IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wikwps/1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

My browser is not a billboard: Experimental evidence on ad-blocking adoption and users' acquisition of information

Author

Listed:
  • Fourberg, Niklas
  • Taş, Serpil
  • Wiewiorra, Lukas

Abstract

Ad-avoidance technologies such as ad-blocking add-ons in browsers and supplemental mobile applications have become mainstream tools in recent years. Over time they surpassed their niche role as applications only for the technically savvy and became an essential tool for many internet users. While the technical impact of these tools has been well researched, their effects on actual consumer behavior is still unclear. In an experimental setting this study provides first evidence on the effect of ad-blocking on users' ability to acquire information in the form of an online reading task. We find that ad-blocking leads to more effort being exerted and increases social welfare by reducing inefficient searching. Additionally, ad-blocking induces users' visit duration on websites to be more elastic in the experienced intensity of advertisement. Hence, gains in user visit duration from reducing the ad-load are larger, which consequences a more competitive environment among publishers. The results provide new perspectives on ad-blocking and inform the current debate on looming ad-tech regulations in the light of DMA and DSA initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Fourberg, Niklas & Taş, Serpil & Wiewiorra, Lukas, 2021. "My browser is not a billboard: Experimental evidence on ad-blocking adoption and users' acquisition of information," WIK Working Papers 1, WIK Wissenschaftliches Institut für Infrastruktur und Kommunikationsdienste GmbH, Bad Honnef.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wikwps:1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/253742/1/WIK-WP-No1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Horton & David Rand & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 399-425, September.
    2. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine E. Tucker, 2011. "Privacy Regulation and Online Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 57-71, January.
    3. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Henderson, Austin, 2018. "Experimental methods: Measuring effort in economics experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 74-87.
    4. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    5. Gary E. Bolton & Axel Ockenfels & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2012. "Managers and Students as Newsvendors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(12), pages 2225-2233, December.
    6. Timothy Van Zandt, 2004. "Information Overload in a Network of Targeted Communication," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 542-560, Autumn.
    7. Simon P. Anderson & Joshua S. Gans, 2011. "Platform Siphoning: Ad-Avoidance and Media Content," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 1-34, November.
    8. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972.
    9. Evans David S., 2008. "The Economics of the Online Advertising Industry," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 1-33, September.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    11. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Didier Laussel & Nathalie Sonnac, 2004. "Programming and Advertising Competition in the Broadcasting Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 657-669, December.
    12. Guillaume R. Fréchette & Sevgi Yuksel, 2017. "Infinitely repeated games in the laboratory: four perspectives on discounting and random termination," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 279-308, June.
    13. Przemyslaw Jeziorski & Ilya Segal, 2015. "What Makes Them Click: Empirical Analysis of Consumer Demand for Search Advertising," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 24-53, August.
    14. Marcus Giamattei & Kyanoush Seyed Yahosseini & Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman, 2020. "LIONESS Lab: a free web-based platform for conducting interactive experiments online," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 95-111, June.
    15. Ben Shiller & Joel Waldfogel & Johnny Ryan, 2017. "Will Ad Blocking Break the Internet?," NBER Working Papers 23058, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Randall A. Lewis & Justin M. Rao, 2015. "The Unfavorable Economics of Measuring the Returns to Advertising," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(4), pages 1941-1973.
    17. Tucker, Catherine E., 2012. "The economics of advertising and privacy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 326-329.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fourberg, Niklas & Tas, Serpil & Wiewiorra, Lukas, 2022. "My Browser is not a Billboard: Experimental Evidence on Ad-blocking Adoption and Users' Acquisition of Information," 31st European Regional ITS Conference, Gothenburg 2022: Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging monopolies, promoting competition and developing regulatory regimes 265628, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Esther Gal-Or & Ronen Gal-Or & Nabita Penmetsa, 2018. "The Role of User Privacy Concerns in Shaping Competition Among Platforms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 698-722, September.
    3. Simon P. Anderson & Martin Peitz, 2023. "Ad Clutter, Time Use, and Media Diversity," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 227-270, May.
    4. Anna D’Annunzio & Antonio Russo, 2020. "Ad Networks and Consumer Tracking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 5040-5058, November.
    5. Francis Bloch & Gabrielle Demange, 2018. "Taxation and privacy protection on Internet platforms," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(1), pages 52-66, February.
    6. Simon P. Anderson & Bruno Jullien, 2015. "The advertising-financed business model in two-sided media markets," Post-Print hal-02866192, HAL.
    7. Attila Ambrus & Emilio Calvano & Markus Reisinger, 2016. "Either or Both Competition: A "Two-Sided" Theory of Advertising with Overlapping Viewerships," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 189-222, August.
    8. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    9. Florian Hoffmann & Roman Inderst & Marco Ottaviani, 2020. "Persuasion Through Selective Disclosure: Implications for Marketing, Campaigning, and Privacy Regulation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 4958-4979, November.
    10. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cagé, 2019. "Newspapers in Times of Low Advertising Revenues," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 319-364, August.
    11. Simon P. Anderson & Joshua S. Gans, 2011. "Platform Siphoning: Ad-Avoidance and Media Content," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 1-34, November.
    12. Miguel González-Maestre & Francisco Martínez-Sánchez, 2015. "Quality choice and advertising regulation in broadcasting markets," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 107-126, March.
    13. Anderson, Simon P. & Peitz, Martin, 2020. "Media see-saws: Winners and losers in platform markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4edekc99or8n2bu86nu4ua8adl is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Behringer, Stefan & Filistrucchi, Lapo, 2015. "Hotelling competition and political differentiation with more than two newspapers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 36-49.
    16. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/26t617gatp86qree1dejcpchbr is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Anna D'Annunzio, 2013. "Vertical Integration in Two-Sided Markets: Exclusive Provision and Program Quality," DIAG Technical Reports 2013-16, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    18. Kaifu Zhang & Miklos Sarvary, 2015. "Differentiation with User-Generated Content," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 898-914, April.
    19. Alaoui, Larbi & Germano, Fabrizio, 2020. "Time scarcity and the market for news," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 173-195.
    20. Dietl, Helmut & Lang, Markus & Lin, Panlang, 2013. "Advertising pricing models in media markets: Lump-sum versus per-consumer charges," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 257-271.
    21. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," Sciences Po publications 2020-03, Sciences Po.
    22. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," SciencePo Working papers hal-03393063, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ad-blocking; consumer behavior; lab experiment; online advertising; welfare; privacy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • M37 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Advertising
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:wikwps:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.wik.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.