toward the core elements of the message that organization wants consumers to see. One
type that has a special status as an attentional cue is deictic gaze (Shepherd, V., 2010) – when
someone in the advertisement is looking at something (e.g. brand or product), consumer brain acts
reflexively and they start looking at that object as well. The other type of visual cues is pointing
gestures (when someone in the advertisement is pointing with the hand or leg or somehow else at
something) (Birmingham, E., Bischof, W. F. and Kingstone, A., 2009). This type of visual cues may
also include pointing arrows, head position or body position. Deictic gaze and pointing arrows are
widely discussed in the scientific literature (Birmingham, E., Bischof, W. F. and Kingstone, A.,
2009; Hutton, S. B. and Nolte, S., 2011). Nevertheless, research regarding the type of visual cue
when someone is holding and / or using something is scarce. Consequently, four categories of the
advertisements with different types of visual cues are generated:
 Advertisements without cues (control);
 Advertisements with deictic gaze to a brand / product;
 Advertisements with pointing gestures / arrows to a brand / product;
 Advertisements where spokesperson is holding / using the product with the brand presented on
it.
Based on the content analysis of real advertisements the grid of the experiment’s
advertisements was created with the description of three advertisements for each category
(Table 1).
Table 1
The grid of experiment’s advertisements
Criteria
Number of the advertisement
1
2
3
Advertisements
without cues
(control)
Spokesperson in the right
of the advertisements’
layout and the product with
the brand on it in the left of
the advertisements’ layout
Spokespersons in the left of
the advertisements’ layout
and the product with the
brand on it in the right of
the advertisements’ layout
Spokes-characters in the
middle of the
advertisements’ layout,
product with the brand on
it in the bottom of
advertisements’ layout
Advertisements
with deictic gaze
Spokesperson looking at
the product with the brand
on it
Spokesperson looking at
the product with the brand
on it
Spokesperson looking at
the product with the brand
on it
Advertisements
with pointing
gestures
Spokesperson pointing
with hand to the product
with the brand on it
Arrow pointing from the
spokes-character to the
product with the brand on
it
Spokesperson pointing with
leg to the product with the
brand on it
Advertisements
with
holding/using
product
Spokesperson holding in
the hand and using
(drinking) the product with
the brand on it
Spokesperson holding in
the hand and using
(drinking) the product with
the brand on it
Spokesperson holding in
the hand the product with
the brand on it
Source: author’s elaboration

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
382
According to the latter grid, 12 static advertisements were created by the professionals (4
categories of advertisements, each category contained three advertisements in order to eliminate
the possible biases) and approved by marketing experts. Hence, advertisements without cues (as a
control) contain spokespersons or spokes-characters and the products with the brands on them
without any directional cues. Advertisements in the category of deictic gaze visual cue contained
spokespersons looking at the products with the brands on them. Advertisements with pointing
gestures as visual cues contained spokespersons pointing with the hand or leg to the product with
the brand on it and arrow pointing from the spokes-character to the product with the brand on it.
Finally, advertisements where spokesperson was holding / using the product with the brand
presented on it contained advertisements with spokesperson holding and / or using the product
with the brand presented on it. In all of the advertisements, the advertised product was mineral
water and the brands used on the products were created (not existing) in order to eliminate the
influence of current attitudes towards existing brands.
All the advertisements were presented in the computer screen, one advertisement at once and
the participants looked at the advertisements at their own pace, controlling the switch of the
advertisements with the computer mouse. Between the advertisements the interstimulus of black
screen appeared for 2 seconds in order to eliminate the influence of the previously seen
advertisement’s gaze trajectory. All the participants were told to just look at the advertisements as
they would in real environment (participants were not told that the viewing patterns were analysed
in order to get as reliable results as possible). Total of 12 participants (8 women) participated in
the experiment that was held in January 2018. All of the participants were at the age group of
20-30 years with normal to normal-to-corrected vision.
Tobii Pro X2-30 screen-based eye tracker capturing gaze data at 30 Hz with the accuracy of
0.4° was applied for the experiment. Each participant was calibrated before the experiment. For
the analysis of eye tracing results, Tobii Studio v.3.2.3 software was used. Areas of interest for
advertisements and brands presented on the products in the advertisements were created and time
to first fixation to the brand as well as viewing time and fixation count to the advertisements and
brands were calculated. IBM SPSS Statistics v.20 software package was applied for the statistical
analysis of the results obtained from the Tobii Studio v.3.2.3 software.
2. Research results
The analysis of the research results starts with the evaluation of time to first fixation on a brand
in the advertisement (in seconds). This metric measure how long it takes before a participant
fixates on the specified group of the areas of interest for the first time. In this case the specified
group of the areas of interest is the brands presented in the advertisements of the defined
category (advertisements without cues; advertisements with deictic gaze, advertisements with
pointing gestures, and advertisements with holding / using product). Latter results are provided in
Figure 1 with the average participants’ time to first fixation to the brand. As it can be seen, in the
advertisements where visual cues are the pointing gestures (arrow pointing or spokesperson
pointing with hand / leg), the brands are seen the first. The category of the advertisements where
the brands are seen later is holding / using product. Slightly later brands are first seen in the
advertisements with deictic gaze. Finally, it takes the longest time to see the brands presented in
the advertisements without visual cues. Hence, it can be stated that visual cues help to see the
core of the message faster when compared to the advertisements without visual cues.

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
383
Source: author’s elaboration
Fig. 1. Time to first fixation on a brand in the advertisement (in seconds)
The average of the participants’ total fixation duration (in seconds) on the advertisements and
brands showed in the advertisements is presented in Figure 2 below. As it can be seen, the
advertisements where the spokesperson is holding / using the product attract the most
participants’ visual attention. Moreover, the brands presented in these advertisements also attract
the most visual attention.
Source: author’s elaboration
Fig. 2. Total fixation duration (in seconds) on the advertisements and brands presented in the
advertisements
The advertisements without visual cues are in the second place regarding attracted visual
attention to the advertisements. Nevertheless, brands presented in these advertisements attract
least participants’ visual attention. It can be stated, that without visual cues the possibility that
consumers will notice the brand presented in the advertisement decreases. The advertisements
with deictic gaze to the product and brand presented on the product are in the third place
regarding attracted visual attention to the advertisements, but in the second place regarding
attracted visual attention to the brands presented in the advertisements. Finally, advertisements

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
384
with pointing gestures to the product and brand presented on the product attract least visual
attention, but are in the third place regarding attracted visual attention to the brands presented in
the advertisements. Consequently, it could be stated that visual cues do not necessarily make
advertisement itself more visually interesting as advertisements without visual cues still attract
attention, but they definitely enhance the possibility that brand presented in the advertisement will
be seen and taken into consideration as brands presented in the advertisements with any visual
cues attract more visual attention than brands presented in the advertisements without visual
cues.
Latter results are substantiated by the participants’ average fixation count (number of fixations
in times) within the advertisements and brands presented in the advertisements that can be seen
in Figure 3. The advertisements where the spokesperson is holding / using the product had the
most fixations on the advertisement as well as on the brand. The advertisements with deictic gaze
to the brand are in the second place regarding fixation count to the brand and in the third place
regarding fixation count to the advertisement. Advertisements with pointing gestures to the brand
are in the third place regarding fixation count to the brand and in the fourth place regarding
fixation count to the advertisement. Finally, advertisements without visual cues are in the second
place regarding fixation count to the advertisement, but in the last place regarding fixation count to
the brand.
Source: author’s elaboration
Fig. 3. Fixation count (times) on the advertisements and brands presented in the
advertisements
Consequently, when measuring brand viewing time as a percent from advertisement’s viewing
time (Figure 4), it can be seen that visual cues of spokesperson holding / using the product and
deictic gaze attract most visual attention to the brand when watching at the advertisement,
respectively 35 percent and 29 percent of advertisement’s viewing time. When pointing gestures to
the brand are used in the advertisement, brand viewing time is 23 percent from the
advertisement’s viewing time. Finally, when there are no visual cues in the advertisement, brand
viewing time is 16 percent from the advertisement’s viewing time. Bearing in mind that if
advertisements’ viewing time is a few seconds, then there is a possibility that brand presented in

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
385
the advertisement without visual cues cannot pass the filter of attention as its viewing time is too
short.
Source: author’s elaboration
Fig. 4. Percent of brand viewing time from the advertisement’s viewing time
As the data of brand viewing time (total fixation duration) violated the assumptions necessary
to run the ANOVA with repeated measures (data has marked deviations from normality and
violated Sphericity), Friedman test is applied to test for differences in brand viewing time with
different visual cues presented in the advertisements. As it can be seen from Table 2, there is a
statistically significant difference in brand viewing time depending on which type of visual cue was
applied in the advertisement, χ2(3) = 15.857, p = 0.001.
Table 2
Friedman Test Statistics
Variables for Total fixation duration
Mean Rank
Chi-Square
df
p-value
Brand in the advertisements without cues
1.67
15.857
3
0.001
Brand in the advertisements with deictic gaze
2.83
Brand in the advertisements with pointing gestures
2.00
Brand in the advertisements with holding/using
product
3.50
Source: author’s calculations
To examine where the differences actually occur, Wilcoxon signed-rank test with the use of
Bonferroni adjustment is applied as a Post Hoc test. As there are 6 tests, new significance level is
0.008 (standard significance level of 0.05 divided by the number of tests). The results of Wilcoxon
signed-rank test are provided in Table 3 below. As it can be seen from the results, brand presented
in the advertisement with visual cue of deictic gaze attracts statistically significantly more visual
attention than brand presented in the advertisement without visual cues (Z = -2.812, p = 0.005).
Moreover, brand presented in the advertisement with visual cue of spokesperson holding / using
the product attracts statistically significantly more visual attention than brand presented in the
advertisement without visual cues (Z = -2.831, p = 0.005). Nevertheless, there is no significant
differences between visual attention to the brand presented in the advertisement with pointing
gestures and brand presented in the advertisement without visual cues (Z = -0.971, p = 0.331);
between visual attention to the brand presented in the advertisement with pointing gestures and

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
386
brand presented in the advertisement with deictic gaze (Z = -2.096, p = 0.036); between visual
attention to the brand presented in the advertisement with holding / using the product and brand
presented in the advertisement with deictic gaze (Z = -2.516, p = 0.012); and between visual
attention to the brand presented in the advertisement with holding / using the product and brand
presented in the advertisement with pointing gestures (Z = -2.516, p = 0.012). Hence, it could be
stated that brand viewing time when applying visual cues of deictic gaze or spokesperson holding /
using the product is statistically significantly higher than brand viewing time in the advertisement
without visual cues.
Table 3
Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Statistics
Variables for Total fixation duration
Z
p-value
Brand in the advertisements with deictic gaze - Brand in the advertisements
without cues
-2.812
0.005
Brand in the advertisements with pointing gestures - Brand in the advertisements
without cues
-0.971
0.331
Brand in the advertisements with holding/using product - Brand in the
advertisements without cues
-2.831
0.005
Brand in the advertisements with pointing gestures - Brand in the advertisements
with deictic gaze
-2.096
0.036
Brand in the advertisements with holding/using product - Brand in the
advertisements with deictic gaze
-2.516
0.012
Brand in the advertisements with holding/using product - Brand in the
advertisements with pointing gestures
-2.516
0.012
Source: author’s calculations
This conclusion is substantiated by the analysis of visual attention to the brand regarding all of
the separate experiment’s advertisements (see Figure 5).
Source: author’s elaboration
Fig. 5. Total fixation duration (in seconds) on the brands for different advertisements
As it can be seen, the first advertisement attracted most visual attention to the brand when
visual cue of spokesperson holding / using the product or deictic gaze was applied. The same
situation is with the second advertisement. Regarding the third advertisements, the application of

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference "ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT" No 48
Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 9 11 May 2018, pp. 380-387
DOI 10.22616/ESRD.2018.108
387
visual cue of spokesperson holding / using the product and deictic gaze attracted nearly the same
visual attention to the brand.
In the advertisements without visual cues brand attracted the least visual attention in 2 out of 3
separate advertisements. As it could be seen, regarding the first advertisement where
spokesperson was pointing with hand to the product with the brand on it, brand attracted the least
visual attention. Nevertheless, in the case of the second and third advertisements, where arrow
was pointing from the spokes-character to the product with the brand on it and spokesperson was
pointing with leg to the product with the brand on it, brands in the advertisements without visual
cues attracted less visual attention when compared to the advertisements with pointing gestures.
Conclusions, proposals, recommendations
1) The analysis of the research results allows concluding that the core message of the
advertisement – the brand – requires additional instruments to make it visible and perceived by
consumers in order to enhance brand value. The directional visual cues can serve as an effective
instrument to direct consumer’s attention to the most important areas (in most cases – the
brand) of an advertisement.
2) The analysis of the research results reveal that the highest probability to attract most consumer
attention to the brand is to apply visual cue of spokesperson holding / using the product.
However, if there are any constrains for application of this type of cue, deictic gaze can be
effective as well.
3) The results of the research show that most ineffective (in terms of capturing consumer attention
to a brand) are the advertisements where no visual cues are provided.
4) Using pointing gestures as a visual cue is better than leaving an advertisement without a cue;
however, the effect of this technique is very low.
Bibliography
17. Birmingham, E., Bischof, W. F. and Kingstone, A. (2009). Get real! Resolving the Debate About Equivalent
Social Stimuli. Visual Cognition, Volume 17, No. 6/7, pp. 904-924.
18. Chamblee, R., Sandler, D. M. (1992). Business-to-Business Advertising: Which Layout Style Works Best?.
Journal Of Advertising Research, Volume 32, No.6, pp. 39-46.
19. Eisend, M., Tarrahi, F. (2016). The Effectiveness of Advertising: A Meta-Meta-Analysis of Advertising Inputs
and Outcomes. Journal of Advertising, Volume 45, No. 4, pp. 519-531.
doi:10.1080/00913367.2016.1185981
20. Hutton, S. B., Nolte, S. (2011). The Effect of Gaze Cues on Attention to Print Advertisements. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, Volume 25, pp. 887–892.
21. Patrick, V. M., Hagtvedt, H. (2011). Advertising with Art: Creative Visuals, Editor(s): Mark A. Runco, Steven
R. Pritzker, Encyclopedia of Creativity (Second Edition), Academic Press, pp. 18-23. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-375038-9.00003-0.
22. Pileliene, L., Grigaliunaite, V. (2016). Effect of Visual Advertising Complexity on Consumers’ Attention.
International Journal of Management, Accounting and Economics, Volume 3, No. 8, pp. 489-501.
23. Pileliene, L., Grigaliunaite, V. (2016) Influence of Print Advertising Layout Complexity on Visual Attention.
Eurasian business review, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp. 237-251.
24. Pozharliev, R., Verbeke, W.I., Bagozzi, R.P. (2017). Social Consumer Neuroscience: Neurophysiological
Measures of Advertising Effectiveness in a Social Context. Journal of Advertising, Volume 46, No. 3,
pp. 351-362. Available from: 10.1080/00913367.2017.1343162.
25. Shepherd, V. (2010). Following gaze: gaze-following behavior as a window into social cognition. Frontiers in
Integrative Neuroscience, Volume 4, Article 5, pp. 1-13.