See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275045576

An Empirical Study of Factors Influencing Consumer Attitudes

towards SMS Advertising

Article  in  International Journal of Online Marketing · May 2014

DOI: 10.4018/ijom.2014070101

CITATIONS READS

6 570

1 author:

Pradeep Dharmadasa
University of Colombo
24 PUBLICATIONS   64 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Determinants of Young Sri Lankan Individuals’ Intention to Engage in Viral Marketing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pradeep Dharmadasa on 18 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 1

An Empirical Study of Factors

Influencing Consumer Attitudes
towards SMS Advertising
Pradeep Dharmadasa, Faculty of Management and Finance, University of Colombo,
Colombo, Sri Lanka
Thilini Alahakoon, Faculty of Management and Finance, University of Colombo, Colombo,
Sri Lanka

ABSTRACT
This article examines factors influencing consumer attitudes towards SMS advertising. The study’s research
framework was conceptualized using five predictor variables – informativeness, irritation, privacy, credibility,
and incentives – and an outcome variable of consumer attitudes towards SMS advertising. The informative-
ness, irritation, and privacy was labelled as central route constructs and credibility and incentives were
labelled as peripheral route constructs. Survey data collected from 251 mobile users selected from a cohort
of undergraduates in business management from the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka, were analyzed using
the Structural Equation Method (SEM). Results suggest that the informativeness and incentive variables are
positively associated with customer attitudes towards SMS advertising, whereas irritation and privacy are
found to be negatively associated with consumer attitudes towards SMS advertising. Surprisingly, credibility
was found to be an insignificant factor predicting consumer attitudes towards SMS advertising. Several im-
plications for consumer attitudes towards SMS advertising are discussed.

Keywords: Central Route, Consumer Attitudes, Credibility, Incentives, Informativeness, Irritation,

Peripheral Route, Privacy, SMS Advertising

INTRODUCTION SMS-based mobile communications in increas-

With the rapid development of mobile tech-
nology and high penetration rate of mobile
devices, Short Messaging Service (SMS) is
extensively used for advertising products and
services. Prior studies (Rohma, Gao, Sultanb,
& Pagani, 2012; Sultan & Rohm, 2005; Varnali
& Toker, 2010) have underlined the ubiquity of
DOI: 10.4018/ijom.2014070101
ing opportunities for marketers to sell their
products and services and also for building
and sustaining better customer relationships
(Haghirian & Madlberger, 2005). In relation
to expenditure, Gao, Rau and Salvendy (2009)
highlighted that approximately $871 million
was spent on mobile advertising worldwide in
2006. More recently, Baghdassarian and Frank
(2012) forecasted that global mobile advertis-
ing will grow roughly 400% between 2011

Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
2 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014
and 2016, reaching $24.6 billion, creating new
opportunities for app developers, ad networks,
mobile platform providers, specialty agencies
and even communication service providers in
certain regions.
In Sri Lanka, there has been a tremendous
growth in the mobile communication sector,
with a relatively high mobile-cellular penetra-
tion that has more than tripled, from around
27% in 2006 to over 87% by the end of 2011.
By early 2012, the country’s mobile penetration
level was higher than that of the regional and
world averages (International Telecommunica-
tion Union, 2012) and, in 2013, the Sri Lankan
mobile market was set to pass 100% subscriber
penetration rate (Evans, 2013). Sri Lanka has
therefore become a fertile ground for initiating
SMS advertising as an effective marketing com-
munication channel to promote products and
services to consumers. Although consumers in
Sri Lanka are increasingly exposed to mobile
advertising, little is known about what factors
may influence their attitudes towards this form
of advertising (Vatanparast, 2010) as research in
this field is still in its infancy. Given the preva-
lence of SMS advertising in emerging markets,
like Sri Lanka, and the increasing interest in
this form of advertising to both academics and
practitioners (Chowdhury, Parvin, Weitenber-
ner, & Becker, 2006; Vatanparast, 2010), a study
was designed to investigate factors influencing
consumer attitudes towards SMS advertising
from a South Asian perspective.
Following, a review of the literature is
presented. Then the research framework is dis-
cussed, hypotheses proposed and the research
method outlined. In the third section, the results
of the study are presented and discussed. The
final section concludes this paper and makes
some suggestions about potential future research
directions.
LITERATURE REVIEW
In the past decade, SMS advertising has gained
widespread popularity largely due to its inherent
merits to potentially reach a large number of
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
individuals at relatively low cost (Baiwise &
Strong, 2002; Chen, Fang, Chen, & Dai, 2008;
Dickinger, Haghirian, Murphy, & Scharl, 2004;
Kim, Park, & Oh, 2008; Rettie, Grandcolas,
& Deakins, 2005), immediately (Baiwise &
Strong, 2002; Dickinger, et al., 2004; Rettie &
Brum, 2001; Zhang & Mao, 2008), with high
levels of interactivity, and ease of personaliza-
tion (Bamoriya & Singh, 2012; Chowdhury, et
al., 2006; Rettie & Brum, 2001; Tsang, Ho, &
Liang, 2004; Vatanparast, 2010). As a result,
many companies have been redirecting their
marketing spending towards interactive market-
ing tools, like SMS (Vatanparast, 2010). Gen-
erally speaking, advertising is used to inform,
persuade and remind consumers about products
and services in order to enhance their ability to
make informed-purchase decision and thus lead
to greater sales for the relevant companies (Eze
& Lee, 2012; Nelson, 1974). In the case of SMS
advertising, this is a special form of marketing
that uses mobile devices to send text messages
to inform, persuade and remind intended cus-
tomers of a company’s products and services.
Unlike traditional advertising channels, where
the individual consumer is often anonymous,
the mobile channel is extremely personal (Muk
& Babin, 2006; Tahtinen & Salo, 2003) and
ubiquitous.
The literature suggests that advertising,
in general, is either easily ignored by the audi-
ence or is perceived to have little value by its
recipients (Wang, Zhang, Choi, & DíEredita,
2002). As this also applies to SMS advertising
(Leppäniemi, Sinisalo, & Karjaluoto, 2006;
Maneesoonthorn & Fortin, 2006; Rettie &
Brum, 2001), it is critical for SMS advertisers
to inquire about the effectiveness of their adver-
tisements in terms of customer acceptance so
that effective customer services can be offered.
Therefore, marketers need to take greater care
in designing and sending SMS advertisings to
consumers’ mobile devices (Leppäniemi, et
al., 2006; Maneesoonthorn & Fortin, 2006)
as the success of SMS advertising is largely
dependent on users’ acceptance to receiving
advertisements on their mobile devices (Bauer,
Barnes, Reichardt, & Neumann, 2005). Past
 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 3
studies have highlighted several key factors
influencing mobile advertising acceptance and
effectiveness (Barnes & Scornavacca, 2004;
Choi, Hwang, & McMillan, 2008). These
fall broadly within four categories: customer-
related; message-related; media-related; and
device-related (Vatanparast, 2010).
On the strength of Chowdhury et al. (2006)
and Leppäniemi et al. (2006) who argued that
research on attitudes towards mobile market-
ing is an interesting area of academic inquiry,
the study presented within this paper assessed
customer attitudes towards SMS advertising
by focusing on customer- and message-related
factors, which are important in understanding
advertising effectiveness (Lee & Miller, 2006;
Mehta, 2000; Xu, Oh, & Teo, 2009).
Researchers (Lutz, McKenzie, & Belch,
1983; MacKenzie, Lutz, & Belch, 1986) have
suggested that attitudes towards advertisements
are an affective construct representing recipi-
ents’ feeling towards the advertisement itself.
More specifically, Lutz (1985) views attitudes
towards advertisements as a predisposition to
responding in a favourable or unfavourable
manner to a particular advertisement stimulus
during a particular exposure occasion. Fishbein
and Ajzen’s Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA)
(1975) suggests that attitudes are correlated
with individuals’ intentions to perform. From
this perspective, Merisavo et al.’s (2007) study
has highlighted that when SMS advertising mes-
sages are creatively designed, or if they provide
a high information value, consumers develop
a positive attitude towards them, which results
in positive customer behaviour, which in turn
leads to greater sales. In their research, Muk
and Babin (2006) found that attitudes towards
accepting wireless advertisements turned out
to be a significant predictor on the intention to
opt-in to SMS advertising. Moreover, Bauer et
al. (2005) and Radder, Pietersen, Wang and Han
(2010) found that attitudes towards advertising,
in general, and towards mobile marketing, in
particular, strongly determine consumers’ inten-
tion to participate in mobile marketing services.
Other studies have shown that the accept-
ability of mobile advertisements is likely to de-
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
pend on the demography of recipients (Carroll,
Barnes, & Scornavacca, 2005; Rettie & Brum,
2001). More specifically, younger generations
are more prone and willing to receive and act on
mobile advertisements (Barnes, 2002; Hanley
& Becker, 2008; Jay, 2013; Kim, et al., 2008;
Maneesoonthorn & Fortin, 2006; Sultan, Rohm,
& Gao, 2009). Prior studies have also shown
that consumers’ acceptance of mobile adver-
tisements depends on the number of messages
they receive (Rettie & Brum, 2001; Standing,
Benson, & Karjaluoto, 2005) and the time it
takes to process messages (Standing, et al.,
2005). Moreover, some studies have highlighted
that SMS acceptance depends on the type and
relevance of the message (Rettie & Brum, 2001),
while others (Bauer, et al., 2005) have claimed
that entertainment and information values are
the strongest drivers for mobile advertising
acceptance. In their research, Carroll, Barnes,
and Scornavaccal (2005) concluded that permis-
sion, content, wireless service provider control
and the delivery of messages have a significant
impact on mobile marketing acceptance.
Some researchers (Gardner, 1985; Lutz,
1985; Lutz, et al., 1983; MacKenzie, et al.,
1986) argue that feelings and thought-oriented
factors may play a major role in consumer
attitude formation. Such formation may be
strongly influenced by its constructs, whether
it is a central route construct – for example the
message content –, or a peripheral route con-
struct – for example the contextual cues – (Petty,
Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983). While central
route constructs are based on a person’s diligent
consideration of the information contained in
the message, peripheral route constructs are
based on the cues that are associated with the
message (Miniard, Dickson & Lord, 1988;
Petty, et al., 1983).
For the present study, the researchers select-
ed a battery of customer attitudes towards SMS
advertisements, in terms of central route and
peripheral route constructs. Attitudes towards
central route constructs included: informative-
ness, irritation (Leppäniemi, 2008; Leppäniemi
& Karjaluoto, 2005; Petty, et al., 1983; Zhang
& Xiong, 2012), and privacy of the message
4 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014
(Cleff, 2007). Attitudes towards peripheral route
constructs included: credibility of the source,
and incentives of the message (Leppäniemi,
2008; Leppäniemi & Karjaluoto, 2005; Miniard,
et al., 1988; Zhang & Xiong, 2012).
Informativeness is the informational role,
the central legitimizing function, of advertise-
ments (Rotzoll, Haefner, & Sandage, 1989, as
cited in Ducoffe, 1996; Nelson, 1974) and a
useful guidance for customers in making their
own purchase decisions (Merisavo, et al., 2007;
Shavitt, Lowrey, & Haefner, 1998; Zhang &
Xiong, 2012). Therefore, effective provision
of relevant information (Vatanparast, 2010) to
the target audience needs to be accurate, timely,
useful and quick. Prior research has suggested
that SMS advertising with relevant information
could increase consumer attitudes (Haghirian
& Madlberger, 2005; Lee & Hsieh, 2009;
Zhang & Xiong, 2012) and their receptivity
towards advertisements (Cleff, 2007; Suher,
& Ispir, 2011). Conversely, some studies have
postulated that, because of misleading infor-
mation contained in advertisements, (Nelson,
1974; Shavitt, et al., 1998) customer attitudes
towards advertisements are found to be nega-
tive (Haq, 2012; Mittal, 1994; Tsang, et al.,
2004). Thus, the literature has emphasized the
merits of informativeness of advertisements
(Daugherty, Logan, Chu, & Huang, 2008) and
stressed that misleading advertising causes a
decline in a company’s credibility (Nelson,
1974) and reduces consumers’ confidence
towards advertisements. On these grounds, for
this study, we surmised that:
H1: Informativeness of SMS advertising is
positively related to consumer attitudes
of SMS advertising.
Irritation is the indignity elicited by adver-
tisements. It plays a major role in accounting
for customers’ attitudes towards advertisements
(Shavitt, et al., 1998). It has been shown that
consumers are much concerned about disturb-
ing / irritating advertisements and tend to
avoid such SMS advertisements making them
less effective (Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985; Lee
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
& Hsieh, 2009; Suher & Ispir, 2011). Prior
studies have posited that advertisements that
employ techniques that annoy, offend, insult
or are overly manipulative, are likely to be
perceived by consumers as an unwanted and
irritating influence (Ducoffe, 1995, 1996).
Further, an increase in irritation levels can lead
to a general reduction in the effectiveness of all
advertising (Aaker & Bruzzone, 1985), yielding
negative attitudes (Haq, 2012; Merisavo, et al.,
2007; Tsang, et al., 2004). Instead, researchers
suggested permission-based advertising as a
possible strategy for mitigating such irritation
(Tsang, et al., 2004). Thus, we surmised that:
H2: Irritating messages can negatively affect
consumer attitudes towards SMS adver-
tising.
Privacy refers to the degree to which per-
sonal information is not known to others (Rust,
Kannan, & Na, 2002). Despite many leverages
and the usefulness of SMS advertising, it raises
privacy concerns for individuals due to the
fact that this marketing approach has an abil-
ity to collect, store, use and disclose personal
information. To address this issue, legislative
bodies all over the world have drawn new
legislation and regulation to protect personal
data and against the proliferation of unsolicited
commercial communication. However, in some
cases, such legislation and regulation may be
in conflict with some companies’ commercial
practice that includes the use of advertising
via SMS (Cleff, 2007). In our wireless age, it
has been highlighted that consumers are more
sensitive to receiving messages from unknown
people or organizations as mobile devices are
more personal (Leppäniemi, 2008; Vatanparast,
2010). Accordingly, Okazaki (2005) and Tay-
lor (2008) point out that the privacy factor
negatively affects consumer attitudes towards
SMS advertising. Again, permission-based
mobile advertising has been suggested as a
way of minimizing such negativity (Haghirian
& Madlberger, 2005). Still, privacy issues are
found to be a major challenge for SMS advertis-
 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 5
ing (Vatanparast, 2010). Hence, for this study,
we surmised that:
H3: Privacy concern is negatively related con-
sumer attitudes towards SMS advertising.
The credibility of advertising is measured
by a consumer’s perception about the truth-
fulness and believability of assertions made
through advertisements (Goldberg & Jon,
1990; MacKenzie & Lutz, 1989; Zhang &
Xiong, 2012) and the trust consumers have in
the source of information (Fishbein & Ajzen,
1975). Consumers’ reaction to media content
is expressed at the mental perception level,
and takes the form of trust or distrust in the
SMS advertising. An extensive survey in the
UK (Leppäniemi & Karjaluoto, 2005) revealed
that SMS advertising is considered as accept-
able as television or radio advertising if it is
delivered by a trusted source. The credibility
of an advertisement is influenced by three main
factors: a perceived claim discrepancy of the
advertisement; the credibility of the advertiser;
and the credibility of the message (MacKen-
zie & Lutz, 1989; Zhang & Xiong, 2012). In
addition to this, Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975)
study has highlighted that individuals are more
likely to accept message claims presented by a
highly credible source, which leads to positive
attitudinal change (Goldberg & Jon, 1990).
Further, consumers’ perception of advertising
credibility is influenced by how they valued
advertising. Subsequently, the credibility of a
message’s content will have a positive effect on
consumers’ assessment of SMS advertising (Lee
& Hsieh, 2009). For this study, we, therefore,
surmised that:
H4: Credibility of SMS advertisements can have
a positive effect on consumer attitudes
towards SMS advertising
Incentives are a key motivating factor
for mobile advertising acceptance (Hanley &
Becker, 2008; Hanley, Becker, & Martinsen,
2006; Zhang & Mao, 2008), because consumers
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
are interested in gaining benefits from direct
marketing programmes (Haq, 2012; Tsang, et
al., 2004). In this light, incentive-based SMS
advertising is an approach that provides specific
incentives to consumers who agree to receive
advertisements through their mobile phones
(Leppäniemi, 2008; Tsang, et al., 2004; Vatan-
parast, 2010). Some examples of commonly
used incentives include cash incentives, free talk
time, free downloads, free SMS, free ringtones,
free subscription for value-added service (Har-
ris Interactive, 2008, as cited in Bamoriya &
Singh, 2011). Standing et al.’s (2005) found that
consumers’ intention to participate in mobile
marketing is substantially improved if some
form of financial incentive is offered. This is
because recipients react very positively to ad-
vertisements that transfer incentives (Varshney,
2003). Moreover, Hanley and Becker (2008)
found that college student cohorts are increas-
ingly willing to accept mobile advertisements,
especially if they are given monetary incentives.
Thus, we surmised that:
H5: Incentive-based SMS advertising can have
a positive effect on consumer attitudes
towards SMS advertising.
Figure 1 presents the conceptual framework
of the study based on the above discussion.
RESEARCH METHOD
This study adopted a quantitative survey strat-
egy. The sample group was selected from a
cohort of business management undergraduates
from the University of Colombo, in Sri Lanka.
Respondents comprised a group of 251 students
exposed to, and thus familiar with, SMS adver-
tising. Data were collected by administering a
two-part questionnaire. The first part collected
data about respondents’ demographic informa-
tion. The second part included questions relating
to outcome variable – attitudes towards SMS
advertising – and predictor variables – infor-
mativeness, privacy, irritation, credibility and
incentives. In developing the questionnaire,
6 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014
Figure 1. Conceptual framework
informativeness and irritation questions were
adapted from the instrument used by Ducoffe
(1996), and credibility and attitudes towards
SMS advertising questions were adapted from
the instrument used by Chowdhury et.al. (2006).
Questions relating to privacy and incentives
were adapted from the instrument used by Wirtz
and Lwin (2009). All questions in the second
part were on a five point Likert scale anchor-
ing strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Respondents were asked to circle the response
which best described their level of agreement
with the statements. The hypothesized relation-
ships between predictor variables and consumer
attitudes towards SMS advertising were tested
with the Structural Equation Method (SEM),
using AMOS 18. The estimation method used
was the maximum likelihood estimation.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data were collected from 251 respondents
within the age group of 20–24 years with 60%
of female and 40% of male. Descriptive sta-
tistics of the study’s key variables, along with
Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Composite
Reliability (CR), Interconstruct Correlation (IC)
and Squared Inter-construct Correlation (SIC),
are presented in Table 1.
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was
performed to test the measurement model with
first-order latent constructs of informativeness,
irritation, privacy, credibility, incentives and
customer attitudes towards SMS advertising.
The measurement model resulted in an adequate
fit and the model fit indices were: χ2 = 262.37,
df = 131, χ2 /df = 2.002, GFI = 0. 912, CFI =
0. 906, and RMSEA = 0 .078. Therefore, we
proceeded to evaluate the psychometric proper-
ties of the measurement model using convergent
validity, discriminant validity (Bock, Zmud,
Kim, & Lee, 2005; Hu, Wang, Chang, & Liu,
2009; So & Bolloju, 2005) and content validity.
Convergent validity, that is the extent to which
indicators of a specific construct “converge”
or share a high proportion of variance in com-
mon, was measured using CR and AVE (Hair,
Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010). Discriminant
validity, that is the extent to which a construct
is truly distinct from other constructs, was mea-
sured using SIC. Following Bagozzi and Yi’s
(1988) and Hair et al. (2010) proposition, that
CR should exceed 0.6, the CR of the constructs
was confirmed since all constructs demonstrated
a value of 0.6 or above (see Table 1). Further,
AVE re-confirmed the convergent validity of the
constructs by reporting a value above 0.5 (see
Table 1), as suggested by Fornell and Larcker
 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 7

Table 1. Means, SD, AVE, CR, IC, and SIC

Mean SD CR 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Informativeness 3.54 0.66 0.61 0.58 0.24 0.06 0.37 0.22 0.43
2. Irritation 3.15 0.65 0.63 -0.49 0.58 0.01 0.49 0.07 0.50
3. Privacy 4.00 0.86 0.65 0.25 0.15 0.72 0.02 0.15 0.05
4. Credibility 2.74 0.62 0.62 0.61 -0.70 0.24 0.59 0.06 0.31
5. Incentives 3.61 0.80 0.67 0.46 -0.27 0.38 0.15 0.62 0.03
6. Attitudes 3.06 0.61 0.75 0.66 -0.71 -0.22 0.56 0.18 0.66
Note: N = 251. The squared inter-construct correlation (SIC) matrix is shown in the upper diagonal half of the matrix
(in italic), and the inter-construct correlation (IC) matrix in the lower diagonal half of the matrix on the lower left. The
shaded numbers on the diagonal are the AVE.

(1981) and Hair et al. (2010) Discriminant
validity was assessed through the SIC, where
the AVE for each construct should be higher
than the SIC between the construct and any of
the other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981,
Hair et al., 2010). The values shown in the
diagonal raw of cells in Table 1, corresponding
to each construct, represent the AVE. The upper
right elements (in italics) in Table 1 represent
the SIC. Since all the AVE for each construct
is greater than its shared variance with any
other construct, the discriminant validity is
supported. In relation to content validity, ques-
tions selected for the construct must represent
the concept around which generalizations are
to be made. As items selected for the particular
constructs were adapted from prior studies, the
content validity is, therefore, ensured. In sum,
the measurement model demonstrated adequate
convergent validity, discriminant validity and
content validity.
Table 2 summarizes the results of the struc-
tural model. The study’s SEM results support
the relationships proposed in hypotheses 1, 2,
3 and 5 and refute the relationship proposed in
hypothesis 4. As shown in Table 2, informa-
tiveness (b = 0.63; p < 0.001) and incentives
(b = 0.32; p < 0.05) were significantly and
positively associated with customer attitudes
towards SMS advertising, as suggested. This
provides evidence to support hypotheses 1 and
5. Findings pertaining to informativeness and
customer attitudes towards SMS advertising are
consistent with findings from previous stud-
ies conducted by Zabadi, Shura and Elsayed,
(2012), Haghirian and Madlberger (2005) and
Ducoffe (1996) and findings on attitudes about
cyberspace advertising (Brackett & Carr, 2001).
Furthermore, the positive relationship found
in this study between incentives and customer
attitudes towards SMS advertising is consistent
with findings from Hanley and Becker (2008),
Zhang and Mao (2008), Leppäniemi (2008),
Hanley, Becker, and Martinsen (2006), Stand-
ing, et al. (2005) and Tsang, et al. (2004). This
study’s positive findings suggest that relevant
information content (Vatanparast, 2010) and
incentives are powerful signals to increase
the acceptability of SMS advertisements for
customers.
The path coefficient from irritation to
customer attitudes towards SMS advertising is
-0.92, P < 0.001, which supports the negative
relationship posited in hypothesis 2, in con-
sistent with previous findings of Zabadi et al.
(2012), Tsang et. al. (2004), and Brackett and
Carr (2001). This study’s findings suggest that
advertisers’ should abstain from sending SMS
advertisements that create irritation among
customers, which in turn decrease customers’
acceptance.
The result for hypothesis 3, linking privacy
and customer attitudes towards SMS advertis-
ing, shows that privacy was significantly and
negatively associated with customer attitudes
towards SMS advertising (b = -0.41; p <0.001).

Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
8 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014

Table 2. Results of the SEM

Dependent variable Independent Estimate S.E. C.R. P

variables
Customer attitudes towards SMS ← Informativeness 0.63 0.16 3.86 0.001***
advertising
Customer attitudes towards SMS ← Irritation -0.92 0.23 -3.87 0.001***
advertising
Customer attitudes towards SMS ← Privacy -0.41 0.12 -3.21 0.001***
advertising
Customer attitudes towards SMS ← Credibility 0.17 0.17 0.96 0.333
advertising
Customer attitudes towards SMS ← Incentives 0.32 0.14 2.28 0.047*
advertising
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

This result lends support to our contention that possible reason for reporting insignificant result
privacy issues negatively affect the effective- may be the fact that customers are more likely
ness of SMS advertising and it is consistent to regard central route constructs as core to
with earlier findings from studies carried out accepting SMS advertisements than peripheral
by Taylor (2008); Haghirian and Madlberger route constructs. Another possible explanation
(2005) and Okazaki (2005). Recognizing this, for reporting this insignificant result might be
marketers must be sensitive to consumers’ needs that customers discount or disregard the cred-
for privacy and balance this with their own desire ibility of the source due to their inclination
to engage with consumers (Hanley, et al., 2006). towards incentives.
Therefore, it is of paramount importance to reas-
sure consumers that their privacy is protected
when using SMS advertising. CONCLUSION
Contrary to findings from Zabadi, et al.
Recently, the use of SMS advertising has been
(2012); Dickinger, et al. (2004); Haghirian and
the source of a great interest from both academ-
Madlberger (2005) and Tsang, et al. (2004), the
ics and practitioners. Both parties acknowledge
result pertaining to credibility suggests a lack of
the influential role central and peripheral route
relationship between credibility and customer
constructs play in increasing customers’ accep-
attitudes towards SMS advertising, rejecting
tance towards SMS advertising. Based on the
hypothesis 5. The negation of relationship
extensive literature, this study was designed to
found between credibility and customer at-
examine factors influencing consumer attitudes
titudes towards SMS advertising in this study
towards SMS advertising. The research was
is consistent with Yaakop, Anuar, and Omar
conceptualized using five predictor variables
(2013) and Marshall and WoonBong’s (2003)
and one outcome variable. The three predictor
findings who found that Internet messages had
variables of informativeness, privacy and irrita-
less credibility than the same message in print
tion were labelled as central route constructs,
media, unless the message was for strong brands.
while credibility and incentives were labelled as
As previously described, message content -
peripheral route constructs. Data were collected
central route construct – has a more influential
from a cohort of business management under-
role than contextual factors - peripheral route
graduates from the University of Colombo. Data
construct - in accepting advertising by custom-
were analysed using SEM. The measurement
ers (MacKenzie & Lutz, 1989). On this basis, a
model showed a good fin and also ensured the

Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 9
convergent validity, discriminant validity and
content validity. The study’s findings showed
that informativeness and incentives were signifi-
cantly and positively associated with customer
attitudes towards SMS advertising, whereas
privacy and irritation were significantly and
negatively associated with customer attitudes
towards SMS advertisements. Moreover, results
negated the proposed relationship between cred-
ibility and attitudes towards SMS advertising.
The contributions of this study to customer
attitudes towards SMS advertising are threefold.
First, the study’s findings are consistent with
previous studies that showed that informative-
ness, privacy and irritation were found to be
significant antecedents of customer attitudes
towards SMS advertising. In this respect, this
study’s finding contribute to extending the gen-
eralization of existing knowledge in the field
suggesting that irrespective of geographical
differences, central route constructs have greater
influence on consumers on their acceptance of
SMS advertising. Second, this study contributes
to the field of interactive marketing by providing
empirical evidence from an emergent market in
South Asia where mobile penetration level is
higher than that in regional and world averages
and SMS advertising research are scant. Third,
this study found incentives to be a significant
antecedent for customer attitudes towards
SMS advertising. This finding contributes to
highlighting incentives’ positive influence on
customer attitudes towards SMS. This latter
finding therefore suggests that practitioners
can make great use of incentives to increase
acceptance of their SMS advertising.
This research has few limitations. Notwith-
standing, the study and its findings have value
as discussed in the preceding section. First,
the sample size is quite small compared to the
number of mobile users in Sri Lanka. Second,
also the fact that the sample only draws on
business management undergraduates with a
similar education level and narrow age bracket
is a limitation. These homogeneous attributes
of the respondents may create cohort effect and
may affect the results and findings. Another
limitation of this study is that the fact that the
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
effect of demographic factors was not consid-
ered in shaping the relationship proposed in
this study. It would, therefore, be interesting for
future studies to use a larger and more diverse
sample group to examine whether demographic
factors, such as gender, ethnicity, job position,
age, social status and education, moderate the
relationships found in this study. Moreover, this
study highlighted an insignificant relationship
between credibility and customer attitudes to-
wards SMS advertising. Thus, using the three
constructs of credibility – perceived ad claim
discrepancy, advertiser credibility and advertis-
ing credibility –, as suggested by MacKenzie
and Lutz (1989), it would be useful for future
researchers to examine to what extent each of
these constructs affect customer attitude towards
SMS advertising.
REFERENCES
Aaker, D. A., & Bruzzone, D. E. (1985). Causes of
irritation in advertising. Journal of Marketing, 49(2),
47–57. doi:10.2307/1251564
Baghdassarian, S., & Frank, A. (2012). Forecast:
Mobile advertising worldwide, 2009-2016. Stamford:
Gartner Inc, USA.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation
of structural equation model. Journal of Academy
of Marketing Science, 16(14.), 74-94. doi: .10.1007/
BF02723327
Baiwise, P., & Strong, C. (2002). Permission-based
mobile adverising. Journal of Interactive Marketing,
16(1), 14–24. doi:10.1002/dir.10000
Bamoriya, H., & Singh, R. (2011). Incentives in
permission based SMS advertising does it (always)
work? – A special case of mginger. SS International
Journal of Economics and Management, 1(2), 77–96.
Bamoriya, H., & Singh, R. (2012). SMS advertis-
ing in India is tam a robust model for explaining
intention? Organizations and Markets in Emerging
Economies, 3(1), 89–101.
Barnes, S. J. (2002). The mobile commerce value
chain: Analysis and future developments. Interna-
tional Journal of Information Management, 22(2),
91–108. doi:10.1016/S0268-4012(01)00047-0
10 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014
Barnes, S. J., & Scornavacca, E. (2004). Mobile
marketing: The role of permission and acceptance.
International Journal of Mobile Communications,
2(2), 128–139. doi:10.1504/IJMC.2004.004663
Bauer, H. H., Barnes, S. J., Reichardt, T., & Neu-
mann, M. M. (2005). Driving consumer acceptance
of mobile marketing: A theoretical framework and
empirical study. Journal of Electronic Commerce
Research, 6(3), 181–192.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N.
(2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge
sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators,
social-psychological forces, and organizational cli-
mate. Management Information Systems Quarterly,
29(1), 87–111.
Brackett, L. K., & Carr, B. N. (2001). Cyberspace
advertising vs. other media: Consumer vs. mature
student attitudes. Journal of Advertising Research,
41(5), 23–32.
Carroll, A., Barnes, S. J., & Scornavacca, E. (2005).
Consumers perceptions and attitudes towards SMS
mobile marketing in New Zealand. In BrookesW.
LawrenceE.SteeleR.ChangE. (Eds.), International
Conference on Mobile Business (pp. 434 - 440). Syd-
ney, Australia: IEEE Computer Society. doi:10.1109/
ICMB.2005.30
Chen, Z. U., Fang, L. Z., Chen, L. Y., & Dai, H. L.
(2008). Comparison of an SMS text messaging and
phone reminder to improve attendance at a health
promotion center: A randomized controlled trial.
Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B., 9(1),
34–38. doi:10.1631/jzus.B071464 PMID:18196610
Choi, Y. K., Hwang, J.-S., & McMillan, S. J. (2008).
Gearing up for mobile advertising: A cross-cultural
examination of key factors that drive mobile mes-
sages home to consumers. Psychology and Marketing,
25(8), 756–768. doi:10.1002/mar.20237
Chowdhury, H. K., Parvin, N., Weitenberner, C., &
Becker, M. (2006). Consumer attitude toward mobile
advertising in an emerging market: An empirical
study. International Journal of Mobile Marketing,
1(2), 33–41.
Cleff, E. B. (2007). Privacy issues in mo-
bile advertising. International Review of Law
Computers & Technology, 21(3), 225–236.
doi:10.1080/13600860701701421
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Daugherty, T., Logan, K., Chu, S. C., & Huang, S.
C. (2008). Understanding consumer perception of
advertising: A theoretical framework of attitude and
confidence. In RodgersS. (Ed.), Annual Conference
Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising
(pp. 308-313): University of Missouri, Columbia,
MO 65211.
Dickinger, A., Haghirian, P., Murphy, J., & Scharl,
A. (2004). An Investigation and Conceptual Model
of SMS Marketing. Paper presented at the Pro-
ceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Confer-
ence on System Sciences, Hawaii. doi:10.1109/
HICSS.2004.1265096
Ducoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the
value of advertising. [CTC Press]. Journal of Current
Issues and Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1–18. do
i:10.1080/10641734.1995.10505022
Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising value and adver-
tising on the web. Journal of Advertising Research,
36(5), 21–36.
Evans, P. (2013). Sri Lanka - Telecoms, Mobile,
Broadband and Forecasts (19th ed.). Bucetty, NSW
2250: Paul Budde Communication Pty Ltd, Australia.
Eze, U. C., & Lee, C. H. (2012). Consumers’ attitude
towards advertising. International Journal of Busi-
ness and Management, 7(13), 94–108. doi:10.5539/
ijbm.v7n13p94
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude,
intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory
and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating struc-
tural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error. JMR, Journal of Marketing
Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi:10.2307/3151312
Gao, Q., Rau, P.-L. P., & Salvendy, G. (2009).
Perception of interactivity: Affects of four key vari-
ables in mobile advertising. International Journal
of Human-Computer Interaction, 25(6), 479–505.
doi:10.1080/10447310902963936
Gardner, M. P. (1985). Mood states and consumer
behavior: A critical review. The Journal of Consumer
Research, 12(3), 281–300. doi:10.1086/208516
Goldberg, M. E., & Jon, H. (1990). The effects
of advertiser reputation and extremity of adver-
tising claim on advertising affectiveness. The
Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 172–179.
doi:10.1086/208547
 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 11
Haghirian, P., & Madlberger, M. (2005). Consumer
attitude toward advertising via mobile devices: An
empirical investigation among austrian users. ECIS
2005 Proceeding, Paper 44, http://aisel.aisnet.org/
ecis2005/44
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson,
R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.).
New Delhi, India: Prentice Hall.
Hanley, M., & Becker, M. (2008). Cell phone usage
and advertising acceptance among college students:
A four-year analysis. International Journal of Mobile
Marketing, 3(1), 67–80.
Hanley, M., Becker, M., & Martinsen, J. (2006).
Factors influencing mobile advertising acceptance:
Will incentives motivate college students to accept
mobile advertisements? International Journal of
Mobile Marketing, 1(1), 50–58.
Haq, Z. U. (2012). Attitude toward SMS advertis-
ing: A survey with reference to Indian consumers.
Journal of Internet Commerce, 11(4), 271–290. doi
:10.1080/15332861.2012.729463
Hu, I. L., Wang, P., Chang, C. C., & Liu, K. L. (2009).
Improving group identity by job design in academic
libraries. Journal of Educational Media & Library
Sciences, 47(2), 147–161.
International Telecommunication Union. (2012). ITU
statistical market overview: Sri Lanka. Newsroom:
GSR 2012.
Jay, Y. (2013). You’ve got mobile ads! young con-
sumers’ responses to mobile ads with different types
of interactivity. International Journal of Mobile
Marketing, 8(1), 5–22.
Kim, G. S., Park, S.-B., & Oh, J. (2008). An examina-
tion of factors influencing consumer adoption of short
message service (SMS). Psychology and Marketing,
25(8), 769–786. doi:10.1002/mar.20238
Lee, C. C., & Hsieh, M. C. (2009). The influence
of mobile self-efficacy on attitude towardsmMobile
advertising. Paper presented at the International Con-
ference on New Trends in Information and Service
Science, Beijing, China. doi:10.1109/NISS.2009.91
Lee, K., & Miller, K. E. (2006). Internet users’ attitude
and behavioural intention on ebranding. International
Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 3(4),
335–354. doi:10.1504/IJIMA.2006.012687
Leppäniemi, M. (2008). Mobile marketing com-
munications in consumer markets. Oulu, Finland:
University of Oulu.
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Leppäniemi, M., & Karjaluoto, H. (2005). Factors
influencing consumers’ willingness to accept mo-
bile advertising: A conceptual mode. International
Journal of Mobile Communications, 3(3), 197–213.
doi:10.1504/IJMC.2005.006580
Leppäniemi, M., Sinisalo, J., & Karjaluoto, H. (2006).
A review of mobile marketing research. International
Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(1), 30–40.
Lutz, R. J. (1985). Affective and cognitive ante-
cedents of attitude toward the ad: A conceptual
framework. In L. F. Alwitt & A. A. Mitchell (Eds.),
Psychological processes and advertising effects;
Theory, research and application. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Lutz, R. J., McKenzie, S. B., & Belch, G. E. (1983).
Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising
effectiveness: Determinants and consequences.
Advances in Consumer Research. Association for
Consumer Research (U. S.), 10(1), 532–539.
MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. J. (1989). An em-
pirical examination of the structural antecedents
of attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretest-
ing context. Journal of Marketing, 53(2), 48–65.
doi:10.2307/1251413
MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986).
The role of attitude toward the Ad as a mediator
of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing
explanations. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research,
23(2), 130–143. doi:10.2307/3151660
Maneesoonthorn, C., & Fortin, D. (2006). Texting
behaviour and attitudes toward permission mobile
advertising: An empirical study of mobile users’
acceptance of SMS for marketing purposes. Inter-
national Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(1), 66–72.
Marshall, R., & WoonBong, N. (2003). An ex-
perimental study of the role of brand strength in the
relationship between the medium of communication
and perceived credibility of the message. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 17(3), 75–79. doi:10.1002/
dir.10061
Mehta, A. (2000). Advertising attitudes and advertis-
ing effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research,
40(3), 67–72.
Merisavo, M., Kajalo, S., Karjaluoto, H., Virtanen,
V., Salmenkivi, S., & Leppäniemi, M. et al. (2007).
An empirical study of the drivers of consumer ac-
ceptance of mobile advertising. Journal of Interactive
Advertising, 7(2), 41–50. doi:10.1080/15252019.2
007.10722130
12 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014
Miniard, P. W., Dickson, P. R., & Lord, K. R. (1988).
Some central and peripheral thoughts on the route
to persuasion. Advances in Consumer Research.
Association for Consumer Research (U. S.), 15(1),
204–208.
Mittal, B. (1994). Public assessment of TV adver-
tising: Faint praise and harsh criticism. Journal of
Advertising Research, 34(1), 35–53.
Muk, A., & Babin, J. (2006). U.S. consumers’ adop-
tion - Nonadoption of mobile SMS advertising. Inter-
national Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(1), 21–29.
Nelson, P. (1974). Advertising as information.
Journal of Political Economy, 82(4), 729–754.
doi:10.1086/260231
Okazaki, S. (2005). Mobile advertising adop-
tion by multinationals: Senior executives’ initial
responses. Internet Research, 15(2), 160–180.
doi:10.1108/10662240510590342
Okazaki, S., & Taylor, C. R. (2008). What is SMS
advertising and why do multinationals adopt it?
Answers from an empirical study in European mar-
kets. Journal of Business Research, 61(1), 4–12.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.05.003
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D.
(1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising
effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement.
The Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135–146.
doi:10.1086/208954
Radder, L., Pietersen, J., Wang, H., & Han, X.
(2010). Antecedents of South African high school
pupils’ acceptance of universities’ SMS advertis-
ing. International Business & Economics Research
Journal, 9(4), 29–40.
Rettie, R., & Brum, M. (2001). M-commerce: The role
of SMS text messages. In R. R. Dholakia, L. Kolbe, A.
Venkatesh & P. Zoche (Eds.), From E-Commerce to
M-Commerce, COTIM-2001 Proceedings. Kingston,
01: RITIM, University of Rhode Island.
Rettie, R., Grandcolas, U., & Deakins, B. (2005).
Text message advertising: Response rates and brand-
ing effects. Journal of Targeting. Measurement and
Analysis for Marketing, 13(4), 304–312. doi:10.1057/
palgrave.jt.5740158
Rohma, A. J., Gao, T., Sultanb, F., & Pagani, M.
(2012). Brand in the hand: A cross-market investiga-
tion of consumer acceptance of mobile marketing.
Business Horizons, 55(5), 485–493. doi:10.1016/j.
bushor.2012.05.004
Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Rust, R. T., Kannan, P. K., & Na, P. (2002). The
customer economics of internet privacy. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 455–464.
doi:10.1177/009207002236917
Shavitt, S., Lowrey, P., & Haefner, J. (1998). Public
attitudes toward advertising: More favorable than
you might think. Journal of Advertising Research,
38(4), 7–22.
So, J. C. F., & Bolloju, N. (2005). Explaining the inten-
tions to share and reuse knowledge in the context of
IT service operations. Journal of Knowledge Manage-
ment, 9(6), 30–41. doi:10.1108/13673270510629945
Standing, C., Benson, S., & Karjaluoto, H. (2005).
Consumer perspectives on mobile advertising and
marketing. Paper presented at the Australian & New
Zealand Marketing Academy Conference (AN-
ZMAC), Perth, Australia, 5 - 7 December.
Suher, H. K., & Ispir, N. B. (2011). Permission based
mobile marketing and MS Ad avoidance. Journal of
Yasar University, 6(21), 3633–3647.
Sultan, F., & Rohm, A. (2005). The coming era of
“brand in the hand” marketing. MIT Sloan Manage-
ment Review, 47(1), 83–90.
Sultan, F., Rohm, A. J., & Gao, T. (2009). Fac-
tors influencing consumer acceptance of mobile
marketing: A two-country study of youth markets.
Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(4), 308–320.
doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2009.07.003
Tahtinen, J., & Salo, J. (2003). Special feature of
mobile advertising and their utilization. Marketing.
University of Oulu.
Tsang, M. M., Ho, S. C., & Liang, T. P. (2004).
Consumer attitudes toward mobile advertising: An
empirical study. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 8(3), 65–78.
Varnali, K., & Toker, A. (2010). Mobile marketing
research: The-state-of-the-art. International Jour-
nal of Information Management, 30(2), 144–151.
doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.08.009
Varshney, U. (2003). Issues, requirements and support
for location-intensive mobile commerce applications.
International Journal of Mobile Communications,
1(3), 247–263. doi:10.1504/IJMC.2003.003492
Vatanparast, R. (2010). Factors affecting mobile
advertising. In K. Pousttchi & D. G. Wiedemann
(Eds.), Handbook of research on mobile marketing
management (pp. 58–76). Hershey, USA: IGI Global.
 International Journal of Online Marketing, 4(3), 1-13, July-September 2014 13

Wang, C., Zhang, P., Choi, R., & DíEredita, M.
(2002). Understanding consumers attitude toward
advertising. Eighth Americas Conference on Infor-
mation Systems. Retrieved from http://www.sighci.
org/amcis02/RIP/Dishaw.pdf
Wirtz, J., & Lwin, M. O. (2009). Regula-
tory focus theory, trust, and privacy concern.
Journal of Service Research, 12(2), 190–207.
doi:10.1177/1094670509335772
Xu, H., Oh, L. B., & Teo, H. H. (2009). Perceived
effectiveness of text vs. multimedia location-based
advertising messaging. International Journal of Mo-
bile Communications, 7(2), 154–177. doi:10.1504/
IJMC.2009.022440
Yaakop, A., Anuar, M. M., & Omar, K. (2013). Like
it or not: Issue of credibility in Facebook advertising
Asian. Social Science, 9(3), 154–163. doi:10.5539/
ass.v9n3p154
Zabadi, A. M. A., Shura, M., & Elsayed, E. A. (2012).
Consumer attitudes toward SMS advertising among
Jordanian users. International Journal of Marketing
Studies, 4(1), 77–94. doi:10.5539/ijms.v4n1p77
Zhang, J., & Mao, E. (2008). Understanding the ac-
ceptance of mobile SMS advertising among young
Chinese consumers. Psychology and Marketing,
25(8), 787–805. doi:10.1002/mar.20239
Zhang, X. Y., & Xiong, K. (2012). A conceptual
model of user adoption of mobile advertising. Paper
presented at the 2012 International Conference on
Computer Science and Electronics Engineering.
doi:10.1109/ICCSEE.2012.454

Pradeep Dharmadasa is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Marketing of the Faculty of Management
and Finance of the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka. He is also a research associate of the Australian
Centre for Family Business (ACFB), Bond University Australia and visiting research fellow at the Faculty
of Commerce, Chuo University, Tama Campus, Tokyo, Japan. Dr Dharmadasa has an MBA from the Uni-
versity of Colombo and a PhD from Bond University, Australia. His research profile resides within business
strategy, knowledge management, corporate governance and family-control business.
Tilini Alahakoon is a Lecturer in the Department of Marketing of the Faculty of Management and Finance,
University of Colombo, Sri Lanka. She has a Bachelor degree in Business Administration specializing mar-
keting management from the University of Colombo Sri Lanka. Her interests include e-business, business
communications and hospitality management.

Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

View publication stats