Picture this: a package arrives at your doorstep, and before the delivery driver even makes it back to the truck, you find yourself unwrapping an unexpected purchase—a Speedo with dinosaur tear-away trunks. The perplexity in your partner’s eyes is matched only by your own as you question, “Why did I buy this?”
Could it have been meant for a light-hearted social media skit? A spontaneous attempt to amuse? Or perhaps, you simply fell prey to an online advertisement that showed up at just the right—or wrong—moment.
As you scroll through social media, even a brief 30-second glance can leave your mind more fatigued than before. This mental weariness makes you more susceptible to ads that dictate what to purchase—”The facts make it clear, we’re the best!”—instead of those that invite you to form your own opinion.
I’m a professor of advertising researching the effects of social media on consumer behavior. My latest study highlights how “cognitive load,” or the mental effort required to process information, influences consumer reactions to product advertisements.
Matt Pittman, Author provided (no reuse)
Explicit versus implicit pitches
In collaboration with researchers Stan Li and Bixuan Sun, I conducted three experiments to examine how individuals react to online advertisements for eco-friendly products.
Participants were divided into two groups: one scrolled through Instagram for 30 seconds, while the other did not. Both groups then viewed an Instagram ad from a sustainability-focused brand.
The first study featured an ad for laundry detergent sheets; the second, an eco-friendly phone case; and the third, a reusable water bottle. Each ad presented various environmental facts about the product.
The difference lay in the conclusion of the ad. Half the participants encountered an implicit ending: “Who makes the best, most sustainable detergent? Here are the facts, now decide for yourself.” The other half saw an explicit ending: “Who makes the best, most sustainable detergent? The facts make it clear – it’s TruEarth!!”
Matt Pittman
The results were telling: under normal circumstances, participants favored the implicit conclusion, preferring to draw their own inferences.
However, when cognitive load was introduced through Instagram scrolling—a common activity for half of all U.S. adults—participants leaned towards the ads that explicitly directed them to purchase the product because it was “the best.”
This preference was driven by perceived credibility. Under cognitive load, consumers favored explicit ads not because they were overtly aware of being told what to do, but because the directness made the brand appear more credible.
This phenomenon parallels how assertiveness is perceived in people. Typically, a domineering individual may be off-putting, but in stressful situations, their assertiveness can be comforting.
Crafting effective sustainability claims poses a challenge for advertisers. Such claims lack the immediate verifiability of tasting a coffee or trying on a shirt, making credibility vital. Brands must avoid being accused of greenwashing.
The cost of cognitive load
When individuals can focus, they tend to prefer drawing their own conclusions, as research suggests. This autonomy feels more like personal choice than external influence.
Consider a friend recommending a restaurant by sharing their favorite dishes, versus another asserting, “You have to go there, it’s the best.” We like to believe we are rational consumers, making informed decisions—even if this isn’t always the case.
With enough time and mental energy, consumers are inclined to prefer ads that allow them to form their own judgments based on facts.
But when cognitive load is present, the dynamics change. Imagine evaluating that restaurant recommendation while juggling work emails, a podcast, and dinner preparation. In such a mentally taxing state, a straightforward recommendation is easier to accept.
This scenario mirrors the social media experience. While scrolling, users encounter a myriad of stimuli, from friends to advertisements, all vying for limited attention. In this context, a clear and confident ad message feels less aggressive and more credible.
In the film “Father of the Bride,” Steve Martin portrays a loving father overwhelmed by the stress of wedding planning. Under increased cognitive load, he makes a poor decision:
It is no surprise that consumers view themselves as more rational and less emotional than others.
While this may hold true at times, even the most logical individuals experience “foggy brain.” Whether you’re an early bird or a night owl, our research underscores the importance of a clear mental state when making online purchases, particularly significant ones.
Periods of heightened cognitive load, such as late afternoons or pre-event preparations, are not ideal for making crucial financial decisions. Avoid shopping on a Friday afternoon at 4 p.m. Instead, wait until you’re fresh and clear-headed the next morning.
When credibility backfires
While an explicit product claim can enhance credibility, it risks appearing as false advertising if unsupported by facts. Worse, it might backfire, leading to disdain for the ad or brand.
In our studies, claims were backed by concrete data, such as recycled materials and verified certifications. Brands making bold claims without evidence may find this tactic counterproductive, as skepticism is hard to reverse once triggered.
While our study focused on sustainability claims due to their complexity, it’s uncertain if explicit messaging’s effectiveness extends to other complex claims, like health benefits or financial products. We are all aware of how false messages can spread rapidly, causing harm before verification.
For now, if you find yourself mindlessly scrolling and a brand asserts its superiority, recognize that their confidence might be influencing you due to your lowered defenses.
To avoid buyer’s remorse, reconsider making purchases late at night. Instead, wait until the next morning when you can decide more thoughtfully.
