Exploring attitudes towards targeted online advertising through in-depth interviews

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15170/MM.2026.60.02.04

Keywords:

online behavioral advertising, targeted advertising, privacy, interview, thematic analysis

Abstract

THE AIMS OF THE PAPER
The aim of this study is to explore how young social media users perceive (behaviorally) targeted advertising. The research examines the underlying drivers of these attitudes through the lens of the (personalization)–privacy paradox, with particular attention to the aspects of usefulness, relevance, and privacy protection.

METHODOLOGY
The study employed an exploratory qualitative approach, conducting 15 in-depth interviews with active social media users aged 20–29. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis in NVivo 12, following a fully inductive coding process and a realist approach. As a result, 26 codes were identified and organized into 9 themes, which were then grouped into 3 overarching dimensions.

MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS
The study identified three main dimensions: the ad‑fit aspect, the emotional aspect, and the informational aspect. The results show that young social media users’ attitudes toward behavioral advertising are shaped simultaneously by rational benefits and strongly emotion‑based risks. Within the ad‑fit dimension, participants appreciated relevant offers, easier information gathering, and favorable prices, all of which strengthen the perceived benefits side of the privacy calculus. In parallel, the emotional aspect revealed feelings of concern, vulnerability, and privacy invasion, especially in the case of sensitive topics, highlighting the presence of perceived risks. Reflexive cookie acceptance and a general sense of resignation indicate that attitudes and actual behavior often diverge, reflecting the typical pattern of the privacy paradox. Finally, the lack of knowledge about how targeted advertising works further reinforces this contradiction and plays a key role in sustaining these paradoxes.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The study recommends enhancing the transparency of data management and ad targeting practices, for example through short, easy-to-understand explanations. It is important to reduce ad frequency, limit repetition, and establish specific targeting guidelines for sensitive topics. Additionally, user control should be strengthened by providing clear and easily accessible settings for managing ad preferences and the degree of personalization, thereby reducing negative emotional reactions and improving user trust.

References

Aguirre, E., Mahr, D., Grewal, D., de Ruyter, K. & Wetzels, M. (2015), “Unraveling the Personalization Paradox: The Effect of Information Collection and Trust-Building Strategies on Online Advertisement Effectiveness”, Journal of Retailing, 91(1), 34–49. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.09.005

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006), “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology”, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Boerman, S. C., Kruikermeier, S. & Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J. (2017), “Online Behavioral Advertising: A Literature Review and Research Agenda”, Journal of Advertising, 46(3), 363–376. DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2017.1339368

Boerman, S. C. & Smit, E. G. (2023), “Advertising and Privacy: An Overview of Past Research and a Research Agenda”, International Journal of Advertising, 42(1), 60–68. DOI: 10.1080/02650487.2022.2122251

Buvár Á. (2018), „#Reklám, #hirdetés, #fizetett tartalom: A reklámfelismerés szerepe a reklámmal kapcsolatos attitűdök aktiválásában szponzorált tartalmak esetén”, Marketing & Menedzsment, 52(3–4), 33–44.

Chen, S., Wu, Y., Deng, F., & Zhi, K. (2023), “How Does Ad Relevance Affect Consumers’ Attitudes Toward Personalized Advertisements and Social Media Platforms? The Role of Information Co-ownership, Vulnerability, and Privacy Cynicism”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 73, 103336. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103336

Coventry, L. M., Jeske, D., Blythe, J. M., Turland, J. & Briggs, P. (2016), “Personality and Social Framing in Privacy Decision-Making: A Study on Cookie Acceptance”, Frontiers in Psychology, 7. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01341

De Groot, J. I. M. (2022), “The Personalization Paradox in Facebook Advertising: The Mediating Effect of Relevance on the Personalization-Brand Attitude Relationship and the Moderating Effect of Intrusiveness”, Journal of Interactive Advertising, 22(1), 57–74. DOI: 10.1080/15252019.2022.2032492

Gáti M. & Simay A. (2019), „A magánélet védelmével kapcsolatos fogyasztói észlelések a GDPR szabályozás tükrében”, in: Veres, Z., Sasné Grósz, A. & Liska, F. (szerk.), Ismerjük a vevőt? A vásárlás pszichológiája – Az egyesület a marketingoktatásért és kutatásért XXV. országos konferenciájának előadásai, Veszprém, 2019, 554–563.

Gerber, N., Gerber, P. & Volkamer, M. (2018), “Explaining the Privacy Paradox: A Systematic Review of Literature Investigating Privacy Attitude and Behavior”, Computers & Security, 77, 226–261. DOI: 10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002

Grigorios, L., Magrizos, S., Drossos, D. & Santos, D. (2022), “Overt and Covert Customer Data Collection in Online Personalized Advertising: The Role of User Emotions”, Journal of Business Research, 141, 308–320. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.025

Kelly, L., Kerr, G. & Drennan, J. (2017), “Privacy Concerns on Social Networking Sites: A Longitudinal Study”, Journal of Marketing Management, 33(17–18). 1465–1489. DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2017.1400994

Kokolakis, S. (2017), “Privacy Attitudes and Privacy Behaviour: A Review of Current Research on the Privacy Paradox Phenomenon”, Computers & Security, 64, 122–134. DOI: 10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002

Rekettye G. & Rekettye G. ifj. (2020), “The Changing Role of Customer Experience in the Age of Industry 4.0”, Marketing & Menedzsment, 54(1), 17–27. DOI: 10.15170/MM.2020.54.01.02.

Somosi Z., Hajdú N. & Molnár L. (2023), “Targeting in Online Marketing: A Retrospective Analysis with a Focus on Practices of Facebook, Google, LinkedIn and Tiktok”, European Journal of Business and Management Research, 8(1), 33–39. DOI: 10.24018/ejbmr.2023.8.1.1724

Török A., Malota E. & Mucsi A. (2022), „A nők attitűdje a tradicionális és a femvertising reklámokban megjelenő női sztereotípiákkal szemben”, Marketing & Menedzsment, 55(4), 5–14. DOI: 10.15170/MM.2021.55.04.01

Ur, B., Leon, P. G., Cranor, L. F., Shay, R. & Wang, Y. (2012), “Smart, Useful, Scary, Creepy: Perceptions of Online Behavioral Advertising” SOUPS ’12: Proceedings of the Eight Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, 1–15. DOI: 10.1145/2335356.2335362

Wang, P., Jiang, L. & Yang, J. (2024), “The Early Impact of GDPR Compliance on Display Advertising: The Case of an Ad Publisher”, Journal of Marketing Research, 61(1), 70–91. DOI: 10.1177/00222437231171848

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

Sikó, B. (2026) “Exploring attitudes towards targeted online advertising through in-depth interviews”, The Hungarian Journal of Marketing and Management, 60(2), pp. 53–63. doi: 10.15170/MM.2026.60.02.04.

Issue

Section

Papers

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.