Researchers study the phenomenon of ‘creepiness’ in a digital world

The targeting may be technically impressive, but it can feel unsettling to ordinary consumers. That uneasy sentiment is the centre of new research by Wayne Hoyer, Professor of Marketing at the University of Texas at Austin.  

He finds that when digital personalisation crosses perceived boundaries, it triggers a powerful emotional response which he calls ‘creepiness’. That response can backfire on digital marketers by materially reducing consumers’ willingness to buy, Hoyer warns. 

The study, conducted by Hoyer and three marketing researchers from the University of Bern in Switzerland – Alisa Petrova, Lucia Malär, and Harley Krohmer – argues that creepiness is not a property of digital marketing itself. Instead, it is a structured emotional episode that unfolds inside the consumer in response to marketing. 

Their study, titled ‘The Phenomenon of Creepiness in a Digital Marketing World’ is published in the academic journal Psychology & Marketing. 

According to the researchers, the response by consumers to creepiness has two parts: feeling ambiguous about what’s behind a marketing message, then deciding it’s a threatening form of surveillance. 

“When consumers are exposed to these ads, they make an assessment of ambiguity – such as, ‘What is this?’ –  and whether this is intrusive surveillance – such as, ‘Are they watching me?’” Hoyer explains. “If the answer is ‘yes’, this creates a negative emotion that can negatively affect purchase intentions.” 

Particular about privacy 

In three studies involving 1,800 participants, the researchers exposed some people to unsolicited ads shortly after they talked about the product. Those subjects rated how uncomfortable they felt and why. 

The researchers then compared their reactions with those of control groups that weren’t digitally targeted. Their results confirmed that creepiness is real and alienates potential customers. Key points: 

• Perceptions of ambiguity and surveillance explained 75% of the emotional discomfort consumers reported. 

• Personalised ads nearly doubled levels of feeling under surveillance, compared with non-personalised ads. 

• On a seven-point scale for intent to purchase, each one-point increase in negative consumer reaction reduced their willingness to buy by about half a point. 

Countering the creepiness 

What can brands do to mitigate feelings of creepiness? 

In a final experiment, the researchers tested a variety of remedies – such as transparency about data use, assurances of good intentions, offers of discounts and charitable donations. They also tried including positive emotional images in ads: pictures of kittens. 

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the kittens proved somewhat effective at ‘de-creeping’ consumer reactions and softening damage to their plans to buy. Offering monetary compensation also helped. 

Overall, however, even the best interventions made only limited improvements to purchase intentions. “Creepiness is robust and difficult to mitigate once triggered,” Hoyer says. 

This means that prevention is key, he believes. It’s more effective to avoid creating bad feelings in the first place than try to repair them after the fact. 

“Managers should focus on prevention by designing personalisation practices that minimise ambiguity and try to avoid signals of intrusive surveillance,” Hoyer suggests. 

Over the long run, though, the marketing risk might diminish. “It is possible that creepiness will decline as consumers become more used to personalisation and more accepting of AI technology,” he notes. 

You can find out more about the study here.