The Psychological Appeal of Personalized Content in Web Portals: Does Customization Affect Attitudes and Behavior?

By S. Kalyanaraman, Shyam Sundar. 2006

468 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Literature and Literary Theory, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a989da33f846e5def1b1b8ccd045363a96ccb57f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems and Management

In Literature and Literary Theory

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. (2014, methodology): “Our example is based on data provided by Kalyanaraman and Sundar (2006) from an experiment on web portal customization and its effects on users.”
A Review and Conceptual Framework for Understanding Personalized Matching Effects in Persuasion (2020, background): “As another approach for strengthening matches, one could target not only different types of dimensions but also multiple characteristics simultaneously (Kalyanaraman & Sundar, 2006; Strecher et al., 2008).”
Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. (2008, methodology): “Greater detail on the measurement and study procedures can be found in Kalyanaraman and Sundar (2006).2 Drawing on this example, it may be of interest to determine whether perceived interactivity (M) mediates the effect of perceived customization (X) on attitudes toward the Web portal (Y).”
Experimental Manipulation of Psychological Involvement with Media (2014, methodology): “Immersion and spatial presence were measured using items from the following scales: IJsselsteijn, Poels, and de Kort (2008); Kalyanaraman and Sundar (2006); Lee, Park, Jin, and Kang (2005); Lessiter, Freeman, Keogh, and Davidoff (2001); Lombard and Ditton (1997); Lombard et al. (2000); and…”
Social Media for Socially Responsible Firms: Analysis of Fortune 500’s Twitter Profiles and their CSR/CSIR Ratings (2013, background): “In this respect, Kaplan and Haenlein’s (2010) five success factors for being social in social media are suggestive of the sought-after rules: (1) be active, (2) be interesting, (3) be humble, (4) be unprofessional, and (5) be honest.”
Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models (2008, background): “Kalyanaraman and Sundar (2006) showed that perceived interactivity of a Web portal functions as a mediator of the effect of customization on attitudes toward the portal.”
Understanding the appeal of user-generated media: a uses and gratification perspective (2009, background): “It also has the potential to generate positive attitudes and behaviors towards the sites (Carpenter, 2000; Graham, 2002; Kalyanaraman and Sundar, 2006).”
I’m Proud of It: Consumer Technology Appropriation and Psychological Ownership (2015, unknown): “Lastly, simply perceiving interactivity in technology allows consumers to customize their exposures and experiences in ways not possible in more static environments (Kalyanaraman and Sundar, 2006; Kirk and Swain, 2013; Liu and Shrum, 2002).”
Precursors and Underlying Processes of Adolescents' Online Self-Disclosure: Developing and Testing an “Internet-Attribute-Perception” Model (2006, background): “A recent study by Kalyanaraman and Sundar (2006) also demonstrated the important role of user perceptions in explaining the relation between customized Internet content and attitudes towards the content.”
Is this for me? How Consumers Respond to Personalized Advertising on Social Network Sites (2015, background): “ELM predicts that people are more motivated to process an advertisement for a highinvolvement product than for a low-involvement product (Franke, Keinz, and Steger 2009; Kalyanaraman and Sundar 2006).”