In the mobile ad ecosystem, there are 3 parties to satisfy: advertisers, publishers, and users. Advertisers want effective advertising. Publishers want to attract and retain users. And users want a good experience. So the question remains, how do we find a balance?
The industry has found a number of quantifiable methods to measure the effectiveness of advertising, whether it be through surveys, behaviors, sales, data, etc. Outside of effectiveness, what else may we want to measure when it comes to an ad campaign? We mentioned the importance of a good digital experience, but what about brands that aren't delivering that? How would one measure the level of annoyance and intrusion of mobile ads?
The easy answer would be to survey users. However, this method uses rational measures - meaning, the respondent has time to think about their answer. Also, a survey is not delivered in a timely manner (generally) to the user, so you're measuring the impact long after the ad was served. Annoyance and intrusion are emotional impacts, which must be tracked in the moment of stimuli, and most importantly before a user has a chance to think about their response.
With neuroscience research, conducted in partnership with MediaScience, this industry-leading study combines both rational and emotional measures to help optimize the effectiveness and user experience of different ad formats. This study was conducted by analyzing consumers’ rational and emotional responses to four mobile ad formats within premium editorial environments. It tracked neurological reactions to various types of mobile ads via participants’ eye movements, biometric responses, and attitudinal changes.
> The branding impact of interstitial ads on mobile may not be worth the negative emotional costs that come with it.
> In-Stream ad units have shown to provide users the opportunity to focus on mobile ads at their own discretion, thus providing a less intrusive experience.
> Smaller ad units with movement provide brands with continued visual attention without the negative emotional costs.