Beyond Visibility: Determining and Ranking the Factors Affecting Out-of-Home Advertising Performance in Sports Arenas

Introduction

Outdoor advertising in sports stadiums has become one of the most influential forms of marketing communication, leveraging the emotional engagement and mass visibility of live sports audiences (Kończak, 2021).  In an era of media fragmentation, global sports events capture the unified attention of billions, offering an unparalleled advertising platform (Broch, 2016). The economic scale is substantial, with (PwC, 2023) highlighting the continued expansion of the global sports industry, and strategic investments reflected in costs such as the approximately $7 million price of a 30-second Super Bowl ad in 2024 (Statista, 2024). However, this high-stakes environment is fraught with challenges. Advertisers face intense competition for attention within a cluttered media space (Dix & Phau, 2017; Riebe & Dawes, 2006) and must allocate scarce resources-both budgetary and creative-with precision (Breuer et al., 2011; Naik & Peters, 2009). The primary challenge is that audiences attend events for the game, not the advertisements (Soebandhi & Andriansyah, 2017), making contextual game factors, such as emotional reactions to match outcomes, critical determinants of an ad campaign's success or failure (Cianfrone et al., 2008). Ignoring these dynamics risks financial loss, while strategically aligning ads with game flow can significantly enhance effectiveness and Return on Investment (ROI) (Darabi & Asgarabadi, 2025).

In previous research on outdoor advertising, various factors such as message type, design, placement, and audience characteristics have been studied (Madlenak et al., 2023). Some works have examined psychological variables like attention, perception, and memory, while others have explored social and cultural influences on how advertising messages are interpreted. However, few studies have specifically analyzed the factors influencing the effectiveness of outdoor advertising in sports stadiums. Recent global research has begun addressing this gap by examining both perceptual and contextual factors simultaneously (Cheong et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2022), yet a comprehensive, multidimensional synthesis remains scarce. In recent years, interest in sports advertising, particularly stadium advertising, has grown. Some studies have investigated how specific audience characteristics—such as interest in sports or loyalty to a team—affect advertising effectiveness. Others have examined situational factors like game conditions and spectator emotions in relation to advertising attention and recall. Nevertheless, there remains a need for more comprehensive research to fully understand the factors that determine the effectiveness of stadium advertising and to develop strategies for improving its performance. Table 1 below synthesizes the main findings of prior studies (starting with national papers, then international ones), highlighting the conceptual and theoretical gaps that the present research addresses.

Table 1- Previous research and related gap

Based on the discussions presented above and the examples of related prior studies summarized in Table 1, it can be concluded that while an extensive body of research exists on sports advertising, the majority of these studies have examined the effects of isolated variables-rather than approaching the phenomenon through an integrated or multidimensional framework. For example, some studies have primarily analysed the type of advertising message (Abolhassanzadeh Zvaram, 2015; Turley & Shannon, 2000), others have emphasized audience characteristics (Cheong et al., 2019; Oboudi, 2023), while a smaller number have examined environmental or game-related factors (Esmaeilpour, 2011; Lee et al., 2022). However, the effectiveness of outdoor advertising in sports stadiums results from a complex interaction of message, audience, environment, and contextual variables. Evaluating these factors in isolation produces fragmented insights that fail to capture the dynamic interplay of stimuli, attention, and emotional involvement occurring during live sporting events (Boronczyk et al., 2022; Teal et al., 2020). A simultaneous and hierarchical examination of these elements is therefore necessary to generate both theoretical depth and practical guidance for marketers. Furthermore, the scarcity of studies conducted within the Iranian context underscores the necessity of localized research. Cultural, infrastructural, and behavioral differences-such as variations in fan engagement, stadium design, and sponsorship norms-suggest that findings from Western settings (Cheong et al., 2019; James, 2011) may not fully generalize to domestic markets. Hence, exploring how these variables operate within Iranian sports environments provides a valuable contribution to the global literature on sports advertising effectiveness.

At the international level, despite the proliferation of research on sports communication and sponsorship, few studies provide a comprehensive evaluation of outdoor advertising from the spectator’s perspective. Prior investigations have tended to focus either on brand outcomes (awareness, preference, purchase intention) or sponsorship motives, while neglecting the psychological processing and contextual factors influencing ad impact during live games (Dahlen et al., 2009; Kończak, 2021; Kover, 1995).
Therefore, the present study aims to bridge this critical gap by integrating psychological, environmental, and message-related dimensions into a unified analytical framework. By employing a two-phase methodological design-a qualitative meta-synthesis followed by a quantitative AHP- this research provides both a conceptual model and empirical prioritization of factors influencing the effectiveness of outdoor advertising in sports stadiums. This mixed-method approach not only enriches theoretical understanding but also delivers a practical decision-support tool for advertisers and event organizers seeking to optimize message exposure, audience engagement, and ROI.

Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to systematically identify and prioritize the key factors influencing the effectiveness of outdoor advertising in sports stadiums using a Sequential Exploratory Mixed-Methods Design. To fulfill this purpose, the study is guided by two sequential research questions:

• RESEARCH QUESTION 1 (QUAL – Analytical/Exploratory): What factors influence the effectiveness of outdoor advertising in sports stadiums?
• RESEARCH QUESTION 2 (QUAN) – Explanatory/Evaluative): How do these factors differ in relative importance when evaluated using the AHP?

Addressing these questions provides essential theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, it synthesizes disparate research into an integrated model. Practically, it offers advertisers, sponsors, and event managers an evidence-based, prioritized framework to optimize strategic investments and creative execution in a dynamic and high-value environment, ultimately bridging empirical insight with applied marketing practice.

The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. The Theoretical Framework section synthesises key cognitive, affective, and environmental theories—specifically Lang’s Limited Capacity Model, Kahneman’s Attention and Effort Theory, the Dual Motivational Systems framework, and ecological systems theory—that form the study’s foundation. The Research Methods section outlines the systematic mixed-studies review, including the PRISMA-guided selection process, thematic synthesis, and the AHP applied for expert-based prioritisation. The Findings section presents the resulting four-domain framework—encompassing audience-, message-, stadium-, and game-centered factors—and reports the AHP-based prioritisation of these criteria. The Discussion interprets the findings within existing theoretical frameworks and emphasises the dynamic interactions among the identified factors. Finally, the Conclusion summarises the study’s theoretical and practical contributions, acknowledges limitations, and proposes avenues for future research.

Theoretical Framework

One major challenge in sport advertisement domain is ambient noise and distraction, especially in sports stadiums for popular games such as football. In these settings, spectators engage in multiple simultaneous activities—watching the game, conversing, checking their phones, capturing moments via photos and videos, and noticing billboards or stadium screens (Bhattacharya et al., 2025). Hence, the effectiveness of stadium advertising cannot be adequately understood without grounding it in cognitive and psychological theory. One theoretical framework that addresses this issue is the Limited Capacity Model (LCM). This model is based on two key assumptions: first, individuals are information processors whose primary activity is message processing; second, their capacity to process messages is limited (Vashisht & Mohan, 2018). This model integrates several information-processing theories, including Lang’s (2000) Limited Capacity Model of Mediated Message Processing, (Zhang et al., 2010), and Kahneman’s (1973) Attention and Effort Theory (Kahneman, 1973; Lang, 2000). Lang’s model (2000) provides a theoretical framework for examining the potential effects of advertising in sports environments. It posits that message processing requires cognitive resources, and individuals have only a limited amount of such resources available at any given time. Information processing consists of three subprocesses: encoding, storage, and retrieval, which occur simultaneously but independently during game viewing. Encoding determines which information is selected and transferred to short-term memory. Therefore, memory for a specific message depends on how cognitive resources are allocated; insufficient allocation reduces message recognition and recall (Lang, 2000). In the context of sports advertising, the primary task of players is to play the game, while the primary task of spectators is to watch it (Grigorovici & Constantin, 2004). Consequently, both groups have limited cognitive capacity for processing in-game advertisements.

Complementing this, the Dual Motivational Systems Framework (Potter & Keene, 2012), explains spectators’ affective responses by distinguishing between appetitive and aversive activation systems. For example, scenes of a favorite team’s victory activate appetitive responses, while scenes of defeat trigger aversive responses. Moreover, uncertainty regarding game outcomes correlates positively with fans’ emotional arousal (Madrigal et al., 2011). Another study examining the effects of game outcomes and processes found that scoring activates the appetitive system, while conceding points stimulates the aversive system, and close scores can activate both simultaneously (Lee et al., 2019). This dynamic emotional state directly shapes audience attention, recall, and behavioral intention toward advertisements.

According to Kahneman’s theory (1973), attention is a limited resource. In multitasking environments, the primary task absorbs the most attention, while secondary tasks receive less. As the demands of the primary task increase, attentional capacity expands, but not enough to maintain constant performance. Consequently, the attention allocated to secondary tasks diminishes (Grigorovici & Constantin, 2004). In sports advertising, watching the match is the primary task, while processing advertisements is secondary. This prioritization means that divided attention reduces the opportunity for ad recall. However, by strategically synchronizing ad display with lower-demand moments—such as breaks or halftime—advertisers may exploit temporary attention surpluses (Swallow & Jiang, 2010; Zacks et al., 2007). Empirical research has shown that attention and cognitive resource demands increase at event boundaries (Swallow & Jiang, 2010). Although experiences like watching a football match feel continuous, human memory segments them into discrete events, with beginnings and endings remembered more vividly (Zacks et al., 2007). This process-known as the Event Boundary Advantage-indicates that memory for information near event boundaries is stronger (Pettijohn et al., 2016; Swallow & Jiang, 2010). This is explained by the Event Segmentation Theory, which describes how the brain organizes continuous information into meaningful segments (Richmond & Zacks, 2017). Enhanced memory for information near event boundaries improves recall accuracy (Heusser et al., 2018).

This study is grounded in an integrative theoretical framework that synthesizes perspectives from advertising psychology, communication theory, and environmental context models to explain how ambient advertising in sports stadiums achieves effectiveness. Three complementary theoretical lenses inform the conceptual logic and guide both the qualitative synthesis and the subsequent hierarchical prioritization of factors. First, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) provides the foundational psychological perspective for understanding how spectators process advertising stimuli (Petty & Cacioppo, 2012). According to ELM, individuals process persuasive messages through two primary routes-central and peripheral—depending on their motivation, involvement, and ability to process information. In stadium settings, audience-centered factors such as emotional excitement, loyalty, and cognitive attention determine which route dominates. This model justifies the inclusion of both cognitive and affective components within the identified organizing themes and underscores the importance of spectators’ psychological readiness in shaping advertising effectiveness. Second, the Hierarchy of Effects and AIDA models (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961; Strong, 1925) contribute the behavioral dimension of the framework (Ojagh et al., 2023) (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961; Strong, 1925). These models conceptualize advertising impact as a sequential process moving from attention and interest to desire and action. Within the context of stadium advertising, message-centered factors such as creativity, clarity, and emotional appeal correspond to the early cognitive and affective stages of this hierarchy, while audience loyalty and behavioral intentions align with the later conative stages. This theoretical integration provides a process-based rationale for examining how spectators move from exposure to persuasion and, ultimately, behavioral response. Third, ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) informs the contextual dimension of the framework, emphasizing that advertising does not operate in isolation but within nested environmental systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The stadium-centered and game-centered factors represent these environmental layers that mediate spectators’ perceptual and emotional responses. Elements such as lighting, placement, and real-time match dynamics constitute contextual forces that either facilitate or hinder message reception, reflecting the interaction between micro-level stimuli (advertisements) and macro-level settings (stadium and game atmosphere).

Integrating these three perspectives-psychological, behavioral, and contextual-provides the conceptual basis for constructing a multidimensional model of advertising effectiveness. Within this model, audience, message, stadium, and game dimensions operate as interdependent domains influencing spectators’ attention, comprehension, emotional response, and behavioral intention. This theoretical integration provides the conceptual structure for the hierarchical framework applied in the AHP phase of the study. It is acknowledged that AHP is a multi-criteria decision-making method, and the ELM, AIDA, and Bronfenbrenner theories are not directly linked to its methodology. The combination is therefore not one of methodological prescription but of conceptual and structural alignment. The theories justify the selection and organization of the criteria (the four domains) and sub-criteria (the organizing and basic themes) that populate the AHP hierarchy, ensuring that the prioritization exercise is grounded in established explanatory frameworks rather than ad-hoc factors. This approach ensures theoretical coherence informs the empirical prioritization, bridging explanatory depth with practical decision-support.

Research Methods

Considering the multidimensional factors influencing outdoor advertising effectiveness in sports stadiums and the diversity of perspectives in prior research, this study employed a mixed-studies systematic review. Both qualitative and quantitative articles were included, but all evidence was analyzed using a qualitative thematic synthesis. Quantitative findings from prior studies were integrated narratively-not statistically-to support and contextualize the emerging themes. These QUAL findings then informed a separate quantitative phase using AHP. Note that the opinions of 25 experts were collected via an online questionnaire designed based on the AHP principle. All of these experts have conducted extensive studies in advertising and marketing. They were identified by reviewing their profiles on the websites of universities and research institutes.

  The research process followed a systematic seven-step model adapted from Gough et al. (2017): (1) formulation of research questions, (2) identification of theoretical foundations, (3) database selection, (4) quality assessment, (5) data extraction, (6) coding and thematic synthesis, and (7) integration of findings into a final report (Figure 1). Extensive database searches were conducted in Business Source Complete, Web of Science, and other major repositories (Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science), covering peer-reviewed articles published between 1995 and 2025. This timeframe captures the modern era of stadium advertising, beginning with the commercialization of sports leagues, the advent of digital signage, and a scholarly shift toward audience experience and ROI beyond mere exposure metrics (Lawrence & Crawford, 2018; Turley & Shannon, 2000). Earlier literature focused primarily on traditional broadcast models, which are less relevant to the interactive, in-stadium environment central to this study. The chosen span ensures coverage of contemporary research on psychological (Madrigal et al., 2011), contextual, and message-related factors that define current advertising in live sports settings, including digital formats (Lee et al., 2022). Boolean combinations of controlled and free-text keywords were used, including “stadium advertising,” “sports sponsorship,” “outdoor advertising effectiveness,” “in-stadium marketing,” “sports audience behavior,” “sports advertising attention,” and “advertising recall.”

Figure 1. Research Steps (Adapted from Gough et al., 2017)

Inclusion criteria were: (a) publication in English; (b) empirical, theoretical, or review studies; (c) explicit focus on outdoor or stadium advertising; and (d) findings related to effectiveness, attention, recall, or behavioral outcomes. To ensure analytical consistency, methodological rigor, and compatibility with the internationally indexed databases and the qualitative coding framework, the review was limited to English-language publications. While initial scoping considered Persian-language sources, they were excluded from the final synthesis. Exclusion criteria included: (a) non-peer-reviewed studies; (b) investigations of non-stadium media; (c) lack of methodological transparency; or (d) publication in a language other than English. Out of 860 initial records, 37 articles met inclusion criteria after systematic screening and quality assessment (Figure 2).

Quality assessment was conducted separately for qualitative and quantitative studies. Quality assessment was conducted separately for qualitative and quantitative studies to ensure methodological rigor. Qualitative studies were evaluated using the CASP checklist (2018) to assess credibility, rigor, and relevance, while quantitative and experimental studies were appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools appropriate to their respective design. This approach ensured that each study type was assessed with a tool suited to its methodology. Only studies meeting the quality threshold for their type were included in the review.

Figure 2. The process of collecting and selecting relevant articles (source: design by the authors)

Thematic synthesis was applied to extract conceptual categories. Open coding identified basic text segments as the unit of analysis, which were iteratively clustered into higher-order organizing themes. Four organizing themes emerged: audience-centered, message-centered, stadium-centered, and game-centered, forming the global theme of factors influencing stadium advertising effectiveness. Coding was conducted independently by two researchers, and a third expert resolved discrepancies. To ensure robustness, approximately 20% of coded text segments (not entire articles) were randomly selected and re-evaluated independently, with disagreements reconciled through consensus. Cohen’s Kappa coefficient (κ = 0.724) indicated substantial agreement.

Integration of qualitative and quantitative findings occurred after thematic synthesis. Quantitative results were mapped onto qualitative themes to validate and refine conceptual categories, identify convergences or divergences, and provide complementary evidence. For example, quantitative measures of attention and recall were aligned with message- and audience-centered themes, ensuring the synthesized framework captured both interpretive insights and empirical trends.

The validated thematic network was structured into a hierarchical model for AHP prioritization, consisting of three levels: (1) overall goal—determining the effectiveness of out-of-home advertising in stadiums; (2) major evaluative criteria—the principal thematic categories from qualitative synthesis; and (3) sub-criteria—the detailed components derived from basic themes. Importantly, theoretical frameworks were used to guide the construction of this model, not to perform AHP calculations. Theories informed the structure, ensuring that prioritization reflects a scientifically grounded conceptual framework, rather than an arbitrary list of factors.

Theoretical grounding was provided by Lang’s (2000) Limited Capacity Model of Mediated Message Processing and Kahneman’s (1973) Attention and Effort Theory, explaining how spectators allocate limited cognitive resources to simultaneous stimuli. The Dual Motivational Systems theory (Potter & Keene, 2012) further informed coding and interpretation, clarifying how emotional arousal and attention interact in live-event environments (Potter & Keene, 2012). These frameworks linked audience cognition, emotional engagement, and environmental context, guiding both thematic synthesis and the development of a scientifically justified hierarchy for AHP evaluation.

Overall, this integrative, mixed-method synthesis establishes a rigorous, transparent foundation uniting qualitative insights with structured quantitative evaluation. By systematically capturing and prioritizing cognitive, emotional, contextual, and design-related factors, the approach strengthens both theoretical contribution and empirical relevance, ensuring that subsequent AHP prioritization is firmly grounded in systematically derived evidence.

Findings

The findings derived from the comprehensive analysis of the reviewed studies revealed that the factors influencing the effectiveness of ambient advertising in sports stadiums can be systematically classified into four interrelated domains: audience-centered factors, message-centered factors, stadium-centered factors, and game-centered factors (Table 2). While Table 2 presents sub-themes and basic themes in a numbered format, this reflects a structured hierarchy derived from iterative coding, independent review, and consensus reconciliation, rather than a simple enumeration, ensuring adherence to standard thematic synthesis procedures. This categorization emerged from the thematic synthesis of secondary data extracted from 37 peer-reviewed articles published between 1995 and 2025. Each domain represents a cluster of organizing and basic themes that collectively explain the multidimensional nature of advertising effectiveness in live sporting contexts and form the conceptual foundation of the subsequent AHP model. This classification is theoretically grounded in Lang’s (2000) Limited Capacity Model of Mediated Message Processing and Kahneman’s (1973) Attention and Effort Theory, which together explain how spectators distribute finite cognitive resources between game engagement and advertising exposure. Additionally, the Dual Motivational Systems theory (Potter & Keene, 2012) provides insight into spectators’ emotional responses to victory, defeat, and uncertainty during games, offering an interpretive lens for understanding the dynamic nature of attention and recall (Potter & Keene, 2012). Integrating these theories within the thematic synthesis allowed the identification of how emotional arousal, attention allocation, and message perception collectively contribute to advertising effectiveness inside stadiums.

Table 2- Categorization of factors affecting the effectiveness of ambient advertising in sports stadiums

As shown in Table 2, the basic themes related to audience-centered factors include demographic characteristics, level of excitement, audience experience and familiarity with advertisements and brands, and the degree of cognitive attention to advertisements. These factors directly influence how sports spectators process and accept advertisements, which aligns with the cognitive assumptions of the Limited Capacity Model and Attention–Effort Theory. For instance, a strong attachment to a particular team can enhance the effectiveness of advertisements associated with that team, whereas advertising saturation or an unattractive message may reduce attention and impact. Moreover, audience loyalty to sports brands and their level of social interaction within the stadium play a significant role in how advertising messages are perceived and processed.

In contrast, message-centered factors focus on the content, clarity, and creativity of the advertisement itself. Emotional and cognitive appeals (Dahlen et al., 2009) interact with spectators’ motivational systems (Potter & Keene, 2012), producing differing attention and recall effects depending on message relevance and timing. An appealing and contextually aligned advertisement that connects emotionally with the audience has a higher probability of being encoded and retrieved effectively (Lang, 2000).

Stadium-centered factors concern the physical and environmental characteristics of advertising within the stadium—such as placement, visibility, lighting, and density—which influence the extent to which spectators allocate visual attention to advertisements under high-stimulation conditions (Grigorovici & Constantin, 2004). Meanwhile, game-centered factors relate to situational dynamics such as competition intensity, score changes, and emotional fluctuations, which can either distract from or amplify ad effectiveness depending on the match phase and emotional salience (Boronczyk et al., 2022). Collectively, these four domains interact to produce a dynamic, context-dependent model of advertising effectiveness, consistent with the cognitive-emotional integration posited in the theoretical frameworks.

Based on the validated thematic synthesis, these four domains were organized into a hierarchical model designed for prioritization through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The resulting three-level structure is presented in Figure 3. At the top level lies the overall goal—to determine the relative influence of key factors on the effectiveness of out-of-home advertising in sports stadiums. The second level includes the four criteria (audience-centered, message-centered, stadium-centered, and game-centered factors), while the third level represents the detailed sub criteria, corresponding to the specific basic themes outlined in Table 2. This structure operationalizes the qualitative findings into a quantitative decision-making framework, linking conceptual analysis to measurable prioritization.

Figure 3. Hierarchical AHP Model for Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Outdoor Advertising in Sports Stadiums

In the next and final stage of the study, the AHP method was applied to perform pairwise comparisons and prioritize the four identified domains according to expert judgment. The participants in this stage consisted of 40 individuals with doctoral degrees in sports management or business management, each having published at least one research paper related to sports advertising or marketing. Experts were selected using purposive sampling through academic and professional networks such as ResearchGate, ensuring domain-specific expertise.

A 9-point comparison scale was employed for the pairwise evaluation of criteria, ranging from “equal importance” (1) to “extremely more important” (9). In cases where inconsistency ratios exceeded the acceptable threshold (CR > 0.1), responses were re-evaluated or excluded to maintain data validity. Consequently, four questionnaires were removed from the final analysis. Note that the inconsistency ratio for the pairwise comparison matrix is 1.15%, which is below the acceptable threshold of 10%.

Table 3- Pairwise comparison matrix of factors affecting the effectiveness of ambient advertising in sports stadiums

The data in Table 3 represent the geometric means of expert comparisons across all criteria. Since the initial matrix does not reflect normalized weights, each row’s geometric mean was divided by the total of all geometric means to calculate eigenvector-based priority weights. These computations yielded the normalized ranking of factors, presented in Figure 4.

As illustrated in Figure 4, audience-centered factors emerged as the most influential determinant of advertising effectiveness, followed by message-centered, stadium-centered, and game-centered factors, respectively. This hierarchy reinforces theoretical expectations derived from the Limited Capacity Model and Dual Motivational Systems framework—both emphasizing that cognitive attention and emotional arousal are primary mediators in advertising processing. Consequently, the findings highlight that advertising effectiveness in live sports settings is not static but dynamically shaped by audience engagement, message design, environmental constraints, and game context.

Figure 4. Prioritization of Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Ambient Advertising in Sports Stadiums

Discussion

The present study, by systematically integrating previous research and conducting a meta-synthesis of factors influencing the effectiveness of ambient advertising in sports stadiums, provides a multidimensional understanding of this evolving field. The findings reveal that advertising effectiveness results from a complex and dynamic interplay among four key dimensions—audience, message, stadium environment, and game conditions. This outcome confirms earlier fragmented findings while advancing the literature by offering a comprehensive, interaction-based framework that situates advertising impact within a systemic model rather than as isolated cause-and-effect relationships. This integrative framework is theoretically underpinned by the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 2012) and the Hierarchy of Effects Model (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961), both of which emphasize that message processing and behavioral response depend on the interaction between message features, receiver involvement, and contextual cues.

Among these dimensions, audience-centered factors were identified as the most influential, underscoring the pivotal role of spectators’ cognitive and emotional states in determining advertising outcomes. This result aligns with cognitive processing theories (Vashisht & Mohan, 2018), which emphasize that spectators’ attentional and affective engagement governs how advertising stimuli are encoded and remembered. From the theoretical lens of the Elaboration Likelihood Model, it can be inferred that spectators process stadium advertisements through both central and peripheral routes depending on their motivation, arousal, and involvement levels. In sports contexts, spectators are not passive message receivers but emotionally invested participants whose loyalty and identification with teams mediate their responsiveness to sponsor messages. Therefore, emotional resonance, personal relevance, and timing relative to spectators’ arousal levels are crucial determinants of effectiveness. Unlike traditional advertising frameworks that focus primarily on message design, the findings here suggest that the strategic synchronization of advertising with spectators’ psychological states—such as excitement peaks, moments of collective anticipation, or emotional calm—enhances cognitive processing and message retention.

Message-centered factors were also shown to substantially influence attention and recall but in a context-dependent manner. Consistent with Dahlen et al. (2009), this study reaffirms that message clarity, creativity, and alignment with sports values enhance brand connection (Dahlen et al., 2009). However, it extends existing understanding by demonstrating that message effectiveness fluctuates across temporal and emotional phases of the game. Applying the notion of the “cognitive peak,” the study proposes that advertisements achieve maximum processing impact during relatively calm intervals, such as halftime breaks or tactical pauses, when spectators’ attentional resources are less absorbed by gameplay. This insight supports the AIDA model (Attention–Interest–Desire–Action), as advertising stimuli that coincide with moments of high cognitive openness are more likely to progress along the consumer decision pathway from awareness to behavioral response. This finding implies that dynamic scheduling of in-stadium advertising could optimize engagement by capitalizing on spectators’ shifting cognitive availability.

In addition, stadium-centered factors emerged as significant determinants of perceptual effectiveness, highlighting the physical and environmental conditions through which spectators experience advertisements. Placement, lighting, visibility, and display technology all shape spectators’ perceptual access to advertising stimuli. Echoing Lee et al. (2022), who compared digital versus static signage, the current study reveals that technological format alone does not guarantee impact; rather, the key lies in environmental congruence—the alignment of advertisements with the spatial, aesthetic, and architectural dynamics of the stadium (Lee et al., 2022). For instance, advertisements integrated into spectators’ natural lines of sight or synchronized with stadium lighting schemes can enhance visual salience and memorability. Interpreting this through the perspective of ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), the stadium environment functions as an ecological layer that mediates stimulus perception, emphasizing that advertising effectiveness depends on the interaction between individuals and their immediate physical surroundings (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). These results emphasize the need for collaborative design strategies involving advertisers, stadium architects, and sport managers to create optimized, distraction-free advertising environments.

Finally, game-centered factors—including competition intensity, emotional tension, and match outcomes—were found to shape the temporal rhythm of spectators’ attention. Consistent with Boronczyk et al. (2022), this study observed that critical game moments typically reduce advertising attention due to heightened emotional engagement with gameplay (Boronczyk et al., 2022). Nevertheless, the findings also identify opportunities within this challenge. For example, adaptive or reactive advertisements that respond dynamically to game developments—such as motivational messages following a goal concession—may convert emotionally charged moments into points of brand empathy and connection. This opens a novel avenue for context-aware and emotion-driven advertising design, positioning in-stadium advertisements not as static visuals but as interactive communicative tools that mirror spectators’ emotional journeys. This adaptive potential reflects the principles of real-time marketing and experiential communication, where the brand message evolves synchronously with consumer emotion and context, reinforcing authenticity and engagement.

Overall, these findings advance both academic and practical understanding by emphasizing that ambient advertising in sports stadiums operates within a dynamic attention ecosystem, where audience psychology, message content, environmental design, and game context continuously interact. The study’s integrated framework contributes a unified perspective that links cognitive, emotional, and contextual determinants of advertising effectiveness, offering a foundation for future theoretical and applied work in sports marketing and communication.

Despite these contributions, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the meta-synthesis relied on English-language publications indexed in reputable databases, which, while ensuring rigor, may have excluded relevant studies in other languages or regional contexts. Future research could expand inclusion criteria to incorporate non-English literature, enabling a more culturally sensitive understanding of stadium advertising practices. Second, the AHP-based prioritization phase relied on expert judgments, which, though methodologically justified, inherently involve subjectivity. To enhance objectivity, future research should integrate physiological and behavioral data—such as eye-tracking, biometric, or neurocognitive indicators—to validate experts’ perceptual weighting of advertising factors. Third, while this research identified conceptual interdependencies among audience, message, stadium, and game factors, these relationships were not empirically modeled. Subsequent studies are encouraged to apply structural equation modeling (SEM) or machine learning techniques to quantify these linkages and predict effectiveness outcomes. Additionally, cross-cultural comparative analyses could reveal how national sport cultures, fan rituals, and emotional display norms shape advertising responses, enriching the theoretical generalizability of the framework. By addressing these limitations, future research can advance from identification toward explanation and prediction, thereby consolidating the theoretical and managerial implications of ambient advertising in sports contexts.

Conclusion and Future Work

Based on the integrative results, this study concludes that the effectiveness of ambient advertising in sports stadiums is a dynamic and multi-level process, shaped by continuous interaction among audience, message, stadium, and game dimensions. Audience-centered factors are the most influential, emphasizing the necessity of tailoring advertisements to spectators’ emotional and cognitive conditions. Message-centered factors should be designed not only for aesthetic appeal but also for temporal and contextual alignment, ensuring they appear when spectators are most receptive. Stadium-centered factors require the application of environmental design principles to ensure visibility, harmony, and minimal visual clutter. Lastly, game-centered factors highlight the importance of adaptive, real-time advertising strategies that respond to the evolving emotional tone of live matches. The theoretical integration of the Elaboration Likelihood Model, the AIDA framework, and ecological systems theory enriches this understanding by connecting psychological processing, behavioral response, and environmental context in a unified conceptual structure.

Building on these findings, this study further conceptualizes stadium advertising effectiveness as an interdependent system characterized by both compensatory and synergistic relationships. Audience-centered factors function as the primary psychological filter, shaping how spectators perceive and process all subsequent stimuli. Strong stadium-centered elements—such as optimal placement or enhanced visibility—may partially compensate for weaker message design or less engaging game moments by capturing residual attention. True effectiveness emerges when audience state, message alignment, stadium environment, and game timing converge, producing a multiplicative rather than additive effect. This dynamic interdependence underscores that advertising success is constrained by the weakest link in the live, interdependent system.

From a managerial standpoint, these insights generate several actionable implications. First, advertisers should adopt emotionally intelligent strategies that integrate real-time audience reactions and engagement levels rather than relying on static exposure. Second, the timing and frequency of in-stadium advertisements should align with spectators’ cognitive recovery periods, such as after intense gameplay sequences or during planned breaks. Third, collaboration among sports marketers, venue designers, and technology providers is essential to optimize visibility and environmental harmony. Finally, the adoption of data-driven and adaptive advertising technologies can enable real-time adjustments to match conditions, enhancing both spectator experience and sponsor ROI.

This research delivers dual-impact value. For scholars, it provides a novel integrated theoretical framework and mixed-method approach that synthesizes psychological, contextual, and environmental determinants of stadium advertising effectiveness, filling a critical gap in non-Western contexts and offering a foundation for future hypothesis-driven research. For industry professionals, it translates these insights into a practical, prioritized decision-making tool that guides strategic budget allocation, dynamic creative execution, and context-aware campaign planning to maximize audience engagement and ROI while mitigating financial risk in high-stakes sports advertising. The findings hold particular actionable relevance for the Iranian market while remaining applicable to global stadium operators.

Limitation

A significant methodological limitation of this meta-synthesis is the systematic exclusion of non-English, particularly Persian-language, literature. While this approach ensured analytical consistency and access to internationally indexed databases, it may have inadvertently omitted unique cultural, infrastructural, and regulatory insights specific to Iran and the broader regional context. This limitation could reduce the contextual transferability of the synthesized framework, as factors such as fan engagement rituals, local sponsorship norms, and stadium design conventions prevalent in Persian-language research may not be fully captured. Consequently, although the four-dimensional model provides a robust global framework, its direct application to local settings like Iran requires careful contextual adaptation. Future research should prioritize systematic reviews of Persian and other regional literature to validate, refine, and culturally ground these factors, as well as empirically test the framework in local stadium contexts. Such studies would offer actionable insights for region-specific advertising strategies and enhance the model’s practical relevance for both scholars and industry practitioners.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to all the experts and participants who contributed to this study. We also acknowledge the support of our affiliated institutions and colleagues who provided valuable insights and guidance throughout the research process.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author(s) declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Statement

No artificial intelligence tools were used in the writing, editing, or preparation of this manuscript.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.