Radio advertising that delivers
measurable results and profitable new customers

« Previous | Main | Next »

February 11, 2009

Do Radio Advertisements Make Radio More Pleasurable for Listeners?

A new study by researchers at the NYU Stern School of Business shows definitively that this is true on TV. So why not for radio?

If you work in advertising you absolutely must read this study. It is a classic demonstration of how people often prefer things that don't make them happier. In other words, you can't always trust what people (including yourself) tell you - you have to look at their actual behavior. In a world of surveys and focus groups, direct response radio advertisers know that a direct on-air test of a trackable ad will always give you the best indication of how the ad will perform.

According to the research paper's abstract:

"Consumers prefer to watch television programs without commercials. Yet, in spite of most consumers' extensive experience with watching television, we propose that commercial interruptions can actually improve the television viewing experience. Although consumers do not foresee it, their enjoyment diminishes over time. Commercial interruptions can disrupt this adaptation process and restore the intensity of consumers' enjoyment. Six studies demonstrate that, although people preferred to avoid commercial interruptions, these interruptions actually made programs more enjoyable (study 1), regardless of the quality of the commercial (study 2), even when controlling for the mere presence of the ads (study 3), and regardless of the nature of the interruption (study 4). However, this effect was eliminated for people who are less likely to adapt (study 5), and for programs that do not lead to adaptation (study 6), confirming the disruption of adaptation account and identifying crucial boundaries of the effect."

Here's a great commentary on the research by James Hibberd. In part, he says:

"The seemingly counterintuitive findings will be familiar to those who have read the book "Stumbling on Happiness," which explained how the pleasure of any positive experience declines due to repetition and time. Watching TV (or eating a fine meal, listening to a favorite song, etc.) tends to be more enjoyable at the outset. The longer you do something, the less satisfaction it provides."

Hibberd writes:
"So if the findings are accurate, why don't people recognize that ads make TV more fun?

The study authors have a few ideas, but no firm answers. One is that people don't study themselves -- you don't watch one show with ads, then the same show without ads, and compare the experience. Another aspect is that the ads act a point of contrast -- compared to the commercials, the programs can seem more entertaining. And finally, the effect isn't universal -- sometimes ads do not make TV more enjoyable (for instance, if the tone of the ad completely clashes with the tone of the show), and those instances can skew viewers' impressions of ads in general.

Based on the research, the authors had a suggestion for broadcast networks that stream their content online: Stop putting ads at the beginning of the clip.

"Our results indicate that moving the commercial to the middle of the clip -- while not intuitively appealing to viewers -- would actually increase their enjoyment of the experience."

James' post generated so many reader comments - and great questions - that one of the study authors provided a response to many of them here.

Among the exchanges:

Q: Some readers said, "This is simply because viewers appreciate the show compared to the lousy commercials, not because the commercials make the show itself seem better."

Galak: That's something we tested for and ruled out. That's the contrast effect, that in comparison to a terrible commercial, the show looks better. As you described in article, the commercial takes you away from the experience and allows you to reset your level of enjoyment.

Q: "Correlation does not prove causation" is something also chanted in the feedback.

Galak: That's a misinterpretation of how we did the research. We randomly assigned participants to control [the variables]. We showed causation. That's the difference between an experiment and a survey.

And now the big question: How does this apply to radio advertising?

Our view is that some of these findings can certainly be applied to radio advertising to improve results. We're already working on it!

Posted by Jeff Small & Brett Astor at 01:39 PM | Permalink