consumer behavior

Experts on Data and Creative

The Drum hosted a roundtable with six select members to dissect the ways in which data informs creativity — and how that relationship is transforming in light of market movements and industry sea changes. Here are three of their biggest takeaways.

Read more »

What Drives Consumers to Share Their Data in Addressable TV?


Addressable advertising on television enables better targeting and measurement of TV ad campaigns, but gaining access to consumer data is essential for its effectiveness and development. So, what can advertisers do to make people more willing to share their data? New research offers insights into developing personalization initiatives aimed at alleviating privacy concerns.

Member Only Access

How Do Consumers Respond to Ads that Mix Black and White Actors?


Many companies and brands increasingly incorporate racially diverse actors, often mixing Blacks and Caucasians in their advertising, yet not much is known about its effectiveness. New research explores how actor race and social tie strength—essentially the potency of the bond between the two actors—translate into consumer responses, with indirect effects on purchase intention.

Member Only Access

New Research Insights on Viewers’ Behaviors and Attitudes 


A (virtual) event presented by the ARF’s LA Media Research Council took place on June 15. Titled ”New Research Insights on Viewer’s Behaviors and Attitudes” it featured four presentations focused on issues that the Council had identified as priorities: better data on viewers’ use of media and platforms, the growth of streaming and content discovery and promotion.

Member Only Access
  • Article

How to Spot Bad Research

The ARF’s focus on research quality is echoed by Andrew Tenzer, Director of Market Insight and Brand Strategy at Reach.  Tenzer writes: I’m on a mission to rid our industry of bad research. I’m fed up with it. It leads to poor decision making and increases the disconnect between marketers and consumers. In short, it is damaging to brands and the industry we represent. Over the past five to 10 years, conducting research has never been so affordable and accessible. On the surface, you might consider this a good thing. The increased number of insights and easy access to the consumer should be a marketer’s dream. After all, we like to position ourselves as the experts in the understanding of people. Also, let’s not forget that we’re all under enormous pressure to use data and insight to underpin strategic decision making – having ready-made insights at our fingertips is incredibly useful. Increased accessibility means we’ve also reached a point where almost anyone can run research. The problem is that quantity is not a sign of quality. Almost all industry research comes from businesses pushing an agenda. It’s not all doom and gloom though. If we acknowledge that utilizing good research leads to better outcomes, it’s in our interest to make sure we can identify the good from the bad.

  1. Ask yourself who has published the study and why.
  2. Determine the extent of social desirability.
  3. Back of the ‘net’ (published research usually has many functions, but often its first requirement is to get industry media coverage).
My advice is always to ask for the percentage breakdown of ‘slightly agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ (or by one-10 on a 10-point scale), so you can get a real sense of the strength of feeling about a particular statement. It will almost certainly give you a different perspective on the findings and will help identify those who are pushing a particular agenda. Source: Tenzer, A. (2022, June 1). Three tips to help you spot bad research. MarketingWeek.

Member Only Access
  • Article

Surveys Don’t Always Predict Behavior

An analysis in The New York Times reminds us that surveys and polls often do not predict behavior. A report by the ARF examines the reasons why and pollsters are reevaluating their methods. The New York Times analysis (June 4, 2022) is illustrated by the table below. An ARF report, available as a “Knowledge at Hand,” stressed the importance of good sampling and of using well-designed questions – rather than just one item – to assess complex attitudes and opinions.  Politico reports that pollsters are reevaluating their approaches and planning changes in their methods for research connected to the 2024 election. Please also note the item Tips to Spot Bad Research in this issue of NYCU. Sources: Cohn, N. (2022, June 3). Voters Say They Want Gun Control. Their Votes Say Something Different. - The New York Times (available for NYT subscribers) The ARF. (2021, March 10). Best Practices in Media and Market Research Studies. The ARF. Shepard, S. (2022, May 15). Pollsters prepare for major changes after presidential election misses. Politico.

Member Only Access
  • Article

The “Shapes of Attention”

While a recent ARF survey documents the rising interest in attention metrics among marketers, a new report reminds us that “attention” comes in different shapes – which have different outcome implications. As we reported (May 6), the ARF contributed to the current discussion about “attention” with a new survey that represented both the buy-side (advertisers and agencies) and market researchers.

  • The survey found differences between the groups on several issues, but almost universal agreement on the idea that attention measures will soon play a more important role: e.g., augmenting, but not replacing, currency metrics.
The ARF‘s report on the study, and other ARF publications about attention, also point to the complexities of the “attention” concept and whether more attention always leads to more ad impact. Professor Karen Nelson-Field and Hayun Jung, both at Amplified Intelligence, have issued a new report that addresses these issues. They describe how their research led them to focus on what they call “shapes of attention — six kinds of attention based on clusters of viewing behavior that are defined by a complex interplay between ‘passive’ and ‘active’ attention.
  • The authors’ initial research on attention found that viewing an ad for similar seconds often resulted in different outcomes. This led them to shift their focus from what people watch to gaining a deeper understanding of how they watch on various platforms and on measuring the different kinds of attention accurately.
  • Their new research found that different attention “shapes” affect upper and lower funnel outcomes in different ways. These insights, the authors hope, will change the conversation from more attention to the right kind of attention.
Sources: The ARF, The Attention Council. (2022, April 26). The ARF Attention ReportThe ARF & The Attention Council. The ARF. (2021, June 8). Attention and Ad Impact: New Insights from New Research The ARF. WARC. (2022). The shape of attention: mining gold from individual level attention view. WARC. (WARC members only)

Member Only Access