When engagement is not enough: an asymmetric dual-system theory of acceptance and avoidance in mobile advertising

Purpose This paper aims to develop an asymmetric dual-system theory of acceptance and avoidance in mobile advertising. It explains why consumers may engage with mobile advertisements while simultaneously resisting their persuasive intent. Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts a conceptual theory-building approach and integrates literature on advertising engagement, consumer brand engagement, persuasion knowledge, psychological reactance, privacy, personalisation, intrusiveness and digital advertising avoidance. Findings The paper proposes that mobile advertising responses are governed by two co-existing regulatory systems. The engagement-based approach system facilitates attention, elaboration and interaction, whereas the threat-based avoidance system monitors perceived intrusiveness, privacy risk and autonomy loss. Threshold, strength and conversion asymmetries explain why engagement is necessary but insufficient for acceptance: threat-based regulation may interrupt engagement-to-acceptance conversion. The framework also distinguishes advertising engagement from consumer brand engagement, positioning the latter as a relational buffer that may facilitate but cannot guarantee acceptance. Research limitations/implications As a conceptual contribution, the framework requires empirical testing across platforms, cultures, regulatory environments and mobile-first ecosystems. Practical implications The framework cautions marketers against treating engagement metrics as proxies for acceptance. Mobile advertising strategies should balance relevance and personalisation with transparency, permission, user control and reduced intrusiveness. Originality/value The paper reframes mobile advertising persuasion as asymmetric co-regulation rather than linear progression from engagement to acceptance. It positions avoidance as an active regulatory outcome and explains why engagement and avoidance may coexist.