Ad TargetingusingPersonalityDataEvidence and Theory2011-12stephen@mypersonality.org
Cambridge Personality Research Personality   and behavioural data >6.5 mn  individuals Model for predicting behaviours, ...
people and their actions are inter -connected in a Giant Global graph        Websites      Likes   People                 ...
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 m...
technique   Matrix of > 35    million    connections    between objects    behaviours &    people   Extract >100 best   ...
accuracyWe predict which of thesetwo people is connectedwith BMW.Our accuracy is 93%         Accuracy for other variables ...
relevancewe gather data across the websearches  browsing logs  tweets  shoppingrecords  mobile sensors  Facebook prof...
value in ad targeting Value   proven in Facebook ad targeting    Best personality-based groups are stable     and emerge...
example: CTR (food brand)                             CTR: Preference vs AgencyTheme of keyword group                     ...
example: CPA (foodbrand)                                 Cost per Action: Preference vs Agency    Theme of keyword group  ...
example: conversions(insurance brand)                        Conversion rates: Agency vs Preference                       ...
current applications predict   business-critical behaviour     likeliness   to repay credit card debt quantifypersonali...
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.cambridgeper...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Cambridge personality research general presentation feb 2012

1,024

Published on

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

Published in: Technology, Design
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,024
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Cambridge personality research general presentation feb 2012

  1. 1. Ad TargetingusingPersonalityDataEvidence and Theory2011-12stephen@mypersonality.org
  2. 2. 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
  3. 3. people and their actions are inter -connected in a Giant Global graph Websites Likes People Emails Searches Products / Services Workplaces
  4. 4. to describe an individual’s location isto predict her traits and behaviour
  5. 5. 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
  6. 6. 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
  7. 7. accuracyWe predict which of thesetwo people is connectedwith BMW.Our accuracy is 93% Accuracy for other variables between 67 and 93 %
  8. 8. 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
  9. 9. 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
  10. 10. 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.
  11. 11. 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
  12. 12. 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.
  13. 13. 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
  14. 14. preference tool - insights
  15. 15. preference tool - matches
  16. 16. preference tool – adjust profile
  17. 17. thankyouto find out more –info@mypersonality.comwww.preferencestool.comTake the free demo: U- demo P- demowww.cambridgepersonality.com
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×