Brand messages are now being delivered across multiple screens, including smartphones and PCs. While researchers have explored various marketing-related dynamics of mobile phone use, relatively little is known about the unique effects of different screens on the engagement outcomes of branded messages. In this research, the authors draw on construal level theory and propose that messages are construed at lower levels on mobile phone (vs. PC) screens, due to a closer psychological distance to those devices. Using a combination of four studies including lab experiments and an analysis with a unique dataset of branded social media messages consumed across mobile phone and PC screens, they show that immediate (i.e., closer temporal distance) social media messages are more engaging on mobile phones than PCs and that the effects are driven by low levels of construal. The findings suggest that there is a screen effect on content effectiveness, and therefore marketers need to not only consider the differences in format (e.g., screen size) of messages but also specifically configure content design for mobile consumption to enhance consumer engagement.
AndrewsMichelleLuoXuemingFangZhengGhoseAnindya (2016), “Mobile Ad Effectiveness: Hyper-Contextual Targeting with Crowdedness,” Marketing Science, 35 (2), 218–33.
3.
Bar-AnanYoavLibermanNiraTropeYaacov (2006), “The Association Between Psychological Distance and Construal Level: Evidence from an Implicit Association Test,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135 (4), 609–22.
4.
BargerVictor A.LabrecqueLauren (2013), “An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective on Social Media Metrics,” International Journal of Integrated Marketing Communications, 5, 64–76.
5.
BargerVictorPeltierJames W.SchultzDon E. (2016), “Social Media and Consumer Engagement: A Review and Research Agenda,” Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10 (4), 268–87.
6.
BartYakovStephenAndrew T.SarvaryMiklos (2014), “Which Products Are Best Suited to Mobile Advertising? A Field Study of Mobile Display Advertising Effects on Consumer Attitudes and Intentions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (3), 270–85.
7.
BorahAbhishekBanerjeeSourindraLinYu-TingJainApurvEisingerichAndreas B. (2020), “Improvised Marketing Interventions in Social Media,” Journal of Marketing, 84 (2), 69–91.
8.
BraselS. AdamGipsJames (2014), “Tablets, Touchscreens, and Touchpads: How Varying Touch Interfaces Trigger Psychological Ownership and Endowment,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24 (2), 226–33.
9.
CesarioJosephGrantHeidiHigginsE. Tory (2004), “Regulatory Fit and Persuasion: Transfer from ‘Feeling Right,’” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 (3), 388–404.
10.
CheeverNancy A.RosenLarry D.CarrierL. MarkChavezAmber (2014), “Out of Sight Is Not Out of Mind: The Impact of Restricting Wireless Mobile Device Use on Anxiety Levels Among Low, Moderate and High Users,” Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 290–97.
11.
ClaytonRussell B.LeshnerGlennAlmondAnthony (2015), “The Extended Self: The Impact of iPhone Separation on Cognition, Emotion, and Physiology,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20 (2), 119–35.
CumminsShannonPeltierJames W.DixonAndrea (2016), “Omni-Channel Research Framework in the Context of Personal Selling and Sales Management: A Review and Research Extensions,” Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10 (1), 2–16.
14.
De HaanEvertKannanP.K.VerhoefPeter C.WieselThorsten (2018), “Device Switching in Online Purchasing: Examining the Strategic Contingencies,” Journal of Marketing, 82 (5), 1–19.
15.
De PelsmackerPatrickDecockBenGeuensMaggie (1998), “Advertising Characteristics and the Attitude Towards the Ad: A Study of 100 Likeable TV Commercials,” Marketing and Research Today, 27 (4), 166–79.
16.
De VriesLisetteGenslerSonjaLeeflangPeter S.H. (2012), “Popularity of Brand Posts on Brand Fan Pages: An Investigation of The Effects of Social Media Marketing,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26 (2), 83–91.
17.
DharRaviKimEunice Y. (2007), “Seeing the Forest or the Trees: Implications of Construal Level Theory for Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17 (2), 96–100.
18.
eMarketer (2017), “US Companies Using Social Media for Marketing Purposes, 2015-2019 (% of Total),” (accessed October 21, 2022), https://www.insiderintelligence.com/chart/212968/join.
FangZhengGuBinLuoXuemingXuYunjie (2015), “Contemporaneous and Delayed Sales Impact of Location-Based Mobile Promotions,” Information Systems Research, 26 (3), 552–64.
22.
FongNathan M.FangZhengLuoXueming (2015), “Geo-Conquesting: Competitive Locational Targeting of Mobile Promotions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 52 (5), 726–35.
23.
FujitaKentaroEyalTalChaikenShellyTropeYaacovLibermanNira (2008), “Influencing Attitudes Toward Near and Distant Objects,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44 (3), 562–72.
24.
GhoseAnindyaGoldfarbAviHanSang Pil (2013), “How Is the Mobile Internet Different? Search Costs and Local Activities,” Information Systems Research, 24 (3), 613–31.
25.
GhoseAnindyaHanSang Pil (2011), “An Empirical Analysis of User Content Generation and Usage Behavior on The Mobile Internet,” Management Science, 57 (9), 1671–91.
GreeneWilliam H. (2004), Econometric Analysis, 5th ed.Pearson Education.
28.
GrewalDhruvBartYakovSpannMartinZubcsekPeter Pal (2016), “Mobile Advertising: A Framework and Research Agenda,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 34 (1), 3–14.
29.
GrewalLaurenStephenAndrew T. (2019), “In Mobile We Trust: The Effects of Mobile Versus Nonmobile Reviews on Consumer Purchase Intentions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 56 (5), 791–808.
30.
HayesAndrew F.PreacherKristopher J. (2013), “Conditional Process Modeling: Using Structural Equation Modeling to Examine Contingent Causal Processes,” in Quantitative Methods in Education and the Behavioral Sciences: Issues, Research, and Teaching. Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course, HancockGregory R.MuellerRalph O., eds. IAP Information Age Publishing, 219–66.
31.
HigginsE. ToryIdsonLorraine ChenFreitasAntonio L.SpiegelScottMoldenDaniel C. (2003), “Transfer of Value from Fit,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (6), 1140–53.
32.
KellerKevin Lane (2009), “Building Strong Brands in a Modern Marketing Communications Environment,” Journal of Marketing Communications, 15 (2–3), 139–55.
33.
KimHakkyunRaoAkshay R.LeeAngela Y. (2009), “It’s Time to Vote: The Effect of Matching Message Orientation and Temporal Frame on Political Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (6), 877–89.
34.
LeeDokyunHosanagarKartikNairHarikesh S. (2018), “Advertising Content and Consumer Engagement on Social Media: Evidence from Facebook,” Management Science, 64 (11), 5105–31.
35.
LeeAngela Y.LabrooAparna A. (2004), “The Effect of Conceptual and Perceptual Fluency On Brand Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 41 (2), 151–65.
36.
LemonKatherine N.VerhoefPeter C. (2016), “Understanding Customer Experience Throughout the Customer Journey,” Journal of Marketing, 80 (6), 69–96.
37.
LeungLouisWeiRan (2000), “More Than Just Talk on the Move: Uses and Gratifications of the Cellular Phone,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (2), 308–20.
38.
LibermanNiraSagristanoMichael D.TropeYaacov (2002), “The Effect of Temporal Distance on Level of Mental Construal,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38 (6), 523–34.
39.
LibermanNiraTropeYaacov (1998), “The Role of Feasibility and Desirability Considerations in Near and Distant Future Decisions: A Test of Temporal Construal Theory,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 (1), 5–18.
40.
LibermanNiraTropeYaacovMcCreaSean M.ShermanSteven J. (2007), “The Effect of Level of Construal on the Temporal Distance of Activity Enactment,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43 (1), 143–49.
41.
LiviatanIdoTropeYaacovLibermanNira (2008), “Interpersonal Similarity as a Social Distance Dimension: Implications for Perception of Others’ Actions,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44 (5), 1256–69.
MacInnisDeborah J.MoormanChristineJaworskiBernard J. (1991), “Enhancing and Measuring Consumers’ Motivation, Opportunity, and Ability to Process Brand Information from Ads,” Journal of Marketing, 55 (4), 32–53.
MelumadShiriInmanJ. JeffreyPhamMichel T. (2019), “Selectively Emotional: How Smartphone Use Changes User-Generated Content,” Journal of Marketing Research, 56 (2), 259–75.
46.
MelumadShiriMeyerRobert (2020), “Full Disclosure: How Smartphones Enhance Consumer Self-Disclosure,” Journal of Marketing, 84 (3), 28–45.
47.
MelumadShiriPhamMichel T. (2020), “The Smartphone as a Pacifying Technology,” Journal of Consumer Research, 47 (2), 237–55.
48.
MolitorDominikSpannMartinGhoseAnindyaReichhartPhilipp (2020), “Measuring the Effectiveness of Location-Based Advertising: A Randomized Field Experiment,” SSRN(March 3), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2645281.
49.
MollenAnneWilsonHugh (2010), “Engagement, Telepresence and Interactivity in Online Consumer Experience: Reconciling Scholastic and Managerial Perspectives,” Journal of Business Research, 63 (9–10), 919–25.
50.
NarangUnnatiShankarVenkatesh (2019), “Mobile App Introduction and Online and Offline Purchases and Product Returns,” Marketing Science, 38 (5), 756–72.
51.
NussbaumShiriTropeYaacovLibermanNira (2003), “Creeping Dispositionism: The Temporal Dynamics of Behavior Prediction,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (3), 485–97.
PellegDanSavenkovDenisAgichteinEugene (2013), “Touch Screens for Touchy Issues: Analysis of Accessing Sensitive Information from Mobile Devices,” Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 7 (1), https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14403.
RansbothamSamLurieNicholas H.LiuHongju (2019), “Creation and Consumption of Mobile Word of Mouth: How Are Mobile Reviews Different?” Marketing Science, 38 (5), 773–92.
56.
ReberRolfSchwarzNorbertWinkielmanPiotr (2004), “Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver’s Processing Experience?” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8 (4), 364–82.
57.
ResnikAlanSternBruce L. (1977), “An Analysis of Information Content in Television Advertising,” Journal of Marketing, 41 (1), 50–53.
58.
SantosZélia RaposoCheungChristy M.K.CoelhoPedro SimõesRitaPaulo (2022), “Consumer Engagement in Social Media Brand Communities: A Literature Review,” International Journal of Information Management, 63, 102457.
59.
SchwarzNorbertCloreGerald L. (1983), “Mood, Misattribution, and Judgments of Well-Being: Informative and Directive Functions of Affective States,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 (3), 513–23.
60.
ShankarVenkateshBalasubramanianSridhar (2009), “Mobile Marketing: A Synthesis and Prognosis,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23 (2), 118–29.
61.
ShenHaoZhangMengKrishnaAradhna (2016), “Computer Interfaces and the ‘Direct-Touch’ Effect: Can iPads Increase the Choice of Hedonic Food?” Journal of Marketing Research, 53 (5), 745–58.
62.
ShermanSteven J.ZehnerKim S.JohnsonJamesHirtEdward R. (1983), “Social Explanation: The Role of Timing, Set, and Recall on Subjective Likelihood Estimates,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 (6), 1127–43.
63.
SongCamilla EunyoungSelaAner (2023), “Phone and Self: How Smartphone Use Increases Preference for Uniqueness,” Journal of Marketing Research, 60 (3), 473–88.
StephenAndrew T.SciandraMichaelInmanJeffrey (2015), “Is It What You Say or How You Say It? How Content Characteristics Affect Consumer Engagement with Brands on Facebook,” Working Paper No.19, Saïd Business School, University of Oxford.
66.
SwaminathanVanithaSorescuAlinaSteenkampJan-Benedict E.M.Gibson O’GuinnThomas ClaytonSchmittBernd (2020), “Branding in a Hyperconnected World: Refocusing Theories and Rethinking Boundaries,” Journal of Marketing, 84 (2), 24–46.
67.
ThompsonDebora VianaHamiltonRebecca W. (2006), “The Effects of Information Processing Mode on Consumers’ Responses to Comparative Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (4), 530–40.
TropeYaacovLibermanNira (2000), “Temporal Construal and Time-Dependent Changes in Preference,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (6), 876.
VallacherRobin R.WegnerDaniel M. (1989), “Levels of Personal Agency: Individual Variation in Action Identification,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57 (4), 660–71.
72.
Van BovenLeafKaneJoanneMcGrawA. PeterDaleJeannette (2010), “Feeling Close: Emotional Intensity Reduces Perceived Psychological Distance,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (6), 872–85.
73.
VivekShiri D.BeattySharon E.MorganRobert M. (2012), “Customer Engagement: Exploring Customer Relationships Beyond Purchase,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20 (2), 122–46.
74.
WhiteKatherineMacDonnellRhiannonDahlDarren W. (2011), “It’s the Mind-Set That Matters: The Role of Construal Level and Message Framing in Influencing Consumer Efficacy and Conservation Behaviors,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (3), 472–85.
75.
WooldridgeJeffrey M. (2010), Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press.
76.
WuQiumingBaiLiying (2015), “The Optimal Integrated Performance of Person and Organization: The Comprehensive Utility of P-O Bidirectional Fit,” Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology, 4, 105–10.
77.
XuKaiquanChanJasonGhoseAnindyaHanSang Pil (2017), “Battle of the Channels: The Impact of Tablets on Digital Commerce,” Management Science, 63 (5), 1469–92.
78.
YanDengfengSenguptaJaideepHongJiewen (2016), “Why Does Psychological Distance Influence Construal Level? The Role of Processing Mode,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (4), 598–613.
79.
YangMochenRenYuqingAdomaviciusGediminas (2019), “Understanding User-Generated Content and Customer Engagement on Facebook Business Pages,” Information Systems Research, 30 (3), 839–55.
80.
ZalmansonLiorOestreicher-SingerGal (2015), “‘Your Action Is Needed’: The Effect of Website-Initiated Participation on User Contributions to Content Websites,” Marketing Science Institute Working Paper No. 15-118.
81.
ZhaoMinXieJinhong (2011), “Effects of Social and Temporal Distance on Consumers’ Responses to Peer Recommendations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (3), 486–96.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
