[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3405962.3405965acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswimsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Measuring Online Advertising Viewability and Analyzing its Variability Across Different Dimensions

Published: 24 August 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Many of the current online business base completely their revenue models in earnings from online advertisement. A problematic fact is that according to Google more than half of display ads are not being seen. The International Advertising Bureau (IAB) has defined a viewable impression as an impression that at least 50% of its pixels are rendered in the viewport during at least one continuous second. Although there is agreement on this definition for measuring viewable impressions in the industry, there is no systematic methodologies on how it should be implemented or the trustworthiness of these implementations. In fact, the Media Rating Council (MRC) announced that there are inconsistencies across multiple reports attempting to measure this metric. For this reason, we select a subset of implementations to track viewable impressions and we perform a case study by implementing them in a webpage registered in the worldwide ad-network ExoClick in order to see their results on different dimensions. Our results show that the Intersection Observer API is the implementation that detects more viewable impressions and that there are significant viewability differences depending on the banner location on the website. Finally, we also propose an ensemble viewability method that proves to be able to detect a higher number of viewable impressions.

References

[1]
Making Measurement Make Sense 2016. Addendum: Viewability Project Background and Data Analysis. Making Measurement Make Sense. Retrieved April 29, 2019 from http://measurementnow.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Viewability-Project-Background-and-Data-Analysis-Addendum.pdf
[2]
Jan Panero Benway. 1998. Banner blindness: The irony of attention grabbing on the World Wide Web. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 42. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA, 463--467.
[3]
Mikhail Bilenko and Matthew Richardson. 2011. Predictive client-side profiles for personalized advertising. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, United States, 413--421.
[4]
Jean Louis Chandon, Mohamed Saber Chtourou, and David R Fortin. 2003. Effects of configuration and exposure levels on responses to web advertisements. Journal of Advertising Research 43, 2 (2003), 217--229.
[5]
David S Evans. 2008. The economics of the online advertising industry. Review of network economics 7, 3 (2008), 33.
[6]
Anindya Ghose and Vilma Todri. 2015. Towards a digital attribution model: Measuring the impact of display advertising on online consumer behavior. Available at SSRN 2672090 - (2015), 41.
[7]
Yu-Chen Hsieh and Kuo-Hsiang Chen. 2011. How different information types affect viewer's attention on internet advertising. Computers in human Behavior 27, 2 (2011), 935--945.
[8]
Interactive Advertising Bureau 2011. Best Practices for Conducting Online Ad Effectiveness Research. Interactive Advertising Bureau. Retrieved April 29, 2019 from https://www.iab.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/BestPracticesForAdEffectivenessStudies.pdf
[9]
Interactive Advertising Bureau 2015. MRC Viewable Ad Impression Measurement Guidelines. Interactive Advertising Bureau. Retrieved April 29, 2019 from https://www.iab.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/MRC-Viewable-Ad-Impression-Measurement-Guideline.pdf
[10]
Interactive Advertising Bureau 2019. IAB Internet Advertising Revenue Report. Interactive Advertising Bureau. Retrieved April 29, 2019 from https://www.iab.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Full-Year-2018-IAB-Internet-Advertising-Revenue-Report.pdf
[11]
Przemysław Kazienko and Michał Adamski. 2007. AdROSA---Adaptive personalization of web advertising. Information Sciences 177, 11 (2007), 2269--2295.
[12]
Kristen M Liu. 2019. The Attention Crisis of Digital Interfaces and How to Consume Media More Mindfully. scholarship. claremont - (2019), 35.
[13]
Manfred Mareck. 2015. Is online audience measurement coming of age? Research World 2015, 51 (2015), 16--19.
[14]
Mary L McHugh. 2012. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia medica: Biochemia medica 22, 3 (2012), 276--282.
[15]
Meetrics 2019. Viewability Benchmark Report 2019/Q2. Meetrics. Retrieved October 17, 2019 from https://www.meetrics.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/07/Meetrics-Benchmark-Report_Q2_2019.pdf
[16]
Media Rating Council 2014. Viewability Implementation: Background and Checklist of Key Considerations. Media Rating Council. Retrieved April 29, 2019 from http://mediaratingcouncil.org/101614_Viewability%20Implementation%20Considerations_Finalversion.pdf
[17]
Magnus Pagendarm and Heike Schaumburg. 2001. Why are users banner-blind? The impact of navigation style on the perception of web banners. Journal of Digital Information 2, 1 (2001), 6.
[18]
W3C. 2018. Intersection Observer. The World Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved April 30, 2019 from https://www.w3.org/TR/intersection-observer
[19]
Think with Google. 2014. The Importance of Being Seen: Viewability Insights for Digital Marketers and Publishers. Google. Retrieved April 29, 2019 from http://think.storage.googleapis.com/docs/the-importance-of-being-seen_study.pdf

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
WIMS 2020: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web Intelligence, Mining and Semantics
June 2020
279 pages
ISBN:9781450375429
DOI:10.1145/3405962
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 August 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Viewability
  2. data mining
  3. online advertising
  4. web measurements

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

WIMS 2020

Acceptance Rates

WIMS 2020 Paper Acceptance Rate 35 of 63 submissions, 56%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 140 of 278 submissions, 50%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 95
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)8
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 12 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media