The ARF Knowledge Center provides secondary research services for ARF and ARF-MSI members on a broad range of topics. Analysis of ARF member questions posed to the Knowledge Center in 2023 shows distinct trends and interests posed by different constituent members. As always, most questions tend to be specific to the unique business needs of each member, but there were some overarching trends, which highlight the evolving landscape of the marketing and advertising industry. This FAQ discusses these trends alongside sample member questions and Knowledge Center research reports.
The Attribution & Analytics Accelerator returned for its eighth year as the only event focused exclusively on attribution, marketing mix models, in-market testing and the science of marketing performance measurement. The boldest and brightest minds took the stage to share their latest innovations and case studies. Modelers, marketers, researchers and data scientists gathered in NYC to quicken the pace of innovation, fortify the science and galvanize the industry toward best practices and improved solutions. Content is available to event attendees and ARF members.
The media landscape continues to evolve, arguably at a faster rate than ever. Leading media and measurement experts presented research-based insights on how viewers use different forms of TV/video on various platforms. Attendees joined us at the Warner Bros. Discovery Studios in California and via livestream to understand the latest data and discussions of the data’s implications.
According to the study’s sponsor, the research was prompted by many advertisers’ “ambivalence” about news as context for their ads. The study, the largest of its kind ever conducted, used an experimental design, placing comparable ads in newspapers and on digital platforms. Digital ads were placed in news and other contexts. The study was conducted in Australia, but U.S. data were also obtained. The analysis focused on three issues:
Does the news context promote ad recall, positive attitudes about the product, and brand choice?
Do ads work better on print or on digital platforms?
What do the findings tell us about how advertising works in different contexts and on different platforms?
On May 17, the ARF Analytics Council explored the groundbreaking concept of Virtual IDs (VIDs) and their potential to revolutionize cross-media measurement. The essential mechanics of VIDs were explained in a non-technical manner to help professionals across media and advertising understand it better. Panelists shared how VIDs could overcome barriers in calculating cross-media and device reach and frequency.
Across all platforms, creative continues to have the dominant effect ranging from 46% to 49% of the effect of the campaign. The proportional effect of media and brand vary by platform depending on the targetability of the medium, the ability to build reach and the appeal to younger audiences such as is the case for social media.
This research has two main objectives: to establish if there is evidence for distinct environment types within digital media and to understand implications for use of attention metrics. The study focused on mobile “in the wild” test using simulated media environments conducted and analyzed by Realeyes in partnership with Eye Square and Bill Harvey consulting. The study scoped to video ads on six media platforms—Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Hulu, Snapchat, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube—and three environment categories—Feed (Facebook, Instagram, twitter), Short Form (Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat stories, TikTok Takeover, Feed and TopView, and YouTube shorts) and Stream (Facebook InStream, Hulu Pre and Mid Roll, and YouTube Skippable and Non-Skippable). Study was conducted in three stages: pre-exposure survey followed by in-context view (ad visibility, skips scrolls, on-screen attention and reactions) and then post-exposure survey (examining brand recognition, ad recall, brand trust, ad liking and persuasion). A number of constants were held: 1) isolating effect of creative; 2) holding audience constant through randomization and isolation (each person sees only one ad at a time).
On May 17, the ARF Analytics Council explored the groundbreaking concept of Virtual IDs (VIDs) and their potential to revolutionize cross-media measurement. The essential mechanics of VIDs were explained in a non-technical manner to help professionals across media and advertising understand it better. Panelists shared how VIDs could overcome barriers in calculating cross-media and device reach and frequency.
Bill Harvey – Executive Chairman, Bill Harvey Consulting, Inc.
Sophie MacIntyre – Ads Research Lead, Meta
This research has two main objectives: to establish if there is evidence for distinct environment types within digital media and to understand implications for use of attention metrics. The study focused on mobile “in the wild” test using simulated media environments conducted and analyzed by Realeyes in partnership with Eye Square and Bill Harvey consulting. The study scoped to video ads on six media platforms—Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Hulu, Snapchat, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube—and three environment categories—Feed (Facebook, Instagram, twitter), Short Form (Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat stories, TikTok Takeover, Feed and TopView, and YouTube shorts) and Stream (Facebook InStream, Hulu Pre and Mid Roll, and YouTube Skippable and Non-Skippable). Study was conducted in three stages: pre-exposure survey followed by in-context view (ad visibility, skips scrolls, on-screen attention and reactions) and then post-exposure survey (examining brand recognition, ad recall, brand trust, ad liking and persuasion). A number of constants were held: 1) isolating effect of creative; 2) holding audience constant through randomization and isolation (each person sees only one ad at a time).
Main findings include:
Across digital environments relaxation is the key mode.
While attention norms vary between environments, brand recognition is comparable and delivers the same effect.
There were similar results across the funnel across different format types—apart from ad recall.
The effect of attention on brand outcomes differs across environments. More attention = higher ad recall and better brand recognition. Feed and short form environments saw the same ad recall with shorter average time and fewer long exposures.
Marketers should tailor creative to take advantage of different second by second attentive profiles. In stream there is a more constant level of attention across creative—more time to tell the story. In Feed and Short Form—a conscious decision to concentrate your attention—you’re enjoying the fun of choosing; in stream it’s like being in the back seat of the limo. Less choice. So different types of attention.
Across all environments, consumer attentive behavior decreases with increasing familiarity.
When you do a study like this it is important to filter out those people who aren’t typically users of the platform. Newbies don’t know how to escape the ads.
In conclusion, effectiveness of attention varies across environment. Caution is needed in averaging across categories. Attentive behavior evolves across time.
Open questions:
How can we distinguish between positive and negative attention? Perhaps through facial attention measurement.
How to understand forced vs. earned time?
What are the tradeoffs between attention, brand outcomes and cost?
How can we layer on emotion data and/or additional data?
Key Takeaways
There are different profiles of consumer behavior across environments.
Despite this, brand outcomes are comparable, suggesting each environment attains value in a different way.
Attention has a different relationship with outcomes across environments and users.
Unexpected ads—like pop-ups and floaters—affect people’s attention and attitudes differently, depending on their location, the degree of unexpectedness and the user’s task level, new research has found. The study’s findings offer fresh evidence toward helping advertisers and website service providers design attention-grabbing ads.
