Science

Viewability of Directly Placed Display Ads Improves in H1

source: http://www.marketingcharts.com/wp/direct/viewability-of-directly-placed-display-ads-improves-in-h1-36622/?utm_campaign=rssfeed&utm_source=mc&utm_medium=textlink

Advertisement

Longer engagement with viewers was much harder to come by: just 31% of directly placed ads remained in-view for 15 seconds, although that was a significant rise from 22.7% in the previous 6-month period.

Details from Integral’s “Semiannual Review” indicate that viewability continues to be better for vertically oriented (160×600 – Skyscraper) ads, with an average of 67% in-view for at least 1 second.

Suspicious Activity Lowest for Directly-Placed Ads

Directly placed ads not only had the highest engagement, they also were deemed to be lowest risk. While more than 1 in 5 impressions overall were suspicious of being fraudulent activity, only 2% of those placed directly exhibited suspicious activity. By contrast, exchanges were far riskier, with 20% of impressions deemed questionable (though that was down from upwards of 30% in H2 2012).

While the Integral study suggest some improvements in fraudulent activity, a recent report from Solve Media indicated that levels of suspicious activity continue to rise. Solve Media also pointed to rising fraud within the video ad space: in its study, Integral reveals that 3% of impressions on pre-roll ads were suspicious, with suspicious activity more concentrated on in-banner video ads. In fact, 40% of impressions through exchanges on in-banner video a! ds were e! stimated to be suspicious, according to the report.

Other Findings:

  • Food sites boasted the highest level of engagement, with an average in-view time of more than 2.1 seconds. Education sites fared worst on this level, with an average in-view time of about 1 second.
  • Ads on shopping sites were again deemed the least risky in terms of suspicious activity, while family and health sites had the highest rates of suspicious activity.
  • The overall proportion of high-risk inventory (impressions that represent a low degree of brand safety) stood at roughly 6% in Q2, and was relatively consistent across channels.
  • Risk content continues to be mostly the realm of illegal downloads, drugs, offensive language and alcohol. Risky adult and hate speech inventory declined between Q1 and Q2.
  • About 13% of ads collided with another ad from the same campaign during H1, down from more than 20% in H2 2012.
  • Canada received the largest amount of the US’ non-geo-targeted content, at 16.4% in Q1 2013 and 15.8% in Q2. Both were improvements from 34.5% in Q4 2012.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, September 15th, 2013 news No Comments

7 Retail Tricks Designed To Make You Spend More

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/7-ways-stores-make-you-spend-more-2012-11

black friday teens shoppingThis post originally appeared on Bankrate.com.

Today’s retailers have uncovered the science behind shopping. Your favorite mall stores actually hire such retail researchers as Paco Underhill, author of Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping.

Underhill has tracked hundreds of thousands of shoppers to study how they shop. “There is nothing random about how a store is arranged and designed. It is carefully calculated to appeal to you in every possible way,” he says.

“The stores have a plan, so you should, too,” says Dave Ramsey, best-selling author of The Total Money Makeover and host of a syndicated financial talk show on the radio.

1. Display ‘magic’

We can learn a lesson in Underhill’s book from a story told by a retailer about a tempting display of T-shirts.

We buy them in Sri Lanka for $3 each. Then we bring them over here and sew in washing instructions, which are in French and English. Notice we don’t say the shirts are made in France. But you can infer that if you like. Then … we fold them just right on a tasteful tabletop display, and on the wall behind it we hang a huge, gorgeous photograph of a beautiful woman in an exo! tic loca le wearing the shirt.”

Resist the urge: “Write a monthly mall shopping budget and stash cash in an envelope specifically for that purpose. When the envelope is empty, stop spending,” says Ramsey. “A written budget makes you think twice when you are tempted by impulse buys.”




2. BOGO and 2-fer deals

BOGOs (buy one, get one), two-fers (two for the price of one) and bundled-item promotions successfully tempt you into shopping more often and spending more to raise the store’s number of sales as well as ticket averages, or amount of each sale. T

hey’re not always a good deal for you if you’re not familiar with the store merchandise and its regular prices. “You’re not saving if you are actually spending more than you planned,” says Underhill.

Resist the urge: “Know your favorite retailers, brands, regular prices, promotions and discounts, and always check the clearance area first to find a similar item on sale to avoid buying two of anything and spending more,” says family financial expert Ellie Kay, author of The 60-Minute Money Workout. “Ask yourself, ‘Do I really need two sweaters or two of the same jeans?’”




3. The right aisle trick

“Retail shopping studies have found that most people turn right when they enter a store. That’s because the majority of the population is right-handed and right-oriented,” says Underhill.

Knowing this, stores highlight tempting new items and trends to the right of the entrance. You’ll find that the music is louder and the displays are brighter to attract you where you will look and turn first. This is also where the most expensive items in the store are generally displayed.

R esist the urge: “Shop with blinders on,” says Kay. “Stick to your list with the cash in your hand. Avoid credit card debt at all costs, and head straight to what you came for.”




See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow Your Money on Twitter and Facebook.

mf 7 Retail Tricks Designed To Make You Spend More

 |  sourceUniversity of Michigan (PDF)  | Email this | Comments

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, May 22nd, 2012 news No Comments

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5885321/how-iphone-apps-steal-your-contact-data-and-why-you-cant-stop-it

How iPhone Apps Steal Your Contact Data and Why You Can't Stop ItThe internet is starting to realize something unsettling: our iPhones send information about the people we know to private servers, often without our permission. Some offending apps are fixing themselves. Some aren’t. But the underlying problem is much bigger.

Apple allows any app to access your address book at any time—it’s built into the iPhone’s core software. The idea is to make using these apps more seamless and magical, in that you won’t have dialog boxes popping up in your face all the time, the way Apple zealously guards your location permissions at an OS level—because fewer clicks mean a more graceful experience, right? Maybe, but the consequence is privacy shivved and consent nullified. Your phone makes decisions about what’s okay to share with a company, whose motivation is, ultimately, making money, without consulting you first.

Once you peel back that pretty skin of your phone and observe the software at work—we used a proxy application called Charles—watching the data that jumps between your phone and a remote server is plain. A little too plain. What can we see?

As Paul Haddad, the developer behind the popular Twitter client TapBot pointed out to me, some of App Store’s shiniest celebrities are among those that beam away your contact list in order to make hooking up with other friends who use the app smoother. From Haddad’s own findings:

Foursquare (Email, Phone Numbers no warning)
Path (Pretty much everything after warning)
Instagram (Email, Phone Numbers, First, Last warning)
Facebook (Email, Phone Numbers, First, Last warning)
Twitter for iOS (Email, Phone Numbers, warning)
Voxer (Email, First, Last, Phone numbers, warning)

Foursquare and Instagram have both recently updated to provide a much clearer warning of what you’re about to share. Which every single app should follow, providing clear warnings before they touch your contacts. But plenty of apps aren’t so generous. “A lot of other popular social networking apps send some data,” says Haddad, “mostly names, emails, phone numbers.” Instapaper, for example, transmits your address book’s email listings when you ask it to “search contacts” to connect with other friends using the app. The app never makes it clear that my data (shown up top) is leaving the phone—and once it’s out of your hands and in Instagram’s, all you can do is trust that it’ll be handled responsibly. You know, like not be stored permanently without your knowledge.

Trust is all we’ve got, and that’s not good. “Once the data is out of your device there’s no way to tell what happens to it,” explains Haddad. Companies might do the decent thing and delete your data immediately. Like Foursquare, which says it doesn’t store your data at all after matching your friends, and never has. Twitter keeps your address book data for 18 months “to make it easy for you and your contacts to discover each other on Twitter after you’ve signed up,” but can delete the data at any time with a link at the bottom of this page. Or a company might do the Path thing, storing that information indefinitely until they’re publicly shamed into doing otherwise. Or worse.

We need a solution, and goodwill on the part of app devs is going to cut it. All the ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THIS? dialog boxes in the world won’t absolve Apple’s decision to hand out our address books on a pearly platter. iOS is the biggest threat to iOS—and nothing short of a major revision to the way Apple allows apps to run through your contacts should be acceptable. But is that even enough? Maybe not.

Jay Freeman, developer behind the massively popular jailbroken-iPhone program Cydia, doesn’t think Apple’s hand is enough to definitively state who gets your address book, and when:

“Neither Apple nor the application developer is in a good position to decide that ahead of time, and due to this neither Apple’s model of ‘any app can access the address book, no app can access your recent calls’, nor Google’s method of ‘developer claims they need X, take it or leave it’ is sufficient.”

Freeman’s solution? Cydia’s “one-off modifications to the underlying operating system” that we deal in, nicely transfers this control back to the user.” In other words, we can’t trust Apple or the people that make apps—so let’s just trust ourselves to control how iOS works.

Freeman left us with one, final, disquieting note. Shrewd devs and others with the knowhow have been able to dig through app traffic to find out of they’re shoveling around your address book. But there’s no easy way to do this—and if a dev really wants to sneak your data through the door, there’s technically nothing we can do to stop him: “There are tons of complex tricks that can be used to smuggle both information in network traffic and computation itself.” It’s a problem fundamental to computer science—once the data’s in a dev’s hands, he can conjure it away, too small to be noticed by App Store oversight in churning sea of other apps.

Unless Apple keeps him from getting that information in the first place by letting us all make informed decisions with our phone and the private life poured into it. Your move, iOS.

Photo: Motorolka/Shutterstock

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 15th, 2012 Uncategorized No Comments

We Love Facebook Because It Tricks Us Into Thinking We’re Doing Something Important [Science]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5883160/study-we-love-facebook-because-it-tricks-us-into-thinking-were-doing-something-important

Study: We Love Facebook Because It Tricks Us Into Thinking We're Doing Something ImportantWhen you’re perusing your Facebook account, your brain might be fooling you into thinking you’re doing something incredibly creative and productive that will improve your life. If only that were true!

Scientists in Milan and at M.I.T. examined the various physiological states of 30 people using Facebook compared to when they were relaxing looking at natural panoramas or taking a math test. They measured physical and psychological responses including breathing rate, brain activation, and pupil dilation, and found that only while looking at Facebook (not while looking at nature pics or doing math), the study subjects were transported into a “core flow state,” which is that thing that people often call, simply, flow. It’s what you might experience when you’re practicing an instrument, or if you’re writing and feeling like everything is just, well, flowing. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes it wonderfully in this TED talk.

We already know Facebook is harder to resist than cigarettes and alcohol. So it’s not all that surprising that Facebook is enjoyable. Cocaine is enjoyable! But like an addictive drug, the results suggest the social network might have a sinister effect: Facebook makes you think you’re being productive when really you’re probably just telling everyone how delicious your lunch was and discovering that your best friend’s cousin’s baby just ate squash.

That’s why perhaps it’s important to keep in mind what Harvard’s Daniel Gulati said: over time, Facebook is making us miserable. Everyone is a shiny happy person on Facebook. Very few people share their insecurities, misgivings, evenings spent alone in the fetal position. And if you experience any of that you might feel very much alone if your visiting Facebook often. In which case maybe consider playing your favorite instrument, hanging out with your kids, working on that novel, or doing something else that leads to actual flow. [Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking]

Image: Shutterstock/PressureUA

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012 Uncategorized No Comments

I Read 21 Books About The Financial Crisis And They Explained Nothing

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/andrew-lo-21-books-financial-crisis-2012-2


andrew lo

Ever thought you would have to read 21 books to get to the bottom of what caused the financial crisis?

Andrew Lo, an economist at MIT, has some bad news: it’s going to take at least 22.

Lo, a leading expert on hedge funds and financial engineering, has written a paper (h/t NPR) for the Journal of Economic Literature describing his experience reading 21 books on the crisis — nine by journalists, 11 by academics and one by a former Treasury Secretary.

His conclusion: In a field that prides itself on its scientific rigor (however dismal), the books reveal that alarmingly few facts about the crisis have been agreed upon. Was there too little or too much regulation? How much of a factor were low interest rates? No one’s been able to say conclusively.

“After each book, I felt like I knew less,” Lo told NPR’s Planet Money.

Economics, he says, has fallen well short of that standard when it comes to understanding the crisis:

“Many of us like to think of financial economics as a science, but complex events like the financial crisis suggest that this conceit may be more wishful thinking than reality.”

Read Andrew Lo’s Reading About the Financial Crisis: A 21-Book Review >

Please follow Clusterstock on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

See Also:



Dr. Augustine Fou is Digital Consigliere to marketing executives, advising them on digital strategy and Unified Marketing(tm). Dr Fou has over 17 years of in-the-trenches, hands-on experience, which enables him to provide objective, in-depth assessments of their current marketing programs and recommendations for improving business impact and ROI using digital insights.

Augustine Fou portrait
http://twitter.com/acfou
Send Tips: tips@go-digital.net
Digital Strategy Consulting
Dr. Augustine Fou LinkedIn Bio
Digital Marketing Slideshares
The Grand Unified Theory of Marketing