Cambridge personality research general presentation feb 2012
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Cambridge personality research general presentation feb 2012

on

  • 1,230 views

The ideas and evidence behind targeting online ads based on the personality match between audience and product.

The ideas and evidence behind targeting online ads based on the personality match between audience and product.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,230
Views on SlideShare
1,167
Embed Views
63

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
11
Comments
0

3 Embeds 63

http://materializednetworks.wordpress.com 61
http://www.linkedin.com 1
https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Cambridge personality research general presentation feb 2012 Cambridge personality research general presentation feb 2012 Presentation Transcript

  • Ad TargetingusingPersonalityDataEvidence and Theory2011-12stephen@mypersonality.org
  • Cambridge Personality Research Personality and behavioural data >6.5 mn individuals Model for predicting behaviours, preferences and individual traits Online tool: www.preferencestool.com In use with global media agencies World leader in research
  • people and their actions are inter -connected in a Giant Global graph Websites Likes People Emails Searches Products / Services Workplaces
  • to describe an individual’s location isto predict her traits and behaviour
  • tools we use for describing people 100 dimensions of mapped behaviour exclusively from Cambridge University Research models personality mapping standard – the “big 5” trait dimensions  openness  conscientiousness  extroversion   agreeableness  neuroticism  social demographics
  • technique Matrix of > 35 million connections between objects behaviours & people Extract >100 best components of patterning Any 25 of our components explain enough variance to make a reliable prediction
  • accuracyWe predict which of thesetwo people is connectedwith BMW.Our accuracy is 93% Accuracy for other variables between 67 and 93 %
  • relevancewe gather data across the websearches  browsing logs  tweets  shoppingrecords  mobile sensors  Facebook profilemodel applicable in all situationstargeting by psycho-demographics  personalisesearch results  add user descriptors  demographicand personality predictions  user understanding
  • value in ad targeting Value proven in Facebook ad targeting  Best personality-based groups are stable and emerge early in campaigns  Method integrated to ad-serving platforms  Personality-based target groups score CTR up to 100% higher than Agency methods  Conversions can rise by 45%  CPA can be more than halved
  • example: CTR (food brand) CTR: Preference vs AgencyTheme of keyword group 3 0.19% 0.12% 2 0.13% Preference keywords: CTR 0.10% Agencys keywords CTR 1 0.12% 0.06% CTRA leading Agency’s Facebook fanning campaign compared its in-house keywordgeneration system against personality-based keyword lists generated byCambridge Personality Research Preference Tool in a trial of 3.5 mn impressionsDecember 2011. Keyword lists were generated for 3 campaign themes 1. Family, 2.Cooking, 3. Online Shopping. Taking Click Through Rate CTR as themetric, Cambridge Personality keywords outperformed agency by between 30and 100%. Enough to double the brand audience.
  • example: CPA (foodbrand) Cost per Action: Preference vs Agency Theme of keyword group C 0.51 0.89 preference agency B 0.82 1.08 A 0.80 1.92 $ per Social ActionA leading Agency’s Facebook campaign compared its in-house keywordgeneration system against personality-based keyword lists generated byCambridge Personality Research Preference Tool across 3.5 mn impressions inDecember 2011. Keyword lists were generated for 3 campaign themes A.Family, B. Cooking, C. Online Shopping. Taking Costs per Social Action as themetric, Cambridge Personality keywords outperformed the Agency keywords bybetween 24 and 58%. Enough to double the campaign ROI
  • example: conversions(insurance brand) Conversion rates: Agency vs Preference (3 top-performing segments) Stegment number 3 0.32 0.18 2 0.33 0.18 Preference 0.35 Agency 1 0.19 conversion rate: clicked, then entered competitionA leading Agency’s Facebook competition-entry campaign compared its in-housekeyword generation system against personality-based keyword lists generated byCambridge Personality Research Preference Tool in a full campaign of 42 mnimpressions in November 2011. The top three performing segments of each methodare compared. Taking conversion as the metric, target groups defined byPersonality using the Preference Tool outperformed target groups defined by theAgency by an average of 45%. Note that CPM was, however, 30 % higher onaverage for these top-performing groups.
  • current applications predict business-critical behaviour  likeliness to repay credit card debt quantifypersonality of brands, products, competitors and audiences  brand insight - positioning and media strategy recommender engines and apps  ifyou like this music, you’ll probably like this [music, or other product eg car] ad targeting
  • preference tool - insights
  • preference tool - matches
  • preference tool – adjust profile
  • thankyouto find out more –info@mypersonality.comwww.preferencestool.comTake the free demo: U- demo P- demowww.cambridgepersonality.com