program engagement power. programs do affect ad engagement
DESCRIPTION
This research demonstrated that commercials shown in highly engaging programs had a higher propensity to be recalled than commercials shown in less engaging programs.TRANSCRIPT
Steve WeaverNetwork Research DirectorNine Network Australia
Program Engagement Power:Programs Do Affect ad Engagement
BackgroundBackground
BackgroundBackground
BackgroundBackground
BackgroundBackground
• TV currency a measure of airtime efficiency
•Cost per thousand the standard bearer of airtime trade
•World rapidly changing– CFO driven marketing– ROI accountability
•Continual search to find measure of effectiveness of advertising airtime
ProblemProblem
“Turning on a prospect to a brand idea enhanced by the surrounding context”
ARF Definition, December 2005
Engagement
EngagementEngagement
ObjectiveObjective
• To establish a measure that is able to demonstrate that commercial creative shown in highly engaging content will generate a better ROI than if shown in low engaging content
• That the measure can be simple to understand
• That the methodology is capable of adapting to the changing media landscape and applied to other mediums
MethodMethodNeuroscience
A B C D E F6 Standard Break Sets
Order A1 Prom o TVC1 E TVC2 R TVC3 E TVC4 ROrder A2 Prom o TVC1 R TVC2 E TVC3 R TVC4 E
E = Em otional. R = Rational.
Standard Ad Break Design
Mem. Enc. BiasAd PIB 1 0.55 0.01Ad PIB 2 0.58 -0.03Ad PIB 3 0.59 0.02Ad PIB 4 0.55 -0.01
MethodMethod
• Two groups of 50 respondents viewed segments of 12 programs– Group A viewed programs 1 to 6– Group B viewed programs 7 to 12
• Each program was followed by one of the 6 standardised ad‐breaks
• For each group, the 6 programs and ad‐breaks were viewed over a 60 minute test session
• The program:ad‐break pairs remained constant– Eg: Ad‐break #1 always followed Program #1, etc
• To counteract potential order effects, the presentation order of the program:ad‐break pairs was varied
The DetailAchieving representative program content within the “limitations” of a test environment
AnalysisAnalysis
Source: OzTAM
0
5
7
2.1
7.7
9.8
7
9.8
6.8
9.1
6.3
5
Pushing Daiseys
Canal Road (Local Drama)
CSI: Miami
The Today Show
Getaway (Travel Show)
60 Minutes
The Footy Show
RPA (Observation Doco)
Funniest Home Videos
Farmer Wants a Wife
Friday Night Football
Sarah Connor Chronicles
GRP’s – Airtime Value Based on Efficiency
AnalysisAnalysis
Source: ADA Q Scores
0
29
43
19
24
21
31
54
22
26
47
36
Pushing Daiseys
Canal Road (Local Drama)
CSI: Miami
The Today Show
Getaway (Travel Show)
60 Minutes
The Footy Show
RPA (Observation Doco)
Funniest Home Videos
Farmer Wants a Wife
Friday Night Football
Sarah Connor Chronicles
Q Scores – Airtime Value Based on Claimed Engagement
AnalysisAnalysis
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
0.52
0.53
0.55
0.59
0.6
0.64
0.64
0.7
0.71
0.73
0.73
0.9
Pushing Daiseys
Canal Road (Local Drama)
CSI: Miami
The Today Show
Getaway (Travel Show)
60 Minutes
The Footy Show
RPA (Observation Doco)
Funniest Home Videos
Farmer Wants a Wife
Friday Night Football
Sarah Connor Chronicles
Memory Encoding
AnalysisAnalysis
y = 0.7162x + 0.1296R2 = 0.5305
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Program Engagement
Ad
Bre
ak E
ngag
emen
t
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysis
0.48
0.5
0.55
0.48
0.51
0.58
0.67
0.65
0.64
0.83
0.57
0.71
0.52
0.53
0.55
0.59
0.6
0.64
0.64
0.7
0.71
0.73
0.73
0.9
Pushing Daiseys
Canal Road (Local Drama)
CSI: Miami
The Today Show
Getaway (Travel Show)
60 Minutes
The Footy Show
RPA (Observation Doco)
Funniest Home Videos
Farmer Wants a Wife
Friday Night Football
Sarah Connor Chronicles
Memory Encoding – Program and Pod Engagement
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
PEP ScorePEP Score
Program Engagement Index
Program A Program Engagement = 0.9
Database Average Program Engagement = 0.65
Program Engagement Index (Prog A) = (0.9/0.65)*100
= 138
PEP PEP –– PProgram rogram EEngagement ngagement PPowerowerIndex of Program Engagement Index of Program Engagement
Index of Engagement Conversion to Ad BreakIndex of Engagement Conversion to Ad Break
Engagement Conversion IndexProgram A Program Engagement = 0.9
Program A Ad Break Engagement Score = .71
Program A Differential = 0.78
Database Average Differential = 0.914
Conversion Index (Prog A) = (0.78/0.914)*100
= 85
PEP= 112
AnalysisAnalysis
90
92
97
89
92
98
106
104
103
118
98
112
Pushing Daiseys
Canal Road (Local Drama)
CSI: Miami
The Today Show
Getaway (Travel Show)
60 Minutes
The Footy Show
RPA (Observation Doco)
Funniest Home Videos
Farmer Wants a Wife
Friday Night Football
Sarah Connor Chronicles
PEP Score
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysis
$0
$19
$60
$9
$28
$26
$40
$20
$26
$37
$33
$40
$0
$21
$62
$10
$30
$27
$38
$19
$25
$31
$34
$36
Pushing Daiseys
Canal Road (Local Drama)
CSI: Miami
The Today Show
Getaway (Travel Show)
60 Minutes
The Footy Show
RPA (Observation Doco)
Funniest Home Videos
Farmer Wants a Wife
Friday Night Football
Sarah Connor Chronicles
Cost per 0 0 0 Cost per Engaged 0 0 0
Cost per Engaged 000
AnalysisAnalysis
0.81
0.620.69
0.59
0.76
0.56 0.55 0.55
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
A BProgram
Spot
Eng
agem
ent
TVC1 TVC2 TVC3 TVC4
Ad Engagement is Affected by Program Engagement HaloSpot engagement differs by program
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysisProgram Ad1 Engagement y = 1.2046x - 0.1746
R2 = 0.7127
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Program Eng
Ad
Eng
AdBreakLinear (AdBreak)
Program Ad2 Engagement y = 1.0691x - 0.1318R2 = 0.6548
0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.90
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Program Eng
Ad
Eng
AdBreakLinear (AdBreak)
Program Ad3 Engagement y = 0.5863x + 0.2125R2 = 0.3279
0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.90
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Program Eng
Ad
Eng
AdBreakLinear (AdBreak)
Program Ad4 Engagement y = 0.4416x + 0.2911R2 = 0.1862
0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.90
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Program Eng
Ad
Eng AdBreak
Linear (AdBreak)
Ad Positions 1 & 2 have the strongest relationship with Program Engagement
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysis
r2=0.19
r2=0.33
r2=0.65
r2=0.71
r2=0.57
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Ad Break Ave. 1st in break 2nd in break 3rd in break 4th in break
Program Halo EffectCorrelations between program engagement and ad engagement
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysis
Program Engagement Halo
Ad Pod
Program Halo Effect
AnalysisAnalysis
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
NeuroscienceGlobal Average
Std Pod Sport Engagement Sport Std PodEngagement
Sport Solus AdBreak
Program Halo Supports Previous Research on Power of Solus
35%
Source: Neuro Insight Cricket Study
AnalysisAnalysis
0.62
0.580.59
0.57
0.66
0.62
0.64
0.61
0.52
0.54
0.56
0.58
0.6
0.62
0.64
0.66
0.68
1st Ad in Break 2nd Ad in Break 3rd Ad in Break 4th Ad in BreakPIB
With Promo Without Promo
Program Halo Supports True First in Break
9.4%
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysis
y = 0.6499x - 0.1606R2 = 0.4646
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Program Engagement
Ad
Rec
all
Linking Back to More Commonly Accepted MeasuresCorrelation between PEP and Ad recall
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysisLinking Back to More Commonly Accepted Measures
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
AnalysisAnalysis
y = 0.6499x - 0.1606R2 = 0.4646
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Program Engagement
Ad
Rec
all
Linking Back to More Commonly Accepted MeasuresCorrelation between PEP and Ad recall
Source: Neuro Insight PEP Study
ConclusionsConclusions
• Program engagement using neuroscience measures do not correlate with claimed engagement measures
• Traditional high GRP programs may not necessarily be highly engaging
• Ad Effectiveness is affected by program– Implications for traditional copy‐testing methods
• Program Engagement correlates strongest with PIB 1 & 2 – Implications for how broadcasters value last in break
• Program Engagement Halo wears off across the pod– Implications for value of true first in break– Implications for value of solus and shorter ad pods
• Program Engagement correlates with Ad Recall
Next StepsNext Steps
• Extend Database for programs yet to air– Make the model predictive
• Extend Database to multi‐platform– Supplier already established similar finding for radio
• Test Market with supportive client to buy schedule of high PEP programs vs standard schedule in control market