the effectiveness of display advertisingon a desktop pc vs. a tablet deviceNew Eye-Tracking Researchfrom Mediative and Tob...
About MediativeMediative is a digital marketing company providing performance servicesand access to media platforms.Organi...
SummaryTablet usage has exploded. eMarketer estimates there will be nearly 70million tablet users in the US by the end of ...
Methodology31 participants viewed display adson a desktop PC, and 27 participants                                         ...
Key TakeawaysAttention Capturing Metrics                                                 Engagement MetricsThe results sol...
All Ads By TypeLeader Board AdsLeader Board Ads: PC vs.                  Leader board ads on the iPad:                    ...
All Ads By TypeLeader Board AdsLeader Board Ads vs.                     Leader board ads on the iPad:                     ...
All Ads By TypeSkyscraper AdsSkyscraper Ads: PC vs. iPad                format is familiar to users - they know           ...
All Ads By TypeBig Box AdsBig Box Ads: PC vs. iPad                  Big box ads on the iPad:                              ...
Ads By VerticalWe also measured the performance of ads on different categories ofwebsites (verticals) to determine if a us...
Ads By VerticalOn the iPad                                verticals - Total Visit Duration and                            ...
ConclusionThe aim of this eye-tracking study        in the effective design of websites        Leader Board Adswas to prov...
Subscribe to Mediative’s newsletterto receive more insights and studies.Download our latest whitepapers> The Impact of Dis...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The effectiveness of display advertising on a desktop pc vs a tablet device mediaative

562 views
470 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
562
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The effectiveness of display advertising on a desktop pc vs a tablet device mediaative

  1. 1. the effectiveness of display advertisingon a desktop pc vs. a tablet deviceNew Eye-Tracking Researchfrom Mediative and TobiiAugust 2012 ° Mediative.com
  2. 2. About MediativeMediative is a digital marketing company providing performance servicesand access to media platforms.Organizations who want to significantly enhance their digital presence andinfluence buyers turn to us to help generate revenue by quickly moving theirtargets from awareness to purchase.Location and research-based data fuels our insight, which we leverageacross our consultative performance services, online properties, andlocation-based marketing platforms in the dynamic digital world.With precise and unmatched knowledge of how “shoppers and clients buy”,we take a consultative and holistic approach, based on our people’s passionfor insight and results, to provide the outcomes you need now, and for thefuture. 2
  3. 3. SummaryTablet usage has exploded. eMarketer estimates there will be nearly 70million tablet users in the US by the end of 2012, an increase of more than100% over 2011, and it is a growth that is expected to continue through 2015.Clearly a huge opportunity exists Key Findings Comparison Between Adfor advertisers to reach audiences Type Performancethrough the tablet as an additionaldigital marketing medium. Comparison Between PC and iPad Ad Performance 1. Leader board ads were the most effective ad type overall on the PCUsing eye-tracking technology, the and iPad, being seen quickest,purpose of this study was: 1. Leader board ads on the PC were seen over twice as fast on average with fewest fixations before being compared to the iPad, with less noticed, and having the highest1. To determine what differences, percentage of people noticing/if any, there were in the views than half the fixations on other elements on the page before the fixating on them.and glances captured by displayadvertising on a traditional desktop leader board ad was noticed. 2. On the iPad, leader board ads hadPC compared to a tablet computer (in a 44% longer average total visitthis case, the Apple iPad). 2. A slightly higher percentage of users fixated on the leader board duration compared to the next ads on the PC vs. the iPad (39% best performing ad, with a higher2. To provide some insight into fixation duration and a higherhow people observed web pages vs. 37%), but leader board ads on the iPad held attention for longer, total number of visits.containing advertising elementsin various formats such as leader with an average total visit duration 22.5% longer. 3. It’s interesting to note, however,boards, big boxes, and skyscrapers. that, on the PC, the skyscraper ad 3. The skyscraper ad on the iPad was outperformed the leader board3. To measure the performance of ad for engagement metrics withads on different website verticals fixated on by 31% of users vs. 13% on the PC. However, the skyscraper a 27.5% longer total average visitto determine if ads on one type of duration, and a 22% longer averagevertical website perform better than ad was noticed more quickly on the PC, and held attention for an fixation duration. This shows thatthose on another. skyscraper ads are still viewed average of 82% longer in total. and noticed - not as quickly, or 4. 26% of users fixated on the big box by as many people as the leader ads on the iPad compared to 23% board ad, but they receive more on the PC. engagement once noticed. 5. Despite the higher number of total people fixating on the big box ads on the iPad, it was the ads on the PC that attracted attention more quickly, with almost half the time Ad Unit Sizes Defined to first fixation, and 35% fewer fixations before. • Leader Board: 728 x 90 6. Engagement with the big box ads • Skyscraper: 160 x 600 was also higher on the PC. The average fixation duration was 26% • Big Box: 300 x 250 longer, and the total visit duration was 15% longer. 3
  4. 4. Methodology31 participants viewed display adson a desktop PC, and 27 participants Tasks Metrics Measuredviewed the ads on the iPad. Depending on the content vertical being tested, participants were asked: 1. Attention Capturing Metrics3 different ad types were tested: Time to First Fixation: The time “You ______. Could this site help give1. Leader board (728 x 90) (in seconds) before the participant you the information you need?”2. Skyscraper (160 x 600) noticed an ad.3. Big box (300 x 250) 1. are thinking about buying a car Fixations Before: The number of 2. are trying to decide what movie to8 different website content categories fixations elsewhere on the page before go see(verticals) were tested with ads shown the participant noticed an ad. 3. are wondering how the economyon the web page: is doing Percentage Fixated: The percentage 4. are looking for some new recipes1. Automotive of the total participants who fixated 5. have a few minutes and want to2. Entertainment on the ad at least once during the catch up on today’s news3. Finance session. 6. are looking to buy a new toaster4. Lifestyle 7. are thinking about getting a new5. News cellphone 2. Engagement Metrics6. Retail 8. are thinking of doing some travel7. Technology in Canada this summer Fixation Duration: The average8. Travel duration of a fixation (in seconds). Participants viewed 5 different sitesData was collected using the Tobii X60 in each vertical, and were given 5Eye Tracker with the Mobile Device Total Visit Duration: The total time seconds to view the page after it had (seconds) of all visits (consecutiveStand for the iPad, and the Tobii T60 finished loading.Eye Tracker for the PC. fixations on an area of interest). The order that the verticals were Visit Count: The number of visitsThe desktop exposure was on a presented was randomized between1280x1024 screen, and the iPad was participants made during the session. participants. e.g. if they looked at the ad twice,in landscape orientation (1024x768 looking at something else in between,screen). that counts as two visits. These images show how the eye tracker can create heat maps (areas of highest gaze concentration), and gaze maps (showing the path a user’s eyes took across the page).Heat Map Gaze Map 4
  5. 5. Key TakeawaysAttention Capturing Metrics Engagement MetricsThe results solidify the expectation that the top portion of the page, where leader board ads are commonly placed, continuesto be a privileged region, generally registering very strong attention on both the desktop PC and iPad.If a large portion of the traffic coming to your website is using a tablet device, consider investing more of your displayadvertising spend into leader board ads rather than skyscraper or big box ads. Leader board ads take up a large portionof the page (often the whole width) and are not likely to be masked by hands/fingers when scrolling. Tablet behaviour mayevolve, but given the physical dimensions of the device and the way users interact with it, it makes sense that this willcontinue to be an effective advertising unit.The results of the performance of ads on different verticals suggest that if you are advertising on a site that perhaps is notas relevant to your ad, it might be better to focus on creating an ad that will capture attention faster, but that might not keepvisitors engaged for as long. However, if you are advertising on a site that is highly relevant to your ad, it might be better togo with a format/placement that you know is going to get better engagement.Overall, the findings indicate that ads on a PC are seen quicker, and hold engagement longer than ads on an iPad, with a fewexceptions. Therefore, the differences in design characteristics should be taken into consideration when creating displayad campaigns in order to optimize attention and engagement on each platform. 5
  6. 6. All Ads By TypeLeader Board AdsLeader Board Ads: PC vs. Leader board ads on the iPad: Key TakeawaysiPad • Held attention for longer, with an average Total Visit Duration 22.5% • Leader board ads on the PCLeader board ads on the PC: longer than on the PC. were seen quicker than those on the iPad, but the leader• Caught visitors’ attention over This suggests that while people board ads on the iPad held twice as fast on average with fewer are familiar with the traditional attention for longer, and were than half (47%) of the fixations dimensions of websites on a PC and looked at by almost as many elsewhere on the page before the use the information at the top for people. ads were noticed (Fixations Before navigation, they are spending more metric). time viewing the leader board ads on • Therefore, leader board ads on the landscape-oriented iPad, possibly tablets have the potential to be• Captured the attention of 39% of because the tablet ads occupy a more effective than those on the participants vs. 37% on the relatively larger percentage of the the PC. iPad. total screen area (see images below).In this image of the PC screen, the leader board ad takes up In this image of the iPad screen, the leader board ad takes5% of the screen space. up 8.1% of the screen space. 6
  7. 7. All Ads By TypeLeader Board AdsLeader Board Ads vs. Leader board ads on the iPad: Key TakeawaysOther Ads Compared to the next best performing ad type, leader board ads: • On both the PC and iPad, leaderLeader board ads were the most boards were the most effectiveeffective type of ad overall on the PC • had a 1.61 second faster average ad, being seen quicker and withand iPad. Time to First Fixation. fewer Fixations Before than other ad types on the page. ThisLeader board ads were seen quicker, • had an average of 3.26 fewer ad type also had the highestwith fewer Fixations Before than any Fixations Before. percentage of people noticing/other type of ad, and had the highest fixating on them. This solidifiespercentage of people noticing/ • were fixated on by 16% more the notion that top and centrefixating on them. participants. ad placement remains a strong and privileged place to be.Leader board ads on the PC: Leader board ads were more effective than other ads on the iPad for • On the iPad, leader boardCompared to the next best performing metrics associated with interest and ads had better engagementad type, leader board ads: engagement: metrics than all other ads types on the page. Fixation• had a 2.52 second faster average • Over 12% longer Fixation Duration Duration, Visit Duration and Time to First Fixation. on average. Visit Count were all greater for leader board ads.• had an average of 8.6 fewer • Over 44% longer Total Visit Fixations Before. Duration on average.• were fixated on by 41% more participants. • Over 13% higher Visit Count on average.• had a Visit Count 15% higher. On the iPad, leader board ads were the most effective ad, being seen quicker than other ads on the page, with better engagement metrics. 7
  8. 8. All Ads By TypeSkyscraper AdsSkyscraper Ads: PC vs. iPad format is familiar to users - they know which areas contain advertising as is because the scrolling finger can obscure the skyscraper on the iPad,Skyscraper ads on the PC: opposed to content, however people whereas the leader board ad on the are not so used to the format and iPad is much more visible.The skyscraper ad performed better presentation on the iPad.on the PC than on the iPad in terms of: Another potential factor is that the skyscraper ads on the iPad occupy Key Takeaways• Time to First Fixation (average of 1.87 seconds faster on the a relatively larger percentage of the total screen area which can cause • The embodied nature of tablet PC). them to capture a higher percentage presentations should be a of people’s attention, but not consideration in the effective• Fixations Before (2.79 fewer on necessarily more quickly, or for longer. design of adverts and their the PC). placements on websites. The implications for ad placement,The slower time taken to notice the especially regarding theskyscraper ad on the iPad is, perhaps, Skyscraper Ads vs. Other element of visual interferencebecause on the iPad people scroll withtheir finger over where the skyscraper Ads by the hand, is a variable that is not relevant on the PC.would be, posing an opportunity for Skyscraper ads on the PC: Skyscraper ads on an iPad arethe obscuring of the ad by their finger. more likely to be obstructed byOnce scrolling is complete, and the Once users’ attention is captured, the scrolling finger.finger is moved, the ad is exposed for there is more engagement withviewing. skyscraper ads than leader board ads • Skyscraper ads (on the PC in (and all other ads) on the PC in terms particular) do hold and retainSkyscraper ads also performed better of: user attention but take longeron the PC in terms of engagement, to be noticed, therefore theholding attention for longer: • Average Fixation Duration (over focus should be on creating a 22% longer than leader board strong, eye catching message• 37.5% longer Fixation Duration ads). and design. on the PC. • Average Total Visit Duration• 82% longer Total Visit Duration (27.5% longer than leader board on the PC. ads).Skyscraper ads on the iPad: This, once again, indicates that the ads are still viewed and noticed, butThe only metric where the not as quickly, or by as many peopleskyscraper performed better on as other ad types.the iPad was Percentage Fixated.31% of participants fixated on the Skyscraper ads on the iPad:skyscraper vs. 13% on the PC. Skyscraper ads on the iPad did notThe higher percentage of people perform as well as the leader boardfixating on the skyscraper ads on Skyscraper ads on an iPad are more ads, which was to be expected.the iPad could partly be due to the likely to be obstructed by the scrolling Again we could speculate that thisfact that on the PC, the presentation finger. 8
  9. 9. All Ads By TypeBig Box AdsBig Box Ads: PC vs. iPad Big box ads on the iPad: Key TakeawaysBig box ads on the PC: The percentage of participants who fixated on the big box ad, however, • The PC format for big boxBig box ads attracted attention more was slightly higher on the iPad at ads seems to be better thanquickly on the PC than the iPad, with 26% compared to 23% on the PC. the iPad at both attractingan average of: As with the skyscraper ad, this could attention more quickly, and partly be due to the fact that the holding it.• 9.52 fewer Fixations Before. PC presentation format is familiar to users - they know which areas • Therefore, as with the• 4.65 seconds shorter Time to contain advertising as opposed to skyscraper ads, the focus First Fixation. content. should be on creating a strong, eye catching message andBig box ads also work better at holding Again, another potential factor is that design for big box ads forattention and creating engagement the big box ads on the iPad occupy consideration when viewing onon the PC vs. the iPad. a relatively larger percentage of the the tablet format. total screen area which can cause• Fixation Duration on the PC was them to capture a higher percentage 26% longer. of people’s attention, but not necessarily more quickly, or for longer• Total Visit Duration on the PC was (see images below). almost 15% longer.In this image of the PC screen, the big box ad takes up 5.7% In this image of the iPad screen, the big box ad takes upof the screen space. 9.3% of the screen space. 9
  10. 10. Ads By VerticalWe also measured the performance of ads on different categories ofwebsites (verticals) to determine if a user is more influenced by ads on aspecific website category than others.The results presented so far show the • Technology websites on the PC site loaded slowly but the stockaverage performance of ads across all were better at keeping interest ticker loaded early. It is possibleverticals. Here, the vertical categories rather than capturing it. Ads on that resource-intensive elementsare broken out to indicate specifically Technology sites had the highest that load early can affect thehow the average of all ad types Fixation Duration, tied with Retail loading of subsequent elements.performed in each category. at 0.2 seconds, and the second highest Total Visit Duration • Travel, Lifestyle, News and Auto behind Retail at 0.46 seconds.On the PC sites were better at attracting attention than keeping users • News and Finance sites were interested or engaged.• Ads on Retail sites were the most among the worst performing effective, performing well on verticals on the PC. It’s interesting all metrics, followed closely by to note that nearly all the finance Entertainment. The ads on both sites had very long preload times of these verticals were strong at suggesting something consistent capturing and holding interest in the nature of the construction compared to the other verticals. of those sites. We noticed that one 10
  11. 11. Ads By VerticalOn the iPad verticals - Total Visit Duration and Visit Count were slightly below the engagement. • The results suggest that when average of all verticals. advertising on a site that• Despite the poor performance of perhaps is not as relevant to ads on News and Finance sites • Ads on Entertainment sites were your ad, it might be better to on the PC, these verticals were the not powerful attention attractors focus on creating an ad that best all round performers on the but when people finally found will capture attention faster, iPad. them, they stayed on them for but that might not keep visitors a long time. The ads had the engaged for as long. However,• News sites performed well at highest Total Visit Duration at 2.72 if you are advertising on a site generating attention to the ads seconds, a 63% increase over the that is highly relevant to your with a below average Time to First next highest vertical (Auto), and advert, it might be better to go Fixation. Engagement metrics the highest Visit Count at 7.35, a with an ad format/placement were also good, with a higher than 30% increase over the next best that you know is going to get average Total Visit Duration and performing vertical (News). better engagement. the second highest average Visit Count, behind Entertainment, at • Unlike the performance on the • These results also highlight 5.62. PC, ads on Technology websites the importance of audience had the worst performance on the segmentation and targeting.• Finance sites also performed iPad. Ads did not capture attention Consider the differences in the well at generating attention to the or interest, and did not generate profile and intent of the visitor ads - the average Time to First for each of the website verticals Fixation was below average, and tested in this study (e.g. a News the Fixations Before was the third site vs. an Entertainment site). lowest behind Travel and Lifestyle. Visitor intent can vary largely Finance sites were also good at between each vertical category keeping interest and engagement Key Takeaways which can have a significant with an 11% longer Fixation effect on the success of an Duration than the next highest • The vertical category of the advertising campaign. vertical, and a higher than average website on which ads are Total Visit Duration. placed must be taken into • For more accurate audience consideration when planning segmentation and targeting,• Ads on Travel and Lifestyle sites advertising strategies. Ads will consider data advertising which captured attention the quickest. not necessarily perform as can deliver highly qualified The average Time to First Fixation, effectively on one category of leads to your campaign by and the Fixations Before were over website compared to another. targeting your ideal consumer 50% less than the average of all Additionally, ads can perform profile throughout their web verticals, with 92% of participants differently on the same vertical journey. Data advertising can fixating on the ads. However website depending on whether boost conversion rates and ads on Travel and Lifestyle sites they are viewed on an iPad vs. a deliver a positive return on your did not keep the user engaged desktop PC. marketing investment. or interested as much as other 11
  12. 12. ConclusionThe aim of this eye-tracking study in the effective design of websites Leader Board Adswas to provide some insight into and the placement of ads on them.how people observed web pages The implications for ad placement, • Leader board ads on the PC hadcontaining advertising elements especially regarding the element of a 45% faster average Time toin various formats on both the visual interference by the hand, is a First Fixation, had almost half thetraditional PC vs. the tablet format. variable that does not exist on the PC. Fixations Before, were fixated on byDoes the new on-the-go user impact 41% more participants, and had adisplay ad effectiveness? Visit Count 15% higher, compared Summary of Key Metrics to the next best performing ad type.We also wanted to measure theperformance of ads on different PC vs. iPad • Leader board ads on the iPadwebsite verticals to determine if ads had a 24% faster average Timeon one type perform better than those • Leader board ads were seen over to First Fixation, had an averageon another. twice as fast on average, with half of 15% fewer Fixations Before, the Fixations Before on the PC vs. and were fixated on by 16% moreThe study revealed that across both the iPad. participants, compared to the nextplatforms, leader board ads were best performing ad type.the best performing type of ad in • Leader board ads on the iPadterms of attention capturing metrics, held attention for longer, with an • The Fixation Duration on leadersolidifying the notion that top and average Total Visit Duration 22.5% board ads compared to other adscentre ad placement remains a strong longer compared to the PC. on the iPad was over 12% longer,and privileged place to be. Total Visit Duration was over 44% • Skyscrapers performed better longer, and Visit Count was over• Leader board ads on the PC were on the PC vs. the iPad for almost 13% higher on average. seen quicker than leader board all metrics. Time to First Fixation ads on the iPad, but the leader averaged 22% faster, Fixations Skyscraper Ads board ads on the iPad held Before averaged almost 13% fewer, attention for longer. Fixation Duration averaged 37.5% • Skyscraper ads on the PC had an longer, and Total Visit Duration average Fixation Duration of over• Leader board ads performed best averaged 82% longer. 22% longer vs. leader board ads, in terms of engagement metrics and had an average Total Visit on the iPad, while on the PC, • 31% of participants fixated on the Duration of 27.5% longer. skyscraper ads performed better skyscraper on the iPad vs. 13% on for engagement metrics. the PC. Vertical SummaryGenerally speaking, all ad types on • Big box ads performed better for • Ads will not necessarily performthe PC outperformed ads on the iPad almost all metrics on the PC. Time to as effectively on one category offor the majority of metrics. However, First Fixation averaged 45% fewer, website compared to another.the skyscraper and big box ads on the Fixations Before averaged 35%iPad were better at capturing a higher fewer, Fixation Duration averaged • Ads can perform differently on thetotal percentage of fixations, possibly 26% longer, and Total Visit Duration same vertical website dependingdue to the larger relative percentage averaged almost 15% longer. on whether they are viewed on anof viewing area. iPad vs. a desktop PC. • 26% of participants fixated on theThe embodied nature of tablet big box ad on the iPad vs. 23% onpresentations should be considered the PC 12
  13. 13. Subscribe to Mediative’s newsletterto receive more insights and studies.Download our latest whitepapers> The Impact of Display Advertising At-Retail on Influencing Customer Buying Behaviour Featuring Walmart> The Brand Lift of Paid Search Featuring Walmart> From the Creation to the Evolution of Location Based MarketingDownload our quick wins guide> 50 Quick Wins for Optimal Website Performance> About TobiiEye tracking and gaze interaction by Tobii Technology is revolutionizing computer interaction and research.Gaze interaction helps thousands of people with special needs to communicate and is advancing intomainstream computers. Eye tracking has transformed research and human behavior analysis and is nowindustry standard in many fields.> Tobii Mobile Device Testing Solutions> Usability Eye Tracking Case Studies Digital Marketing Questions? Ask one of Mediative’s Digital Marketing Strategists info@mediative.com Eye Tracking Questions? Contact Tobii sales.us@tobii.com Mediative.com 1.800.277.9997 August 2012 info@Mediative.com

×