A presentation entitled Impact of Online and Television Advertising on Consumer Behavior, was given at the Advertising Research Foundation’s (ARF) AM 6.0 conference held in 2011. The presentation includes, the challenges to measuring cross-platform media impacts, comscore methods, case studies and results. Presenters included Joan FitzGerald-Vice President of comScore & Alan Vaughn- Statistical Analyst at comScore.

1. Impact of Online and Television
Advertising on Consumer Behavior
Joan FitzGerald Alan Vaughn
Vice President Statistical Analyst
comScore comScore

2. comScore is a Global Leader in
Measuring the Digital World
NASDAQ SCOR
Clients 1600+ worldwide
Employees 900+
Headquarters Reston, VA
170+ countries under measurement;
Global Coverage
43 markets reported
Local Presence 30+ locations in 21 countries
#ARFAM6 V0910

3. Background
Reaching Consumers Is More Challenging
New media and devices equals:
– More opportunity to create brand experiences that
consumers enjoy
– More opportunity to create compelling programming
to build and retain audiences
How do we measure the impact across TV,
Internet and mobile?
– Methodologies in development for use in 25,000
multi-screen consumer research panel
#ARFAM6

4. Challenges
Measuring the impact of cross-platform media is a
significant challenge
Econometric modeling is not an optimum solution
for media
Works best with single, immediate response and
clearly-defined time periods
– Think promotions, sale pricing, couponing
Media responses are multiple, not necessarily
immediate, and time periods are not clearly
defined
– Think awareness, likeability, favorability, intent-to-purchase
– Think long-term, short-term, carry-over, “halo” effects

5. Opportunity
“Single-Source” Research Presents
Opportunity To Uncover Media Effects
More granular
– Break out and understand groups of consumers who may
use media in dramatically different ways
Think “OTT,” heavy DVR, mobile video, mobile app users
Faster
– After each week of campaign, not after 24 months
of prior data
– Answer questions about what marketers should do now
#ARFAM6

6. Methods
Comscore Established 3,700+ Person
Multi-Screen “Test Panel”
Persons-level Internet usage matched to
household-level television viewing
– Blind, third-party match
Data sources
– TV ad exposure: ad schedules matched to TV
“set top box” viewing data
– Internet ad exposure: comScore technology
– Consumer response: website visitation via
comScore technology
January – April 2010
#ARFAM6

7. Research Hypotheses
The combined impact of TV and Internet advertising
exposure is greater than the impact of TV advertising
alone and Internet advertising alone
The impact of exposure will be greater for the target
consumer group
The closer the timing of the exposure to the response,
the greater the impact will be (recency)
It is possible to determine the “equivalent” number of
Internet ads that equal the impact of a 30 second TV
advertisement
#ARFAM6

8. Analysis
2 Case Studies
Major Entertainment/Film and
Financial Services brands
Neither solely or primarily e-commerce brands;
however, online behavior important measure
of success
Multiple creative executions and websites
combined for analysis
Financial Services brand contained insufficient
sample sizes
#ARFAM6

9. Methods
Generalized linear model
– Estimates probability of site visitation
Exposure “windows”
– 3-day, 7-day, 14-day
– TV advertising only, Internet advertising only, TV and
Internet advertising
Online behavioral response
– website visit: 0 (no site visit) or 1 (site visit)
#ARFAM6

10. Methods
3,700+ sample size lower than 25,000 planned for
multi-screen panel
Demonstration data; not weighted
TV advertising exposure is household-based while
Internet advertising exposure is persons-based
Online advertising and online behavioral response
are “co-located,” therefore, one might expect
online advertising to show greater response using
the methods presented here
#ARFAM6

11. Results
1 + 1 = 2.X
For the Entertainment brand, the combination of TV and Internet
Advertising resulted in a 28% and 66% higher probability of a
website visit than exposure to TV advertising alone or Internet
advertising alone, respectively
– Results seen for both brands, although sample sizes insufficient for reliable
results for Financial Services brand
128
Results
100 indexed to
TV only
77 advertising
exposure
Index of Behavior Probability with 3-Day Exposure Window
TV Only Internet Only TV and Internet
#ARFAM6

12. Results
“Recency Effect”
For the Entertainment brand, there was higher probability of website
visitation the closer the exposure to the behavior, with the greatest
“recency” effect shown for the combination of TV and Internet advertising
For exposure to both TV and Internet advertising, the probability of
website visitation increased by 62% within a 3-day window compared to a
14-day window
The probability increased 32% for TV only exposure and 10% for Internet
only exposure
0.17
TV Only
Internet Only
0.12
TV and Internet
0.07
3-Day 7-Day 14-Day
#ARFAM6

13. Results
Target Consumers Responded More
For the Entertainment brand, there was a higher probability of website
visitation for consumers within the brand target group compared to
consumers that were not within the brand target group
The probability increased by 28% for consumers exposed to both TV and
Internet advertising, 31% for consumers exposed to TV only advertising
and 38% for consumers exposed to Internet only advertising
128
TV and Internet
100
77 Target
Internet Only
55 Not Target
100
TV Only
77
#ARFAM6

14. Similar Targeting Impact Seen for
Digital Advertising and CPG Brands
Lift In In-Store Sales
Media Sales Lift in 3-Months from Digital Advertising from CPG Brands
38%
21%
Non-Purchase Based Targeting Purchase Based Targeting
*Source: comScore AdEffx Offline Sales Lift Norms for CPG, March 2011
Non-purchased based targeting includes, but is not limited to, the following types of buys: contextual, audience, run of site//run of network, etc.
** Source: comScore Audience Advantage, which leverages sophisticated predictive targeting algorithms that are created using anonymous
panel and census data sources; targeting was deployed on the Microsoft Network sites.
Note: Retail sales is measured by linking the comScore panel of 1 million U.S. Internet users to their retailer loyalty card data from dunnhumby,
which provides a measure of the panelist’s in-store buying activity.

15. Results
Media “Equivalencies”
For the Entertainment brand, 5 Internet Only advertising exposures
had the equivalent impact of 1 TV Only advertising exposure
The impact of exposure to both TV and Internet was higher than TV
and Internet alone, even at higher frequency levels for Internet
1 TV and 1 Internet
Exposure
1 TV Only 5 Internet Only
Exposure Exposures
Behavior Probability with 3-Day Exposure Window
#ARFAM6

16. Conclusions
Method Uncovered Multi-screen Media Effects
TV and Internet advertising alone in combination,
showed measureable impact on online behavioral
response
– TV and Internet combined had a greater impact on change
probability of a website visit than TV or Internet alone
The study found a measureable “recency” effect
Target consumers had a stronger response than
non-target consumers
Media “equivalencies” can be calculated and used
in media planning
#ARFAM6

17. Opportunities for Future Research
Multi-Screen Media Effects
Frequency of exposure…
How many exposures on what media in advance
of the website visit?
Sequencing of exposure…
How do the media reinforce each other?
Response curves…
Optimizing exposure to generate a response
#ARFAM6

18. Next Steps
25,000 Multi-Screen Panel
25,000 opt-in panelists with access to mobile,
TV, Internet
Recruitment begins Q3 2011
Single-source cross-platform measurement
#ARFAM6