This research is 'bollocks' - but
We've had the ramp-up of the great-unwashed arriving on my pristine internet.
They've been bitten, and their children have installed the ad-blockers for them, whilst uninstalling the toolbars that previously presented the internet through a letterbox.
*Nobody* is uninstalling their ad-blocker though.
I personally have started to make 'exceptions'
Wired, for example, very nicely masks the page and asks you to make an exception for them.
I like Wired, wish to read what they've paid somebody to write, so comply.
I've also in the last few years contributed to kickstarters and signed up to Patreon to chuck the odd dollar to people whose videos/podcasts I actually enjoy.
Bluntly I've come out of the other side of the much derided "I pirate as I can't afford to pay" trench of non-contribution.
What currently annoys the f out of me is the "pay to view per site" model, which I've yet to see any example of... well it "actually working".
e.g. I see a link to The Times.. well I just don't even bother clicking any more.
I might "pay a cent" to read a page, but no way am I ever going to setup a direct debit to read a page of anything.
My cunning, if not innovative, solution is to pay the ad-blockers to handle this for me.
I pay £10 a month to "Ad-Block-Future".
I get my ads blocked.
Sites I go to can decide whether I can view content for my £10 a month subscription, or whether I need to pay £20 a month for access (will they accept 1c assuming I view 1,000 pages a month, or are they holding out on me doubling my payment to get their extra cent).
Whatever I spend each month is divvied up (less overhead) and distributed to pages I could see based on the number I've accessed.
Finally, I want a "won't pay" button/plugin, where I can opt out of sharing to that site/page - solely to ensure that click-bait/spam/shite isn't rewarded. You hit that button, they get nothing, but you lose access for the next billing cycle.