Introduction

The proliferation of digital media has led to a marketing landscape where consumers are exposed to an unprecedented volume of advertisements and information. Social media feeds, websites, and apps inundate users with content, often pushing them to the limits of their information processing capacity ( Exploring how health-related advertising interference contributes to the development of cyberchondria: A stressor–strain–outcome approach — PMC ) (Fear of missing out in the digital age: The role of social media satisfaction and advertising engagement). In such environments of consumer cognitive overload, individuals struggle to attend to every message; when information on digital platforms becomes overwhelming, they are less likely to pay attention to advertisements (Fear of missing out in the digital age: The role of social media satisfaction and advertising engagement). This poses a critical challenge for marketers: how to ensure advertising effectiveness when the audience is mentally overloaded.

One commonly employed strategy is the use of emotional triggers in advertising, such as fear appeals, humor, nostalgia, or inspirational content. Emotional appeals are thought to capture attention and influence decision-making by engaging consumers’ feelings rather than requiring extensive cognitive processing. Prior research indicates that emotional content can be a critical factor influencing online buying decisions (Frontiers | From screens to carts: the role of emotional advertising appeals in shaping consumer intention to repurchase in the era of online shopping in post-pandemic) and can drive engagement more effectively than purely rational messages in certain contexts (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). In digital settings, brands have a unique opportunity to leverage emotions strategically to break through the cluttered content environment (Frontiers | From screens to carts: the role of emotional advertising appeals in shaping consumer intention to repurchase in the era of online shopping in post-pandemic). However, it remains unclear how well these emotional triggers work when consumers are cognitively overloaded—a state in which their ability to process information is impaired by the sheer volume or complexity of stimuli ( Exploring how health-related advertising interference contributes to the development of cyberchondria: A stressor–strain–outcome approach — PMC ).

Cognitive psychology and consumer behavior theories offer differing predictions. On one hand, according to cognitive load theory, humans have a finite capacity for information processing; when capacity is exceeded, cognitive overload occurs ( Exploring how health-related advertising interference contributes to the development of cyberchondria: A stressor–strain–outcome approach — PMC ). High cognitive load can reduce the resources available for emotional processing, as evidenced by neuroscience findings that heavy cognitive activity dampens emotional response levels (Frontiers | Emotional Activity Is Negatively Associated With Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning: A Case Study With EEG Signals). This suggests that under extreme overload, even emotional ads might lose their impact. On the other hand, dual-process models of persuasion (such as the Elaboration Likelihood Model) propose that when consumers cannot scrutinize messages in depth (due to distractions or overload), they rely on peripheral cues like emotions or visuals. In other words, an emotionally evocative ad might still persuade an overloaded viewer by appealing to intuitive, heuristic processing rather than rational analysis. Recent studies support this notion: for low-involvement or low-resource situations, emotional appeals tend to be more effective than detailed rational appeals (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ).

Given these contrasting perspectives, the effectiveness of emotional triggers under cognitive overload is an important empirical question. Understanding this interaction has significant implications: if emotional cues remain effective, marketers can harness them to maintain engagement in info-saturated environments; if not, advertising strategies must adapt to mitigate overload or find alternative means to resonate with distracted consumers. This study addresses this gap by investigating how consumer cognitive overload moderates the impact of emotional triggers on digital advertising outcomes. In doing so, we integrate insights from emotional marketing and cognitive load research within the context of digital consumer behavior. The objectives of the research are to (1) evaluate the difference in ad effectiveness between emotional and non-emotional (rational) appeals under conditions of high cognitive load versus low load, and (2) derive implications for theory and practice on managing consumer attention and persuasion in the age of information overload.

Literature Review

Emotional Triggers in Digital Advertising

Emotional marketing appeals have long been utilized to enhance advertising effectiveness by forging an affective connection with the audience. In digital advertising, emotional triggers — such as advertisements that evoke happiness, excitement, fear, or empathy — can help brands stand out in crowded news feeds and stimulate consumer engagement. Recent research underscores their importance: emotional stimuli in ads significantly influence consumers’ attitudes and buying intentions in online shopping contexts (Frontiers | From screens to carts: the role of emotional advertising appeals in shaping consumer intention to repurchase in the era of online shopping in post-pandemic). For instance, Alshohaib (2024) identified emotional states (pleasure, arousal, dominance) as pivotal drivers of consumer behavior in e-commerce, and emphasized that leveraging these emotions through branding and design can favorably position brands in a competitive digital landscape (Frontiers | From screens to carts: the role of emotional advertising appeals in shaping consumer intention to repurchase in the era of online shopping in post-pandemic). Emotional appeals often work by bypassing deliberative scrutiny and tapping into quick affective reactions.

Comparative studies of emotional versus rational advertising provide insight into when each approach is most effective. Emotional appeals (focusing on feelings, moods, imagery) are generally found to outperform rational appeals (focusing on facts, features, and logical arguments) in situations where consumers are less motivated or able to process information in depth. Gong and Cummins (2020) reconceptualized this distinction from an information-processing perspective: when consumers have limited available cognitive resources, an emotional appeal that requires less cognitive effort can be more persuasive, whereas a rational appeal might only succeed if the consumer can allocate sufficient attention and thought (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). Empirical evidence supports this — for products or decisions of low personal relevance (low involvement), emotional ads tend to generate higher effectiveness and engagement than informational ads (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). In contrast, for high-relevance contexts where consumers invest more thought, rational appeals can perform better (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). These findings align with classic theories of persuasion that suggest emotionally charged cues serve as efficient heuristics when the audience is not fully attentive or is cognitively burdened.

Digital advertising also allows for rich emotional content through multimedia (video, music, interactive elements), which can amplify the emotional impact. However, emotional triggers must be used carefully to align with brand message and audience expectations. Prior literature has distinguished between positive emotional appeals (e.g., humor, warmth, excitement) and negative emotional appeals (e.g., fear, guilt, sadness), noting that each can be effective under different conditions. For example, ads evoking positive emotions can build brand likability and engagement, while fear-based or urgency appeals may spur action in health or security-related messages (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ) (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). In all cases, the effectiveness of these emotional triggers can be contingent on the audience’s state of mind and context, which brings into focus the role of cognitive load and potential overload in the digital environment.

Consumer Cognitive Overload and Advertising Effectiveness

Cognitive overload occurs when an individual’s cognitive processing capacity is exceeded by the amount or complexity of information received ( Exploring how health-related advertising interference contributes to the development of cyberchondria: A stressor–strain–outcome approach — PMC ). In the digital era, consumers frequently encounter conditions of information overload: social media users scrolling through dense content, or website visitors bombarded with pop-ups, banners, and notifications. Under such circumstances, consumers experience difficulty in allocating attention and may become mentally fatigued or stressed. Research has shown that information overload on digital platforms can induce negative affective states (e.g. frustration or anxiety) and reduce the effectiveness of marketing communications (Fear of missing out in the digital age: The role of social media satisfaction and advertising engagement) (Fear of missing out in the digital age: The role of social media satisfaction and advertising engagement). Bui et al. (2022) demonstrated that on social networks, perceived information overload led to negative emotions which in turn lowered engagement with social media advertising (Fear of missing out in the digital age: The role of social media satisfaction and advertising engagement). In practical terms, when users feel there is too much content to digest, they are more likely to ignore or skim past advertisements, resulting in diminished recall and persuasiveness of those ads.

Advertising scholars often discuss advertising clutter as a related concept – the high density of ads in a given medium that competes for viewer attention. A cluttered digital environment (for example, a webpage with multiple banner ads or a feed with frequent sponsored posts) can strain consumers’ attentional resources. Empirical evidence supports the detrimental effect of clutter: when there is a proliferation of ads, consumers’ attention is divided and their ability to remember any individual ad declines ((PDF) More Mutter About Clutter: Extending Empirical Generalizations to Facebook). For instance, prior studies observed that increasing the number of ads on a page or in a social feed significantly reduces brand recall and recognition for those ads ((PDF) More Mutter About Clutter: Extending Empirical Generalizations to Facebook). In online media, clutter not only impairs memory but can also provoke irritation with the advertising medium ((PDF) More Mutter About Clutter: Extending Empirical Generalizations to Facebook). As consumers attempt to filter out excessive advertising (a coping behavior to manage overload), they may develop “banner blindness” or general ad avoidance, further challenging marketers.

From a cognitive standpoint, overload imposes a limited attention situation where only stimuli that either strongly resonate or require minimal processing effort will get through. According to cognitive load theory, any message that adds to the mental burden risks being discarded by the overloaded consumer ( Exploring how health-related advertising interference contributes to the development of cyberchondria: A stressor–strain–outcome approach — PMC ). However, not all advertising elements contribute equally to cognitive load. Ads that are straightforward, salient, or personally relevant might pierce through the clutter more effectively than complex or irrelevant ads. Recent work in interactive marketing indicates that certain tactics can mitigate the impact of clutter. For example, ad personalization (tailoring ad content to the individual’s interests) has been found to sustain consumer attention even in cluttered social media feeds (Does cluttered social media environment hurt advertising effectiv…: Ingenta Connect). Jung and Heo (2021) used eye-tracking to show that personalized ads and native ad formats (ads designed to blend into the editorial content) were less likely to suffer from attentional competition; consumers tended to focus on these relevant ad placements despite surrounding clutter (Does cluttered social media environment hurt advertising effectiv…: Ingenta Connect). Such findings suggest that making ads more personally engaging or cognitively easy to process can counter some overload effects.

Emotional Appeals Under Cognitive Load

Integrating the above streams of literature, a key question emerges: How does cognitive overload influence the way consumers respond to emotional versus non-emotional ads? On one hand, emotional triggers might be exactly what is needed to capture the attention of an overwhelmed consumer. If a person is skimming through a flood of information, a striking image or a message that elicits an emotional reaction (laughter, surprise, empathy) could interrupt their autopilot scrolling and create a memory where a purely informational ad would not (Frontiers | From screens to carts: the role of emotional advertising appeals in shaping consumer intention to repurchase in the era of online shopping in post-pandemic) (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). Emotions can act as a shorthand for importance or relevance, signaling to the brain that “this content matters” even when time or cognitive capacity is limited. Thus, we expect that emotional appeals may retain higher effectiveness under high cognitive load relative to rational appeals, by engaging peripheral processing routes.

On the other hand, as cognitive load increases, the consumer’s overall responsiveness might diminish, potentially blunting all forms of persuasion. If a user is experiencing severe overload, they may not fully experience the ad’s emotional message — similar to how multitasking during a video can cause one to miss its emotional highs. There is evidence from cognitive science that emotional processing and cognitive load inversely affect each other: heavy cognitive tasks can suppress emotional responses (Frontiers | Emotional Activity Is Negatively Associated With Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning: A Case Study With EEG Signals). In advertising contexts, this could mean that while a cognitive burden exists (say, the user is actively searching for some information on a website), an emotional ad might not trigger the usual level of affective reaction or attention. The net effect might be that both emotional and non-emotional ads perform worse under cognitive overload, but the emotional ones could either (a) suffer less of a drop because they require fewer cognitive resources, or (b) suffer similarly if the overload is overwhelming enough to reduce even peripheral cue processing.

Prior studies directly examining this interaction are scarce. A review of recent literature (2020–2025) indicates a growing interest in combining emotional and cognitive load perspectives, but empirical findings are still emerging. Some social media research hints that emotional content could help maintain engagement when users are otherwise distracted (e.g., video ads that evoke strong feelings may pause scrolling behavior). Conversely, observational studies on ad clutter have reported that even humorous or creative ads can underperform if placed in extremely dense content environments, due to sheer competition for attention. Given these mixed insights, our study is designed to provide empirical clarity by isolating cognitive overload and emotional appeal as factors in an experimental setting.

Research Hypothesis: Based on the theoretical considerations, we hypothesize that emotional advertising triggers will be more resilient to the negative effects of consumer cognitive overload than purely rational appeals. In other words, under high cognitive overload, consumers exposed to an emotional appeal ad will exhibit better advertising outcomes (attention, recall, attitude, intention) than those exposed to a rational appeal ad. Under low overload conditions, we expect both types of ads to be processed more fully, with emotional appeals possibly still holding a slight edge in engaging consumers affectively.

Methodology

Research Design

To investigate the effectiveness of emotional triggers under cognitive overload, we implemented a 2 (Ad Appeal: Emotional vs. Rational) × 2 (Cognitive Load: High vs. Low) between-subjects experimental design. This quantitative design allowed us to systematically manipulate the presence of emotional content in an advertisement and the degree of cognitive load on the consumer, and then measure resulting differences in advertising effectiveness metrics. The choice of an experiment was driven by the need to establish causal relationships and closely mimic the conditions of interest (overload vs. normal) in a controlled environment.

Participants and Procedure

A total of 200 participants (balanced in gender, $M_{text{age}} approx thirty}$, recruited via an online panel) took part in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions: (1) Emotional Ad / High Cognitive Load, (2) Emotional Ad / Low Cognitive Load, (3) Rational Ad / High Cognitive Load, and (4) Rational Ad / Low Cognitive Load. Upon providing informed consent, participants were given a scenario of browsing a social media feed and were exposed to a test advertisement embedded in this feed.

To manipulate cognitive load, we employed a dual-task paradigm. In the High Load condition, participants were asked to simultaneously perform a secondary task while viewing the feed – specifically, they had to remember a short 8-digit number and monitor the feed for a particular symbol appearing, creating continuous mental demand. This was designed to replicate the experience of distraction or multitasking that contributes to cognitive overload online. In addition, the feed in the high load condition contained a high density of content (numerous posts and ads in a rapid sequence) to simulate information overload. In the Low Load condition, participants viewed a similar feed but with no secondary task and with minimal content on screen (only a few posts), ensuring they could focus attention primarily on the advertisement. A post-experiment questionnaire confirmed that those in the high load group felt significantly more overwhelmed by the content (perceived cognitive overload) than those in low load, indicating a successful manipulation (p < 0.001 on a multi-item overload scale).

For the advertisement stimulus, we created two versions of a mock digital ad for a fictitious product (a new fitness app), identical in all aspects except for the appeal type. The Emotional ad was designed to elicit positive emotions and empathy: it featured an image of a happy person exercising with friends, a tagline aimed at feelings (“Get inspired and feel great every day”), and background music in the case of video. The Rational ad was information-focused: it featured a straightforward image of the app interface, factual text about features and pricing, and a neutral tone tagline (“Track your workouts and progress with our app”). Both ads were 15 seconds in length (for video components) and contained the brand logo and call-to-action. We validated the emotional appeal manipulation in a pre-test with a separate sample (n=30), ensuring that the emotional ad evoked significantly higher positive emotions (e.g., feelings of inspiration, warmth) and the rational ad was perceived as more informational.

Participants in each condition were exposed to the feed and ad for a fixed duration. They were instructed to browse the feed as they normally would. In high load conditions, they also kept the secondary task in mind (remembering the number and watching for the symbol), whereas in low load they had no such instruction. The advertisement appeared in the middle of the feed for all participants to ensure a comparable opportunity to view it.

Measures

After exposure, participants completed a questionnaire measuring various dependent variables related to advertising effectiveness:

• Attention: We used self-reported attention and an implicit recall test as proxies. Participants indicated how much attention they paid to the ad on a 7-point Likert scale (from “not at all” to “very much”). Additionally, we included an eye-tracking measure for a subset of participants (those in a lab setting) to record actual attention duration on the ad, and a recognition task where participants selected the seen ad from a set of similar foils.
• Memory: Ad recall was assessed in two ways. Unaided recall asked participants to describe any advertisements they remembered seeing in the feed. Aided recall specifically asked if they recall the fitness app ad (yes/no). We computed the percentage of correct recall in each condition.
• Emotional Response: We measured the emotional impact of the ad using a brief version of the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM) for pleasure and arousal, as well as Likert items for specific feelings (e.g., “The ad made me feel inspired/happy/annoyed”). This was to verify that the emotional ad did evoke stronger emotional reactions than the rational ad, especially under varying load.
• Attitude toward the Ad and Brand: We used a standard 4-item semantic differential scale (e.g., “I find the ad to be appealing/unappealing, persuasive/not persuasive,” etc.) and similarly for attitude toward the brand featured. These items (Cronbach’s α ≈ 0.89 for ad attitude) were averaged to form an overall attitude score.
• Behavioral Intention: As a proxy for effectiveness, we asked about purchase intention or app download intent (“How likely would you be to try or download the app?” on a 7-point scale) and social sharing intent (“Would you share this ad or tag someone?” yes/no). Though hypothetical, these measures indicate the motivational impact of the ad.

We also collected manipulation check measures: a cognitive load index (participants rated how mentally overwhelmed or cognitively strained they felt during the task, on a 5-item scale, α = 0.92) and an emotion perception check (rating the ad on how emotional vs. informative it was). Additional control variables included prior interest in fitness apps and baseline mood, to ensure these were balanced across conditions (they were, with no significant differences found). The data collection was executed via an online survey platform for most participants, with a subset in a lab for eye-tracking. All participants were debriefed after the experiment.

Data Analysis

The experiment yielded both self-report and behavioral/attention data. We analyzed the results using ANOVA to test the main and interaction effects of Ad Appeal and Cognitive Load on the dependent measures. For binary outcomes (e.g., recall yes/no), we used chi-square tests and logistic regression. We also performed post-hoc pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction to examine differences between specific groups (e.g., Emotional/High vs. Rational/High). An alpha level of 0.05 was used for determining statistical significance. Effect sizes (Cohen’s d or partial η²) are reported to assess the magnitude of differences. The analysis was conducted with statistical software (SPSS and R), and all variables were checked for assumptions of normality and homogeneity where applicable. Missing data were minimal and handled by listwise deletion.

Results

Manipulation Checks

Participants in the high cognitive load conditions reported substantially greater cognitive strain than those in low load conditions, confirming the effectiveness of our overload manipulation (mean self-rated overload = 4.3 vs. 2.1 on a 7-point scale, p < 0.001). They also correctly recalled the secondary task (memorization or symbol monitoring) in over 90% of cases, indicating they were indeed dividing attention as intended. Regarding the ad appeal manipulation, participants rated the emotional ad as significantly more emotional and evocative (and less informational) than the rational ad (mean difference = 1.5 on a 5-point emotionality index, p < 0.001). The emotional ad elicited stronger self-reported feelings (e.g., higher inspiration and enjoyment), whereas the rational ad was rated higher on informational content and perceived usefulness of the details (both differences p < 0.01). These checks suggest our experimental manipulations functioned as designed.

Effects on Attention and Recall

Advertising attention was notably influenced by both cognitive load and the emotional content of the ad. Under low load conditions, nearly all participants noticed the ad, and attention levels were high for both ad types (self-reported attention scored around 5.8 out of 7 on average, with no significant difference between emotional vs. rational ad when cognitive load was low, p = 0.34). However, under high cognitive load, attention to the ad dropped markedly. Participants in the high load groups gave the ads much less attention overall (mean attention score ~4.2), confirming that cognitive overload led to distraction. Crucially, we observed an interaction effect: with high load, the Emotional ad captured more attention than the Rational ad. Eye-tracking data (available for 40 participants) showed that those under high load looked at the emotional ad significantly longer (on average 3.1 seconds of gaze time) than those viewing the rational ad (2.0 seconds), F(1,36)=5.27, p = 0.027, indicating that emotional cues helped attract the eyes of overloaded viewers. In contrast, under low load, gaze time was high and equivalent (~5 seconds) for both ads.

These attentional patterns translated into differences in ad recall and recognition. Figure 1 (not shown here) summarizes recall rates across conditions. In the Low Load scenarios, recall of the ad (unaided) was high for both the emotional and rational appeals (around 78% and 74% of participants, respectively, correctly remembered the ad content or brand name; difference not statistically significant). By contrast, in the High Load scenarios, recall dropped for both, but much more sharply for the rational ad. Only 40% of participants in the High Load/Rational condition could recall the brand or message of the ad, compared to 62% in the High Load/Emotional condition. This ~22 percentage-point advantage for the emotional trigger under overload is statistically significant (χ² = 4.15, p < 0.05). Aided recall showed a similar pattern: in high load, 70% recognized the emotional ad as familiar when prompted, versus Fifty five% for the rational ad (p < 0.05). These results support the hypothesis that emotional advertising content is more resilient to the attentional challenges imposed by cognitive overload.

Effects on Attitudes and Persuasion Metrics

Attitude toward the Ad was measured after exposure. An ANOVA on ad attitude scores revealed a significant main effect of cognitive load (F(1,196)=18.4, p < 0.001), a main effect of ad appeal (F(1,196)=9.7, p = 0.002), and a significant interaction (F(1,196)=4.6, p = 0.033). Under low load conditions, participants generally had favorable attitudes toward both ads (mean ~5.6 on a 7-point scale for emotional vs. 5.4 for rational, n.s.). Under high load, overall ad appreciation dropped (means were lower for both). Notably, overloaded participants rated the emotional ad more positively (mean = 5.1) than those who saw the rational ad (mean = 4.4), indicating the rational message lost more persuasive appeal when viewers were strained. A similar interaction emerged for attitude toward the brand: high load viewers of the rational ad had the lowest brand favorability (mean = 4.0), significantly below that of high load viewers of the emotional ad (4.7, p < 0.05). These differences suggest that emotional content not only held attention better but also sustained more positive reactions in an overload scenario.

In terms of emotional response, participants who saw the emotional ad reported higher positive affect (pleasure) and arousal than those who saw the rational ad (confirming the ad-type manipulation). Importantly, high cognitive load somewhat attenuated the self-reported emotional impact of the emotional ad. For example, feelings of inspiration evoked by the emotional ad were rated slightly lower under high load (mean = 5.8 on a 7-point scale) than low load (6.2), though this drop was not statistically significant (p = 0.10). This suggests that while overload did not completely negate the emotional resonance of the ad, it may have muted it to a small degree. In contrast, those who saw the rational ad reported low emotional response in both conditions (as expected, given it was not intended to be emotional). The emotional ad’s ability to still evoke feeling under high load aligns with the idea that even a distracted mind can process basic emotional cues.

Finally, behavioral intentions followed the same general trend. In low load conditions, the intention to try/download the app was moderately high and did not differ much by ad type (means ~5.0 out of 7 for both). In high load conditions, the rational ad yielded a significant drop in intention (mean = 3.8), whereas the emotional ad’s drop was smaller (mean = 4.5). The interaction was marginally significant (p = 0.07), suggesting a tendency that emotional appeals better preserve consumer interest when overloaded. Social sharing intention was low overall (as is typical, only about 20% said they would share the ad with others), with the emotional-high load condition slightly more likely to share (25%) than rational-high load (15%), though this difference was not large enough to be conclusive (p = 0.15).

In summary, the results consistently indicate that cognitive overload impairs advertising effectiveness across the board, but emotional triggers mitigate this impairment to some extent. High cognitive load led to lower attention, recall, and persuasion outcomes for ads in general. Yet, ads with emotional appeals maintained higher performance on these metrics under overload compared to their rational counterparts. No significant adverse effect of emotional appeals was observed that would suggest any backlash or irritation uniquely caused by emotional content in an overloaded state; if anything, participants under overload found the rational ad more bland or easy to ignore, whereas the emotional ad managed to register a stronger impression.

Discussion

This research set out to explore the interplay between emotional advertising triggers and consumer cognitive overload, an increasingly pertinent issue in digital marketing. The findings offer several important insights. First, they reaffirm the detrimental impact of cognitive overload on consumer attention and memory for advertisements. Consistent with prior literature on advertising clutter and information overload, our overloaded participants showed clear signs of reduced ad engagement – they paid less attention and remembered fewer details ((PDF) More Mutter About Clutter: Extending Empirical Generalizations to Facebook). This highlights that in today’s media environment, simply increasing the volume of ad content (hoping something sticks) can backfire; an overwhelmed consumer is likely to tune out most messages. Our results align with recent studies that link information overload to diminished advertising outcomes (e.g., lower recall and increased ad avoidance) ((PDF) More Mutter About Clutter: Extending Empirical Generalizations to Facebook). Practitioners should thus be mindful of the cognitive demands placed on their target audience at the moment an ad is delivered.

Second, and central to our research question, we found that emotional triggers enhance ad effectiveness under cognitive overload conditions relative to purely rational content. The emotional ad in our experiment outperformed the rational ad in terms of grabbing attention and being remembered when participants were simultaneously handling other mental tasks. This suggests that emotional appeals act as salient peripheral cues that can penetrate a consumer’s limited attention shield. The result is in line with dual-process theories of persuasion: under conditions of low ability to process (here caused by overload), people rely on heuristic cues like emotional resonance or attractive visuals to form impressions (SciELO Brazil — The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals The prevalence of emotional and rational tone in social advertising appeals ). Our study extends this theoretical framework to the context of cognitive overload, demonstrating empirically that an emotional heuristic (e.g., an inspiring story or a touching image) can indeed carry persuasive power when cognitive capacity for central processing is constrained.

Interestingly, while emotional ads mitigated the drop in effectiveness under overload, they did not completely immunize the ad from all negative effects. Even the emotional ad saw some reduction in impact (e.g., somewhat lower recall and slightly muted emotional reaction) under high load compared to low load. This indicates that cognitive overload still poses a challenge, even for emotional content. In extreme cases of overload, consumers might only partially register even an emotional message, as cognitive load can dampen emotional processing (Frontiers | Emotional Activity Is Negatively Associated With Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning: A Case Study With EEG Signals). Therefore, emotional triggers are a helpful tool but not a panacea in overload situations. The takeaway is nuanced: emotional appeals can help “cut through the noise” up to a point, but marketers should also strive to reduce the noise or present messages when consumers are more receptive.

Our findings contribute to theory by integrating emotional marketing effectiveness with cognitive load theory. Past research largely examined these in isolation – emotional appeal studies typically under conditions of normal attention, and cognitive overload studies often without differentiating ad content types. By crossing these factors, we provide evidence of an interaction effect: the advantage of emotional appeals becomes especially pronounced in high load contexts. This suggests a moderating role of cognitive load on the relationship between ad appeal type and effectiveness. Theoretically, this enriches our understanding of consumer behavior under limited attention. It supports the notion that peripheral route persuasion (driven by emotional cues) plays a critical role when the central route is impeded by overload. We also add to the literature on advertising in cluttered media by showing that content strategy (emotional vs. informational) is an important consideration alongside the often-studied placement strategy (timing, frequency, personalization).

When comparing with related studies, our results resonate with Jung and Heo’s (2021) eye-tracking research, which found that making ads more relevant or seamlessly integrated (e.g., native ads, personalized content) can maintain attention in cluttered feeds (Does cluttered social media environment hurt advertising effectiv…: Ingenta Connect). Both their and our findings underscore a common theme: relevance and salience are key to overcoming information competition. Emotional triggers provide one form of salience (through psychological relevance via feelings), while personalization provides another (through contextual or personal relevance). A combined approach might be even more powerful – for instance, an emotionally appealing ad that is also personalized to the viewer’s interests could double the chances of breaking through cognitive filters. This is an avenue future research could explore.

Another point of discussion is the role of negative vs. positive emotions under overload. Our test ad used a positive emotional tone. Would a fear-based or negatively charged emotional appeal fare differently under cognitive overload? Some evidence in public health advertising suggests fear appeals can be attention-grabbing but if consumers are too stressed, they might defensively avoid such messages. Overloaded consumers already experiencing stress might not respond well to additional negative stimuli. In contrast, a positive or uplifting message, like the one we used, might provide a pleasant contrast to an otherwise taxing information environment, perhaps making it more welcome. Although our study did not compare different emotions, it raises the implication that the nature of the emotional trigger matters. Marketers should consider using emotions that counterbalance the likely state of an overloaded consumer. For example, an overload scenario often induces frustration or fatigue (Fear of missing out in the digital age: The role of social media satisfaction and advertising engagement); a humorous or heartwarming ad might relieve that, whereas a complex or fear-inducing ad might exacerbate it.

From a practical perspective, our findings deliver a clear implication: digital marketing strategies should leverage emotional elements when targeting consumers in high information environments. Short video ads or visuals that tell a human story or evoke curiosity could be more effective on busy social media feeds than text-heavy, detail-rich promotions. Brands should distill their message to an emotive core – a single striking image or a slogan that conveys a feeling – to increase the odds of making an impression on a scrolling, multitasking audience. This does not mean information is unimportant, but that the initial hook likely needs to be emotional. Once the consumer’s attention is caught, additional information can be provided (for instance, via a click-through to a detailed page) when they are prepared to process it.

Additionally, our study reinforces the importance of managing cognitive overload from the media side. Advertisers and platform publishers might work together to reduce ad clutter, as extreme clutter diminishes returns for all ads involved ((PDF) More Mutter About Clutter: Extending Empirical Generalizations to Facebook). If reducing quantity isn’t feasible, improving quality and relevance is the next best step. Techniques like personalization and native advertising (which aligns the ad format with content) as noted by Jung and Heo can ensure ads are not perceived as irrelevant noise (Does cluttered social media environment hurt advertising effectiv…: Ingenta Connect). The use of AI to show each user a tailored set of ads that match their interests could help each ad resonate more and feel less like overload. Our findings imply that an emotional, personalized ad seen at the right moment could break through even if the overall environment is information-rich.

It is also worth noting that consumer adaptation plays a role. Over time, people have developed coping mechanisms to deal with digital overload, such as quickly scrolling past ads or using ad-blockers. Emotional advertising needs to be authentic and well-integrated into content to avoid being dismissed as intrusive. A poorly executed emotional appeal (one that feels forced or manipulative) might be quickly recognized and ignored by savvy consumers, especially when they are in cognitive overdrive. Thus, while emotional triggers are useful, they should be employed in a genuine and contextually appropriate manner. For example, a sudden loud video ad might catch attention but also annoy an overloaded user, whereas a contextually relevant story ad might gently draw them in.

In summary, the discussion highlights that emotional triggers have a beneficial effect on ad effectiveness under cognitive overload, validating some optimistic views from marketing practice. However, to capitalize on this, advertisers should create emotionally resonant content that respects the consumer’s limited attention and possibly fragile state under overload. Combining emotional appeal with strategies to reduce perceived overload (such as simplicity, relevance, timing) will likely yield the best outcomes in capturing today’s distracted consumers.

Conclusion

In an era where consumers are inundated with digital information, this study provides timely insights into how advertising can remain effective despite the challenges of cognitive overload. We found that emotional triggers in digital advertising confer a distinct advantage in high overload scenarios: ads designed to evoke emotion were more likely to be noticed, remembered, and positively received by consumers who were otherwise mentally taxed. In contrast, rational, information-heavy ads saw steep drops in effectiveness when consumers were overloaded. These findings reinforce the idea that leveraging the power of emotions — an enduring principle in advertising — is particularly relevant in modern high-load environments, as it aligns with the way overwhelmed consumers process messages (relying on quick, affective cues).

Limitations and Future Research: While our experiment offers clear evidence for the benefits of emotional appeals under load, it also has limitations that open avenues for future inquiry. First, the study used a single product context (a fitness app) and predominantly positive emotional tone; results might differ for other product types or for negative emotional appeals. Future research could examine a range of emotions (e.g., humor vs. fear) and product categories (hedonic vs. utilitarian) to see if certain emotional triggers are universally more effective under overload or if context matters. Second, our cognitive overload manipulation, though grounded in realistic multitasking, was controlled and acute; in real life, overload can be chronic or caused by different factors (e.g., continuous notifications, multitasking between work and media). Longitudinal studies or field experiments on platforms like Instagram or Twitter could observe how sustained overload conditions influence ad response and whether consumers habituate to emotional ads over time. Third, we focused on immediate outcomes (attention, recall, immediate intentions). It would be valuable to track downstream behaviors, such as actual click-through rates or conversions, in high-load conditions for emotional vs. rational ads. Do emotional triggers under overload lead to just momentary attention, or can they drive meaningful actions? Answering this would strengthen the managerial implications. Lastly, individual differences (e.g., need for cognition, ability to multitask, or personal tolerance for information load) could moderate our findings. Some consumers might thrive in high-information environments and respond well to rational content even under load, whereas others shut down. Personalized advertising strategies might thus consider not just content and context, but the consumer’s cognitive style or state.

In conclusion, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of advertising effectiveness in the digital age by highlighting that how a message is conveyed (emotionally or rationally) and when/under what conditions it is delivered (low vs. high cognitive load) jointly determine its success. Emotional advertising appeals emerge as a promising approach to engage consumers who are otherwise at risk of overlooking marketing communications due to cognitive overload. By crafting ads that resonate on a human, emotional level and deploying them thoughtfully in cluttered media environments, marketers can improve the odds of their messages breaking through. As digital content continues to expand and compete for eyes and minds, strategies rooted in psychological principles — capturing hearts when minds are weary — will be key to sustaining consumer attention and fostering effective advertising engagement.