The Role of Reversal Theory in Digital Advertising

This chapter introduces reversal theory, discusses the theory’s relevance to online consumer behavior, reviews the interactive digital advertising literature from the reversal theory perspective, and suggests areas for future research.

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319805693
The Role of Reversal Theory in Digital Advertising
Chapter · March 2017
CITATIONS
0
READS
151
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Meanings of money among the middle classView project
Reversal TheoryView project
Jae Min Jung
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
20PUBLICATIONS220CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Drew Martin
University of South Carolina
62PUBLICATIONS694CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Jae Min Jung on 16 September 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Role of Reversal Theory in Digital Advertising
Jae Min Jung (corresponding author)
College of Business Administration
California State Polytechnic University at Pomona
3801 West Temple Boulevard, Pomona, CA 91768, United States
Phone: [phone], E-mail: [e-mail]
Kyeong Sam Min
College of Business Administration
University of New Orleans
2000 Lakeshore Drive, New Orleans, LA 70148, United States
Phone: [phone], E-mail: [e-mail]
Drew Martin
College of Business and Economics
University of Hawaii at Hilo
200 West Kawili Street, Hilo, HI 96720 United States
Phone: [phone], E-mail: [e-mail]
1

Abstract
Interacting with online digital activities, consumers tend to be multi-static and non-rational.
Reversal theory offers a compelling approach to explain complex consumer behaviors that
fluctuate between metamotivational states (e.g., serious-mindedness vs. playfulness) in
consumers’ cyber journeys. This chapter explicates how reversal theory relates to interactive
advertising, identifies causes of reversals in the metamotivational states, and discusses state
dominance, state balance, and change. Reviewing the digital advertising literature from the
reversal theory perspective, this chapter concludes by discussing avenues for future research.
2

Inevitably companies increasingly use interactive marketing tools to engage customers
and remain relevant in the market place (Rodriguez, Dixon, & Peltier, 2014; Stone & Woodcock,
2013). As the prevalence of the Internet and digital media ushers in the era of unprecedented
two-way communications between companies and consumers, the value of popular web sites that
provide interactive features has skyrocketed (Jung, Hui, Min, & Martin, 2014). At the heart of
interactive marketing is digital advertising. This chapter introduces a relatively under-researched
theory called reversal theory (Apter, 2007, 2015) that offers promising utility in understanding
consumer behavior (Cummins, Peltier, Schibrowsky, & Nill, 2013) in the era of social media and
digital marketing.
While much research demonstrates that interactive advertisements are effective (Kim &
Forsythe, 2008; Köhler, Rohm, de Ruyter, & Wetzels, 2011), relatively little attention identifies
the conditions under which the interactivity may harm persuasion (Jung, Min, & Kellaris, 2011;
Schlosser, 2003; Seyedghorban, Tahernejad, & Matanda, 2016). For instance, Schlosser (2003)
finds that interactivity is effective for casual Internet browsers, who do not have specific goals in
mind, but that it is ineffective for searchers, who have specific goals. Jung et al. (2011) further
advance the notion of contingency to the game advertising. Specifically, they find that for casual
Internet browsers, interactivity enhances persuasion regardless of the user’s need for cognitive
closure. For information searchers, interactivity’s persuasive effect is contingent upon the
searchers’ need for cognitive closure. Under high need for cognitive closure, the interactivity
tends to harm persuasion for searchers (see Schlosser, 2003); however, under low level of need
for cognitive closure, the interactivity still facilitates persuasion even for searchers. Thus, Jung et
al. (2011) show that consumer characteristics, such as the need for cognitive closure, can
3

determine the effectiveness of the interactivity. However, these studies assume that consumers
remain static and they pursue only one goal.
According to reversal theory, individuals’ metamotiviational modes fluctuate between
telic (i.e., serious-minded) and paratelic (i.e., playful-minded) states due to situation, frustration,
and satiation (Apter, 2007). Taking this multi-static, non-rational view of consumers (Holbrook,
1994), Rodgers and Thorson (2000) integrate the reversal theory into their Interactive
Advertising Model (IAM). IAM recognizes reversal theory’s potential role in explaining
consumers’ online behaviors. To date, the advertising and marketing literatures are slow in
adopting reversal theory. This chapter introduces reversal theory, discusses the theory’s
relevance to online consumer behavior, reviews the interactive digital advertising literature from
the reversal theory perspective, and suggests areas for future research.
A Review of Reversal Theory and Implications for Online Consumer Behavior
What is Reversal Theory?
In the mid-1970s, Drs. K.C.T. Smith and Michael Apter proposed reversal theory to
explain the structure of mental life. Reversal theory relates to motivation, emotion, and
personality (Apter, 1981, 2007). Apter further developed the theory in the 1980s that has
generated sustained interests in various fields of psychology and other disciplines including
marketing and advertising (e.g., Davis, 2009). Surprisingly, the theory remains relatively
undeveloped by marketing scholars. Apter rejects the notion that people’s motivational states
remain static (homeostatic) and contends that people’s motivational states fluctuate in two
opposite states instead. Thus, most individuals display bi-stability such as ‘serious-mindedness’
4

and ‘playfulness.’ Sometimes, people are motivated to achieve goals by minimizing their felt
arousals and engaging in a goal-directed way, which often involves planning for the future.
Other times, behaviors are directed by pleasurable feelings at the present state. Basically,
everyone experiences the same universal set of states differently not only from each other but
also from within a person at different moments. These universal common experiences are
metamotivational states operationalized as four pairs of opposites – (1) telic and paratelic
(means-end dimension), (2) conformist and negativistic (rules dimension), (3) mastery and
sympathy (transaction dimension), and (4) autic and alloic (relationship dimension) (Apter,
2015). Each pair of states has basic psychological value and a different range of emotions. The
outcome is seeing the world from a particular perspective. Among them, the telic and paratelic
states are the most widely researched (Apter, 2013) and arguably the most relevant for
understanding consumer behavior in the digital world.
An Overview of Telic and Paratelic States
Telic and paratelic metamotivational states display interesting contrasting features. Telic
states (from Greek telos meaning a “goal”) refer to a serious-minded state in which individuals
prefer a low level of arousals and seriously engage in a purposeful way to achieve a goal. They
also plan carefully and rationally, and do not pay attention to the emotions. In contrast, paratelic
states (“para” from Greek meaning “alongside”) refer to a playful state. Paratelic state
individuals engage in an activity seeking immediate enjoyment spontaneously. They prefer a
high level of arousals and seek to maintain the level as long as possible. Thus, telic and paratelic
states are polar opposite metamotivational states representing a means-ends domain (Apter,
1984). Whereas the telic state focuses on important future goals and planning ahead, the paratelic
5

state focuses only on the present. As a result, a telic state seeks achievement and progress and a
paratelic state prefers fun and immediate gratification. Further, telic and paratelic states have a
range of emotions associated with the arousal level (see Figure 1).
--------------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 about here
--------------------------------------
Figure 1 shows that telic emotions vary from relaxation to anxiety as the arousal level
individuals feel changes from low to high. Heightened arousal induced by a demanding task
causes individuals in a telic state to become anxious, but they become pleasantly relaxed once
the task is completed. In contrast, paratelic emotions vary from boredom to excitement as the
arousal level changes from low to high. When individuals in a paratelic state are highly involved
and aroused with an activity, they will be pleasantly excited. When the activity lacks enough
stimulation, the paratelic state person becomes bored. As a result, individuals experiencing the
same level of arousal may have completely opposite emotions depending on the person’s
metamotivational state. For example, the same high arousal level can be source of anxiety or
excitement, depending on the person’s bi-stable state or mode interpreting the motivational
experience. This condition is a unique perspective of the reversal theory and differs from optimal
arousal theory (Hebb, 1955), which posits an inverted u-shaped curve with a medium level of
arousal showing greater pleasantness than either low or high arousal levels (Apter, 2007).
Reversal theory employs a bi-stability concept; both high and low arousal levels as two
opposite points are optimal at a given time, and either arousal level can be effective under certain
situations (Apter, 2007). Lastly, telic-paratelic states provide a different experiential structure.
The paratelic state creates a ‘protective frame’ (not in a telic state) that helps individuals feel
6

immune from the consequences of failure. This feature helps explain why some people engage in
dangerous sports such as parachuting and rock-climbing (Apter & Batler, 1997). While this
behavior initially creates anxiety, overcoming the danger creates a protective frame and induces
the switching of the person’s mental state from telic to paratelic mode. The outcome is
excitement as intense as the initial anxiety.
Causes of Reversals in Telic-Paratelic States
According to Apter (2007), psychological conditions including (1) contingency, (2)
frustration, and (3) satiation cause reversals in metamotivational states.
Contingency. Contingent conditions refer to situations that give rise to reversals. Specifically,
faced with a threat or duty, individuals normally switch to a telic state, if not already in this mode.
Removing a threat or absence of duty leads to a paratelic state (Apter, 2007). In addition to this
obvious situational condition, other enduring conditions induce the metamotivational mode. For
example, different locations can prompt contingent reversals (Kerr & Tacon, 1999; Tacon &
Kerr, 1999). A university library and a lecture hall were shown to foster a telic state, whereas a
university sports center and a student union building triggered a paratelic state. Students in a
lecture hall who were in a telic mode were switched to paratelic mode when they were given a
surprise break in the middle of a lecture (Kerr & Tacon, 2000). Prior studies of competitive
sports demonstrate reversals by recording the activities and interviewing the players (Bellew &
Thatcher, 2002; Cox & Kerr, 1990; Males, 1999). Manipulations of metamotivational state in
laboratory experiments also reveal reversals. When participants were presented with a financial
reward, a telic state was induced, but when they were presented with comedy films, a paratelic
state was induced (Svebak & Apter, 1987).
7

Reversals likely occur due to contingency in the digital world, too. Filling out an online
purchase order form creates a telic state as the consumer feels relaxed or anxious. Once the form
is completed, the same person switches to a paratelic state feeling either bored or excited. In
addition to random events, online or off-line retail or service establishments can produce rather
enduring conditions that evoke either telic or paratelic modes.
Frustration. Frustration is the second condition for reversal to occur. When individuals become
frustrated, they switch from a paratelic to a telic mode (Apter, 2007). For instance, a person who
simply wants to have fun playing a game online may become increasingly frustrated if unable to
improve a personal best score. If the person fails to achieve a higher score, the player becomes
increasingly frustrated as the game continues. At a certain point, improving the score outweighs
the fun of just playing the game. The game’s excitement gives way to the anxiety of not
achieving the goal. Frustration results in a reversal from arousal-seeking to arousal-avoidance
and a concomitant reversal from paratelic to telic states.
Further, frustration can motivate individuals to switch from telic to paratelic modes.
Suppose Bob wants to buy an air purifier to use at home for his family. As Bob searches for
product information online, he discovers many brands and technologies with prices varying from
less than $100 to over $1,000. Each manufacturer has a websites complete with videos and
testimonials claiming superior product technology. Information overload leads to simply too
many evaluative criteria. “What should I look for? What would be the right size? Which
technology is better for me? Is there any unknown harmful effect of the technology?” Yet he has
a limited time to make an informed decision. Bob becomes frustrated and gives up searching. He
thinks to himself “Let me just try a product that is priced at below median price with an
acceptable star rating at a popular ecommerce site. How bad could it be? Having any purifier
8

would be better than not having anything at all.” Bob suddenly finds himself fantasizing goal
achievement of the family welfare. At the start of the information search, Bob was in a serious
mode, but his telic mode is now switched to a playful, paratelic mode as he visualizes goal
achievement. The unachievable goal of buying the best air purifier loses centrality, and is
replaced by immediate gratification and excitement of anticipating positive responses from his
family.
An empirical study demonstrates both types of reversals due to frustration (Barr,
McDermott, & Evans, 1993). The stimulus was a kind of jigsaw puzzle in which over 300,000
ways of combining the pieces incorrectly and only one way of combining the pieces correctly.
The participants’ metamotivational states were measured using telic/paratelic state scales before
and after they attempted to assemble the puzzle. Surprisingly, six out of 30 participants (50
percent female) successfully solved the difficult puzzle. None of these puzzle masters showed
reversals in their metamotivational state probably due to the absence of frustration. Most
participants (79.2 percent) who experienced frustration, however, experienced reversals.
Whereas 41.7 percent reversed from a paratelic to a telic state, 37.5 percent reversed from a telic
to a paratelic state. Further, the researchers confirm that participants’ arousal seeking tendency
changed accordingly reflecting their telic/paratelic state before and after the puzzle task.
Satiation. A third reason for reversal could be metamotivational satiation—an internal dynamic
that leads naturally to reversal unless something else happens. According to the theory, satiation
is a kind of “underlying rhythm that moves forward and backward between telic and paratelic
states (Apter, 2007). People make a gratuitous switch from one state to the other for no apparent
reason than being fed up with current trivial daily activities such as gardening, interior
decoration, and browsing on social media sites (Apter, 2007). Many consumers spend a
9

significant portion of their time on computers almost every day, reading newspapers, searching
for information on products, visiting blogs about topics of personal interest from cooking to
politics, and checking their news feeds on social media. During the course of these mundane
activities, satiation can kick in and consumers may experience reversals in their
metamotivational states. Lafreniere, Cowles, and Apter (1988) confirm that indeed such satiation
can explain reversals. Students from statistics classes were recruited to participate in a study of
personality and attitudes to computers. Participants were asked to spend for two hours on a
computer. All participants were given a set of teaching programs on statistics and a varied set of
video games. Results showed that 80.6 percent of participants changed either from a statistics
program to video games or vice versa, suggesting reversals in metamotivational states.
Subsequent questionnaires and interviews revealed that participants offered no reason for
wanting to change the materials.
State Dominance and Individual Difference
Walters, Apter, and Svebak (1982) find that some participants’ preferences for arousal
seeking or avoidance remain unchanged considerably longer than others, typically towards one
of the two polar ends. This behavior does not imply, however, that those traits are stable because
metamotivational states did reverse in all participants despite the differences in duration that the
one mode lasted (Apter, 2007). This form is so-called state dominance. Individuals can be telic
dominant or paratelic dominant. However, this condition does not mean that those individuals
never experience the opposite state. State dominance differs from many personality traits such as
extraversion or introversion.
Murgatroyd, Rushton, Apter, and Ray (1978) develop the Telic Dominance Scale (TDS).
Their scale uses 42 items to operationalize state dominance of individuals in terms of telic
10

dominance. Scale instructions ask participants to choose one of the two courses of action, telic-
versus paratelic-related actions; based on which one they would most usually prefer or most
closely apply to them. The telic dominance scale consists of three subscales, namely serious-
mindedness (14 items), planning-orientation (14 items), and arousal-avoidance (14 items).
Although these three dimensions likely correlate, they represent three distinctive phenomena. In
addition, Cook and Gerkovich (1993) develop the Paratelic Dominance Scale that consists of 30
items. These items primarily employ temporal components (e.g., “I often take risks”, “I usually
take life seriously”).
Svebak and Murgatroyd (1985) compare extremely telic-dominant individuals with
extremely paratelic-dominant individuals in in-depth interviews. Paratelic-dominant individuals
tend to be engaged in a greater variety of activities, act more flexible and spontaneous, and
appear less well-organized than telic-dominant individuals. In contrast, telic-dominant
individuals tend to execute their planned activities more carefully, spend more time carefully
monitoring their activities and performance, and show concerns about achieving their longer-
term goals. When describing the account of activities, the two groups were also quite different.
Telic-dominant individuals were detailed and described events in a more systematic way,
whereas paratelic-dominant individuals described events more generally. In addition, the two
groups differ in their language use. Telic-dominant people tended to use descriptive language,
whereas the paratelic-dominant group tended to use evaluative language (Apter, 2007).
State Balance, State Dominance, and Change
According to the reversal theory, personality is about patterns over a period of time rather
than fixated traits. Thus, individuals are flexible and change in their metamotivational states. A
consumer might spend more time in the paratelic state than in the telic state over the weekend.
11

This same person might spend more time in the telic state than in the paratelic state on a
weekday. Thus, the balance of time spent on one state rather than the other can change. This
weekday versus weekend partitioning is referred to as a “state balance” and the state balance
changes over time (Apter & Larsen, 1993). State balance differs from state dominance. State
balance refers to the actual time spent in one state rather than the other. State dominance refers to
the individual’s innate bias or tendency to be in one state than the other. State balance and
dominance tend to associate strongly; however, they do not necessarily move to the same
direction all the time (Apter, 2007). Girodo (1985) reports generally paratelic-dominant
individuals changed to telic-dominance after undergoing dramatically serious and potentially
traumatic training (e.g. undercover police training). Further, some evidence suggests consumers’
state dominance changes toward telic dominance over the span of their lives. Prior studies find
strong, positive correlations between age and telic dominance; the older consumers are, the more
they exhibit telic dominance (Murgatroyd, 1985; Tacon & Abner, 1993).
Summary
In sum, the telic state is goal-oriented, serious-minded, and arousal avoiding, whereas the
paratelic state is spontaneous, playful, and arousal seeking (Apter, 1984). Reversal theory is
primarily concerned about how consumers interpret experiences (e.g., arousal) rather than the
specific content (Apter, 1981). A lot of complex and inconsistent behaviors of consumers that
traditional psychological theory fails to account for can be explained by acknowledging the fact
that consumers reverse between those psychological states depending on the particular motive
they felt at a particular time (Apter & Batler, 1997). Researchers adopt reversal theory to explain
individuals’ complex and inconsistent behaviors in various contexts such as stress-moderating
effects (Martin, Kuiper, Olinger, & Dobbin, 1987), design (Fokkinga & Desmet, 2014; Gielen &
12

van Leeuwen, 2014), sports (Sit & Lindner, 2006), behavioral counseling (Blaydon, Lindner, &
Kerr, 2004), management (Carter, 2005), and digital advertising (Davis, 2009; Jung et al., 2014;
Rodgers & Thorson, 2000; Seyedghorban et al., 2016).
The Role of Reversal Theory in Digital Advertising
Interactivity in Digital Advertising and Reversal Theory
Online advertising or communication between firms and consumers can be characterized
as interactive (Yadav & Varadarajan, 2005). A computer-mediated environment allows
consumers to control online media and communicate back to the sender of the message any time
of the day. With digital technology advancing, new and innovative interactive technologies
extend the capability of computer-mediated communication to a whole new level. The literature
on on-line advertising shows several researchers investigating how online interactivity affects
persuasion (Jung et al., 2011; Schlosser, 2003). These studies manipulate goal types (e.g.,
information vs. entertainment) and observe effectiveness of the interactivity in the ads from a
rather homeostatic, traditional consumer behavior perspective. Traditional models such as the
integrative attitude formation model (MacInnis & Jaworski, 1989) may be adequate in a static
environment. However, some evidence suggests that Internet users are different from traditional
consumers. Internet consumers tend to be more active searching for information (Hoffman,
Novak & Schlosser, 2000; Rosenkrans, 2009). Consumers appear multi-static and non-rational
(Holbrook, 1994), especially when they use technology (Mick & Fournier, 1998). Rogers and
Thorson (2000) integrate the psychological reversals in the Internet user mode into their
Interactive Advertising Model (IAM).
13

According to the IAM, Internet users’ motives (e.g., research vs. entertainment) interact
with the likely user mode, which in turn transpires information processing (i.e., attention,
memory, and attitude). The user’s motives also interact directly with information processing
because motives encourage the user put efforts to carry out any online activity. Based on the
motives such as research, shopping, entertainment, communication, or socializing, online users
differentially attend to, comprehend, and form attitudes about interactive advertisement (Rodgers
& Thorson, 2000). Further, an Internet user’s motives closely relate to user mode (e.g., serious vs.
playful). An Internet user searching for product information arguably is serious-minded. In
contrast, a user seeking entertainment is playful. Because the user’s motive changes more
frequently while using the Internet than traditional media, an online user’s mode likely changes
frequently as well. Hence, the IAM incorporates reversal theory and classifies an Internet user
mode as ‘telic’ (high goal-oriented, seriousness, and present-oriented) and ‘paratelic’ (low goal-
oriented, playfulness, and future-oriented) along the goal-directedness continuum. Further,
building on multi-stability (Apter, 1984; Mick & Fournier, 1998), Davis (2009) tests reversal
theory and finds coexistence of two reversal states such as telic and paratelic states when
consumers encounter multimedia messaging services.
Online Consumers’ Mode and Advertising Interactivity
Few studies investigate the relationship between online consumer mode and advertising
interactivity. Li and Bukovac (1999) find that larger banner ads invite a higher click-through rate
from playful mode online users than serious mode online users. The IAM suggests that paratelic
users respond more positively to interactive online advertising, whereas telic users respond more
negatively to interactive online advertising because interactive features interfere with telic users’
goal pursuit process.
14

Drawing on the reversal theory and the IAM, Jung et al. (2014) conduct a field
experiment to examine how online consumers’ user mode influences their evaluation of
advertisements that vary in its interactivity. They used a 2 (advertising interactivity: high vs. low)
x 2 (user mode: telic vs. paratelic) between-subjects design. The advertising interactivity was
manipulated with a banner implanted on a cell phone section of a fictitious online retailer. Under
the high interactivity condition, each banner component comes to life as the banner expands to a
larger size and each component appears one at a time when participants move the mouse over the
banner. Under the low interactivity condition, the banner remained static without any interactive
components activated. The user mode is measured using an adapted version of Telic/Paratelic
Statement Instrument (T/PSI) (O’Connell & Calhoun, 2001). Jung et al. (2014) modify this
seven-item, serious-mindedness/playfulness subscale of the T/PSI into a 10-item, 7-point
semantic differential scale: five items for serious-mindedness and five items for playfulness.
Before responding to the scale, participants read an instruction, “Please click on the number that
best indicates how you were feeling in the last few minutes, just before you started this survey.”
Since the telic and paratelic states should be mutually exclusive (Apter, 2007) and
dichotomization determines the two states (O’Connell & Calhoun, 2001), the authors
dichotomize the sample on each dimension based on the neural point of four, and determine telic
users (those who score high on serious-mindedness and low on playfulness) and paratelic users
(those who score high on playfulness and low on serious-mindedness).
In addition, Jung et al. (2014) measure perceived advertising interactivity using four-item
modified from McMillan and Hwang (2002). They also measure arousal-seeking tendency using
19 items adopted from Xie and Lee (2008). Some of the Arousal-Seeking Tendency scale items
were “I prefer an unpredictable life full of change to a more routine one,” “I sometimes like to do
15

things that are a little frightening,” and “I like to experience novelty and change in my daily
routine.”
Results of Jung et al. (2014) show that an interactive effect exists between user mode and
advertising interactivity such that telic state online viewers form a more favorable attitude
toward the low interactivity ad, whereas paratelic state online viewers form a more favorable
attitude toward the high interactivity ad. Further, the study finds that when exposed to the low
(high) interactive ad, the telic (paratelic) state online viewers form a more positive ad attitude
than the paratelic (telic) state online viewers. Consistent with a mediation hypothesis, the study
confirms that the impact of user mode (telic vs. paratelic) on ad attitude is mediated through
arousal seeking tendency. When exposed to a low interactivity ad, paratelic state consumers,
compared with telic consumers, form a less favorable attitude toward the ad because paratelic
state consumers have a greater level of arousal seeking tendency, which makes them evaluate the
ad with low interactivity less favorably. When exposed to a high interactivity ad, however,
paratelic state consumers, compared with telic state consumers, form a more favorable attitude
toward the ad because paratelic state consumers have a greater level of arousal seeking tendency,
which makes them evaluate the ad with high interactivity more favorably.
Conclusion
This chapter argues that reversal theory is a valuable framework relevant for online
consumer behavior in general and digital advertising in particular. While reversal theory is a
well-established psychology theory, historical background, causes, state dominance, and state
balance demonstrate applications to consumer behavior. Reviewing the interactive advertising
literature from the reversal theory perspective, the results show a paucity of research using the
reversal theory in digital advertising (i.e., Davis, 2009; Jung et al., 2014; Li & Bukovac, 1999;
16

Rodgers & Thorson, 2000). Jung et al.’s (2014) research is one of the first empirical studies
rooted on the reversal theory in marketing, and contributes to the literature by incorporating the
metamotivational state’s role in the context of an interactive ad. This research demonstrates that
the users' metamotivational state and arousal seeking tendency affect persuasiveness of digital
advertising that varies in interactivity. Results also have significant implications for practitioners.
Since online consumers’ metamotivational state changes from telic to paratelic or vice versa
during the course of their digital experience, and the user mode at the time of their exposure to
an ad influences the persuasiveness of an interactive ad, digital advertising professionals should
include both high and low interactivity advertisements available (Jung et al., 2014).
Advancements in digital technology potentially help to identify the metamotivational state of
online consumers. Enlightened digital advertisers can show either high or low interactive
advertising that match online consumers’ modes to maximize ad effectiveness.
Despite reversal theory’s relevance and the importance of digital advertising, adoption of
this approach remains limited. Since Rodgers and Thorson (2000) incorporate telic versus
paratelic user modes as an important part of the IAM, surprisingly few known researchers
employ reversal theory in exploring the effectiveness of digital advertising. As the relationship
between digital advertising and firm success continues to grow, researchers need to pay more
attention to the value of reversal theory as a plausible explanation for changeable bi-stability of
human behavior. This chapter only examines one dimension -- telic-paratelic dimension, but
three more dimensions (conformity-negativity, autocentric-allocentric, mastery-sympathy)
remain unexplored in this context. An essential first step is developing scales to measure these
constructs. Further, more experiments are needed to show different types of metamotivational
states that affect different types of advertisements beyond interactivity.
17

References
Apter, M. J. (1981). The possibility of a structural phenomenology: The case of reversal theory.
Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 12, 173-187.
Apter, M. J. (2007). Reversal theory: The dynamics of motivation, emotion, and personality (2nd
ed.). Oxford, England: Oneworld.
Apter, M. J. (2013). Developing reversal theory: Some suggestions for future research. Journal
of Motivation, Emotion, and Personality, 1(1), 1-8.
Apter, M. J. (2015). Exploring the concept of focus in reversal theory. Journal of Motivation,
Emotion, and Personality, 4(4), 1-8.
Apter, M. J., & Batler, R. (1997). Gratuitous risk: A study of parachuting. In S. Svebak & M. J.
Apter (Eds.), Stress and health: A reversal theory perspective (pp. 119-129). Washington
D.C.: Taylor & Francis.
Apter, M. J., & Larsen, R. (1993). Sixty consecutive days: Telic and paratelic states in everyday
life. In J. H. Kerr, S. Murgatroyd, & M. J. Apter (Eds.), Advances in reversal theory (pp.
107-122). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Barr, S. A., McDermott, M. R., & Evans, P. (1993). Predicting persistence: A study of telic and
paratelic frustration. In J. H. Kerr, S. Murgatroyd, & M. J. Apter (Eds.), Advances in
reversal theory (pp. 123-136). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Bellew, M., & Thatcher, J. (2002). Metamotivational state reversals in competitive sport. Social
Behavior and Personality, 30(6), 613-624.
18

Blaydon, M. J., Lindner, K. J., & Kerr, J. H. (2004). Metamotivational characteristics of exercise
dependence and eating disorders in highly active amateur sport participants. Personality
and Individual Differences, 36, 1419-1432.
Carter, S. (2005) Reversal theory: Changing you and your organization for the better. Training
Journal, 2, 20-22.
Cook, M. R., & Gerkovich, M. M. (1993). The development of a Paratelic Dominance Scale. In J.
H. Kerr, S. Murgatroyd, & M. J. Apter (Eds.), Advances in reversal theory (pp. 177-188).
Amsterdam, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Cox, T., & Kerr, J. H. (1990). Self-reported mood in competitive squash. Personality and
Individual Differences, 11, 199-203.
Cummins, S., Peltier, J. W., Schibrowsky, J. A., & Nill, A. (2013). Consumer behavior in the
online context. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 8(3), 169-202.
Davis, R. (2009). Do consumers experience a reversal state when encountering mobile
commerce services? Proceedings from ANZMAC ’09: Australian and New Zealand
Marketing Academy Annual Conference. Melbourne: Australia and New Zealand.
Fokkinga, S., & Desmet, P. (2014). Reversal theory from a design perspective. Journal of
Motivation, Emotion, and Personality, 2(2), 12-26.
Gielen, M. A., & van Leeuwen, L. (2014). Found in translation: Bringing reversal theory to
design for play. Journal of Motivation, Emotion, and Personality, 2(2), 27-40.
Girodo, M. (1985, May). Telic and paratelic modes in operational undercover and field narcotics
agents. Paper Presented at the Second International Conference on Reversal Theory,
York University, Toronto.
19

Hebb, D. O. (1955). Drives and the C.N.S. (Conceptual Nervous System). Psychological Review,
62, 243-254.
Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Schlosser, A. E. (2000). Consumer control in online
environments. Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University, TN.
Holbrook, M. B. (1994). The nature of customer value. In T. R. Roland, & L. O. Richard (Eds.),
Service quality: New directions in theory and practice (pp. 21-71). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Jung, J. M., Hui, H. C., Min, K. S., & Martin, D. (2014). Does telic/paratelic user mode matter
on the effectiveness of interactive Internet advertising? A reversal theory perspective.
Journal of Business Research, 67, 1303-1309.
Jung, J. M., Min, K. S., & Kellaris, J. J. (2011). The games people play: How the entertainment
value of online ads helps or harms persuasion. Psychology & Marketing, 28(7), 661–681.
Kerr, J. H., & Tacon, P. (1999). Psychological responses to different types of locations and
activities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 287-294.
Kerr, J. H., & Tacon, P. (2000). Environmental events and induction of metamotivational
reversals. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91, 337-338.
Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2008). Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel
shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(2), 45-59.
Köhler, C. F., Rohm, A. J., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2011). Return on interactivity: The
impact of online agents on newcomer adjustment. Journal of Marketing, 75(2), 93-108.
Lafreniere, K. D., Cowles, M. P., & Apter M. J. (1988). The reversal phenomenon: Reflections
on a laboratory study. In M. J. Apter, J. H. Kerr, & M. P. Cowles (Eds.), Progress in
reversal theory (pp. 247–254). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
20

Li, H, & Bukovac J. L. (1999), Cognitive impact of banner ad characteristics: an experimental
study. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 341-353.
MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward
an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(4), 1-23.
Males, J. R. (1999). Individual experience in slalom canoeing. In J. H. Kerr (Ed.), Experiencing
sport: Reversal theory (pp. 189-208). Chichester, England: Wiley Publications.
Martin, R. A., Kuiper, N. A., Olinger, L. J. & Dobbin, J. (1987). Is stress always bad? Telic
versus paratelic dominance as a stress-moderating variable. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 53(5), 970-982.
McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J. (2002). Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of the
role of direction of communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of
interactivity. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 29-42.
Mick, D. G., & Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions,
and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 123-143.
Murgatroyd, S. (1985). The nature of telic dominance. In M. J. Apter, D. Fontana, & S.
Murgatroyd (Eds.), Reversal theory: Applications and developments (pp. 20-41). Cardiff:
University College Cardiff Press.
Murgatroyd, S., Rushton, C., Apter, M. J., & Ray, C. (1978). The development of the telic
dominance scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42(5), 519-528.
O’Connell, K. A., & Calhoun, J. E. (2001). The telic/paratelic state instrument (T/PSI):
Validating a reversal theory measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 193-
204.
21

Rodgers, S. & Thorson, E. (2000). The interactive advertising model: How users perceive and
process online adv. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1(1), 42-61.
Rodriguez, M., Dixon, A. L., & Peltier, J. W. (2014). A review of the interactive marketing
literature in the context of personal selling and sales management. Journal of Research in
Interactive Marketing, 8(4), 294-308.
Rosenkrans, G. (2009). The creativeness and effectiveness of online interactive rich media
advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 9(2), 18-31.
Schlosser, A. E. (2003). Experiencing products in the virtual world: The role of goal and imagery
in influencing attitudes versus purchase intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 30,
184-198.
Seyedghorban, Z., Tahernejad, H., & Matanda, M. J. (2016). Reinquiry into advertising
avoidance on the Internet: A conceptual replication and extension. Journal of Advertising,
45(1), 120-129.
Sit, C., & Lindner, K. J. (2006). Situational state balances and participation motivation in youth
sport: A reversal theory perspective. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(2),
369-384.
Stone, M. D., & Woodcock, N. D. (2013). Interactive, direct and digital marketing: A future that
depends on better use of business intelligence. Journal of Research in Interactive
Marketing, 8(1), 4-17.
Svebak, S., & Apter, M. J. (1987). Laughter: An empirical test of some reversal theory
hypotheses. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 28, 189-198.
Svebak, S., & Murgatroyd, S. (1985). Metamotivational dominance: A multimethod validation of
reversal theory constructs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 107-116.
22

Tacon, P., & Abner, B. (1993). Normative and other data for the Telic Dominance and
Negativism Dominance Scales. In J. H. Kerr, S. Murgatroyd, & M. J. Apter (Eds.),
Advances in reversal theory (pp. 165-176). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Tacon, P., & Kerr, J. H. (1999). Metamotivational states in sport locations and activities. In J. H.
Kerr (Ed.), Experiencing sport: Reversal theory (pp. 175-187). Chichester, England:
Wiley Publications.
Walters, J., Apter, M. J., & Svebak, S. (1982). Colour preference, arousal and the theory of
psychological reversals. Motivation and Emotion, 6, 193-215.
Xie, G. X., & Lee, M. J. (2008). Anticipated violence, arousal, and enjoyment of movies:
Viewers’ reactions to violent previews based on arousal-seeking tendency. The Journal of
Social Psychology, 148(3), 277-292.
Yadav, M. S., & Varadarajan, R. (2005). Interactivity in the electronic marketplace: An
exposition of the concept and implication for research. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 33(4), 585-603.
23
View publication statsView publication stats