Review: The Effect of Online Advertising
So I decided to cross-post my review of the article in Communications of ACM on my main blog blogs.technet.com/eldar/archive/2007/06/02/716417.aspx I thought it might be interesting ...
-
I read this article here (the name was on the cover, for the sake of it the whole magazine did not immediately throw it away). It’s not that we don’t even know how online advertising is perceived and influenced by site traffic, but the authors of this article received specific figures on HOW it affects.
In 2005, the online advertising market in the United States was $ 10 billion, 5.3% of the total advertising market. 30% increase compared with 2004 (By the way, the fact that these data are somewhat oldish is caused by the fact that classic journals have a very long cycle of preparing articles for publication. It’s a pity they didn’t correct the data for newer ones from 2006.)
The article compares pop-up, pop-under and inline advertising, that is, the one that is right on the page, mostly banners, the authors conducted a special study with 417 volunteers on a specially made site (so that you can check the same pages with different types of advertisements and without it).
The first result is that pop-ups were perceived as 24% more annoying than ads on the same page (inline banners). Interestingly, pop-unders (opening in a separate window under the current one) are 33% more intrusive than built-in, that is, noticeably more annoying than even pop-ups.
The second result is that the lack of advertising on the site was expressed in an increase in the intention to return to the site and recommend it to others by 11%. Example from the article: Amazon.com receives approximately 48 million unique visitors per month. A drop of this amount of 11% means a loss of about 5 million buyers. However, I'm not sure how good this example is - the whole Amazon.com site is a huge advertisement, apart from the order pages. But the idea illustrates the example quite well.
More specifically, if 14.5% of visitors were going to return to the site without advertising, then with banners only 13.3%, with pop-unders 12.9%, and with pop-ups - 12.7%.
Finally, a bit of a strange result. An advertisement that has no direct relation to the content of the site (for example, an ad for a machine on a site selling potato chips) was remembered a little better - by 3.5% (which was expected), but did not cause more rejection. Apparently, this means that banners with various naked parts of the female body on Russian political sites leading to other political sites, in fact, are annoying not because it is not in context, but in itself, so to say “in absolute terms ":-)
I shared it ... since many IT Pro readers, including those related to website development, thought that this information could be useful.
-
If you are going to be on your own, you’ll be able to see what you’re looking for. McCoy, Andrea Everard, Peter Polak, and Dennis F. Galletta, Communications of ACM , March 2007 / Vol.50, No.3
I read this article here (the name was on the cover, for the sake of it the whole magazine did not immediately throw it away). It’s not that we don’t even know how online advertising is perceived and influenced by site traffic, but the authors of this article received specific figures on HOW it affects.
In 2005, the online advertising market in the United States was $ 10 billion, 5.3% of the total advertising market. 30% increase compared with 2004 (By the way, the fact that these data are somewhat oldish is caused by the fact that classic journals have a very long cycle of preparing articles for publication. It’s a pity they didn’t correct the data for newer ones from 2006.)
The article compares pop-up, pop-under and inline advertising, that is, the one that is right on the page, mostly banners, the authors conducted a special study with 417 volunteers on a specially made site (so that you can check the same pages with different types of advertisements and without it).
The first result is that pop-ups were perceived as 24% more annoying than ads on the same page (inline banners). Interestingly, pop-unders (opening in a separate window under the current one) are 33% more intrusive than built-in, that is, noticeably more annoying than even pop-ups.
The second result is that the lack of advertising on the site was expressed in an increase in the intention to return to the site and recommend it to others by 11%. Example from the article: Amazon.com receives approximately 48 million unique visitors per month. A drop of this amount of 11% means a loss of about 5 million buyers. However, I'm not sure how good this example is - the whole Amazon.com site is a huge advertisement, apart from the order pages. But the idea illustrates the example quite well.
More specifically, if 14.5% of visitors were going to return to the site without advertising, then with banners only 13.3%, with pop-unders 12.9%, and with pop-ups - 12.7%.
Finally, a bit of a strange result. An advertisement that has no direct relation to the content of the site (for example, an ad for a machine on a site selling potato chips) was remembered a little better - by 3.5% (which was expected), but did not cause more rejection. Apparently, this means that banners with various naked parts of the female body on Russian political sites leading to other political sites, in fact, are annoying not because it is not in context, but in itself, so to say “in absolute terms ":-)
I shared it ... since many IT Pro readers, including those related to website development, thought that this information could be useful.
')
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/9357/
All Articles