The purpose of our research is to investigate the influence of brand integration in sports broadcasts across different consumption experiences. Specifically, we utilize dual coding theory to evaluate the importance of visual and verbal broadcast cues for generating brand awareness under conditions of second screen use. To test these hypotheses, we constructed a six-minute segment consisting of clips from two 2012 college football games as the stimuli for the study, with all groups being exposed to the same stimuli. In order to assess the potential effect of second screen activity under various viewing conditions, the study utilized a 3 (audiovisual stimuli, audio-only stimuli and visual-only stimuli) x 2 (second screen, control) between-subjects experimental design with six total groups.

1. Assessing the Impact of Second Screen
Activity During Television Broadcasts on
Sponsor Brand Awareness
Jonathan A. Jensen, Patrick Walsh, PhD,
Joe Cobbs, PhD & Brian A. Turner, PhD

2. INTRODUCTION
Explosion in Demand for Live Sports Broadcasts
• "Live sports are the most powerful programming in the universe right now.”
– ESPN President John Skipper (Guthrie, 2013)
• “It’s not DVR-able. People want to tune in.”
– Jim Vurpillat, Global Marketing Director for Cadillac (McCarthy, 2013)

3. INTRODUCTION
Changes in Consumption of TV Broadcasts
• Advances in technology changing consumer engagement with sports
broadcasts
• Watching live sports on PC’s, tablets and mobile devices
• Watching in new environments (i.e., at work, on the go)
• Use of “second screens” during broadcast

4. Increased use of “second screens”
INTRODUCTION
• 57% of smartphone/tablet owners check email while watching TV
(Nielsen, 2012)
• 34% use mobile computing devices to check sports scores (Nielsen,
2012)
• Growth in Twitter conversation about live television
• 25.3 million tweets during Super Bowl XLVIII
• 13.8 million tweets during the GRAMMYs (Nielsen, 2014)

5. Problem/Purpose
INTRODUCTION
• How do changes in fan consumption of sports broadcasts impact the
brands paying to be integrated into these broadcasts?
• Specifically, does the use of “second screens” is impact brand
awareness for sponsors?

6. LITERATURE REVIEW
Began with Brand Integration in TV and Movies
• First investigations of brand integration started with product placement
in TV and movies (e.g., Gupta and Lord, 1998; Law and Braun, 2000)
• Joiner, and Cameron (2001) found evidence that brand integration was
more effective than commercials; integrated approach most successful
• More recent studies focused on the efficacy of virtual advertising, with
Bennett et al. (2006) finding commercials to be more entertaining,
informative, irritating, and less credible than virtual ads; Breuer and
Rumpf (2012) found that recall depended largely on attention rates

7. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 1. Paivio’s (2010) depiction of the multimodal dual coding model

8. Impact of “second screen” use
HYPOTHESES
• Based on DCT, use of a “second screen” during consumption should
adversely impact brand awareness under video-only or audio-only
conditions, but not under audiovisual conditions
• H1: Utilization of a second screen during consumption should reduce brand
recognition among those exposed to audio-only or visual-only stimuli, but
not among those exposed to audiovisual stimuli
• H2: Utilization of a second screen during consumption should reduce brand
recall among those exposed to audio-only or visual-only stimuli, but not
among those exposed to audiovisual stimuli

9. 3 x 2 Between-Subjects Design
METHOD
• 6 total groups exposed to audiovisual, visual-only and audio-only stimuli
• 3 groups asked to use “second screens” during exposure to stimuli
• DV: Brand recognition and recall
• IV: Group membership
• Disguised purpose of the study
• Sample: 18-24 year-old students, familiar with technology and ability to
multitask
• Total of 189 participants, mean age of 20.54 years (SD = 1.62)

10. METHOD: STIMULI

11. RESULTS
No. of Brands
2.63
Brand Recognition
2.14
2.05
2.45
1.58 1.61
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Audiovisual Audio Only Visual Only
Control
Second Screen

12. RESULTS
No. of Brands
2.43
Brand Recall
1.83
1.62 1.64
1.35 1.35
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Audiovisual Audio Only Visual Only
Control
Second Screen

13. IMPLICATIONS
Brand marketers may not be getting expected ROI
• For audiovisual group with second screens, brands available for retrieval with
recognition (Higgins & Bargh, 1987)
• However, same group unable to recall brands from memory, implying cognitively
effortful use of second screen interfered with elaborative rehearsal, memory
processes that enable the transfer of information from working memory to
storage in longer-term memory (Benjamin & Bjork, 2000; Rammsayer & Ulrich,
2011)
• Given consumption trends, marketers expecting lift in brand awareness may not
be receiving adequate return on their investment

14. First in Series of Experiments
FUTURE RESEARCH
• Comparison of effectiveness of brand integration and commercials (e.g.,
Levin, Joiner, & Cameron, 2001; Olson & Thjømøe, 2009; Breuer & Rumpf,
2012)
• Utilization of subliminal priming (e.g., Hassin, Ferguson, Shidlovski, &
Gross, 2007)
• Introduction of cognitive load (e.g., McFerran, Dahl, Fitzsimons, & Morales,
2010)
• Use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI; e.g., Hoge, 2012) or
facial electromyography (EMG; e.g., Cacioppo, Petty, Losch, & Kim, 1986)

15. Questions?
Jonathan A. Jensen (jensen.205@osu.edu)
Patrick Walsh (ptwalsh@indiana.edu)
Joe Cobbs (cobbsj1@nku.edu)
Brian A. Turner (turner.409@osu.edu)