IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v33y2014i1p27-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Morphing Banner Advertising

Author

Listed:
  • Glen L. Urban

    (MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

  • Guilherme (Gui) Liberali

    (Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands; and MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

  • Erin MacDonald

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011)

  • Robert Bordley

    (Booz Allen Hamilton, Troy, Michigan 48084)

  • John R. Hauser

    (MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

Abstract

Researchers and practitioners devote substantial effort to targeting banner advertisements to consumers, but they focus less effort on how to communicate with consumers once targeted. Morphing enables a website to learn, automatically and near optimally, which banner advertisements to serve to consumers to maximize click-through rates, brand consideration, and purchase likelihood. Banners are matched to consumers based on posterior probabilities of latent segment membership, which are identified from consumers' clickstreams.This paper describes the first large-sample random-assignment field test of banner morphing---more than 100,000 consumers viewed more than 450,000 banners on CNET.com. On relevant Web pages, CNET's click-through rates almost doubled relative to control banners. We supplement the CNET field test with an experiment on an automotive information-and-recommendation website. The automotive experiment replaces automated learning with a longitudinal design that implements morph-to-segment matching. Banners matched to cognitive styles, as well as the stage of the consumer's buying process and body-type preference, significantly increase click-through rates, brand consideration, and purchase likelihood relative to a control. The CNET field test and automotive experiment demonstrate that matching banners to cognitive-style segments is feasible and provides significant benefits above and beyond traditional targeting. Improved banner effectiveness has strategic implications for allocations of budgets among media.

Suggested Citation

  • Glen L. Urban & Guilherme (Gui) Liberali & Erin MacDonald & Robert Bordley & John R. Hauser, 2014. "Morphing Banner Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 27-46, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:33:y:2014:i:1:p:27-46
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2013.0803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2013.0803
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.2013.0803?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ganesh Iyer & David Soberman & J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2005. "The Targeting of Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 461-476, May.
    2. Petty, Richard E & Cacioppo, John T & Schumann, David, 1983. "Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(2), pages 135-146, September.
    3. Thomas P. Novak & Donna L. Hoffman, 2009. "The Fit of Thinking Style and Situation: New Measures of Situation-Specific Experiential and Rational Cognition," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(1), pages 56-72, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Babur De los Santos & Sergei Koulayev, 2017. "Optimizing Click-Through in Online Rankings with Endogenous Search Refinement," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 542-564, July.
    2. Kurt P. Munz & Minah H. Jung & Adam L. Alter, 2020. "Name Similarity Encourages Generosity: A Field Experiment in Email Personalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(6), pages 1071-1091, November.
    3. Kanishka Misra & Eric M. Schwartz & Jacob Abernethy, 2019. "Dynamic Online Pricing with Incomplete Information Using Multiarmed Bandit Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 226-252, March.
    4. Eric M. Schwartz & Eric T. Bradlow & Peter S. Fader, 2017. "Customer Acquisition via Display Advertising Using Multi-Armed Bandit Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 500-522, July.
    5. Jan Krämer & Daniel Schnurr & Michael Wohlfarth, 2019. "Winners, Losers, and Facebook: The Role of Social Logins in the Online Advertising Ecosystem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1678-1699, April.
    6. Song Lin & Juanjuan Zhang & John R. Hauser, 2015. "Learning from Experience, Simply," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Kristen Giombi & Catherine Viator & Juliana Hoover & Janice Tzeng & Helen W Sullivan & Amie C O’Donoghue & Brian G Southwell & Leila C Kahwati, 2022. "The impact of interactive advertising on consumer engagement, recall, and understanding: A scoping systematic review for informing regulatory science," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, February.
    8. De Bruyn, Arnaud & Viswanathan, Vijay & Beh, Yean Shan & Brock, Jürgen Kai-Uwe & von Wangenheim, Florian, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence and Marketing: Pitfalls and Opportunities," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 91-105.
    9. Pilli, Luis & Swait, Joffre & Mazzon, José Afonso, 2022. "Jeopardizing brand profitability by misattributing process heterogeneity to preference heterogeneity," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. John R. Hauser & Guilherme (Gui) Liberali & Glen L. Urban, 2014. "Website Morphing 2.0: Switching Costs, Partial Exposure, Random Exit, and When to Morph," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1594-1616, June.
    11. Tuck Siong Chung & Michel Wedel & Roland T. Rust, 2016. "Adaptive personalization using social networks," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 66-87, January.
    12. Christian Hildebrand & Anouk Bergner, 2021. "Conversational robo advisors as surrogates of trust: onboarding experience, firm perception, and consumer financial decision making," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 659-676, July.
    13. Michael Trusov & Liye Ma & Zainab Jamal, 2016. "Crumbs of the Cookie: User Profiling in Customer-Base Analysis and Behavioral Targeting," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 405-426, May.
    14. Alexander Bleier & Maik Eisenbeiss, 2015. "Personalized Online Advertising Effectiveness: The Interplay of What, When, and Where," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 669-688, September.
    15. Liberali, G., 2018. "Learning with a purpose: the balancing acts of machine learning and individuals in the digital society," ERIM Inaugural Address Series Research in Management EIA-2018-074-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam..

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Breuer, Ralph & Brettel, Malte, 2012. "Short- and Long-term Effects of Online Advertising: Differences between New and Existing Customers," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 155-166.
    2. Cristel Joy G. Cayaban & Yogi Tri Prasetyo & Satria Fadil Persada & Rianina D. Borres & Ma. Janice J. Gumasing & Reny Nadlifatin, 2023. "The Influence of Social Media and Sustainability Advocacy on the Purchase Intention of Filipino Consumers in Fast Fashion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Nitin Mehta & Xinlei (Jack) Chen & Om Narasimhan, 2008. "Informing, Transforming, and Persuading: Disentangling the Multiple Effects of Advertising on Brand Choice Decisions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 334-355, 05-06.
    4. Del Barrio-García, Salvador & Kamakura, Wagner A. & Luque-Martínez, Teodoro, 2019. "A Longitudinal Cross-product Analysis of Media-budget Allocations: How Economic and Technological Disruptions Affected Media Choices Across Industries," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 1-15.
    5. Kareklas, Ioannis & Muehling, Darrel D. & King, Skyler, 2019. "The effect of color and self-view priming in persuasive communications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 33-49.
    6. Stallen, Mirre & Smidts, Ale & Rijpkema, Mark & Smit, Gitty & Klucharev, Vasily & Fernández, Guillén, 2010. "Celebrities and shoes on the female brain: The neural correlates of product evaluation in the context of fame," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 802-811, October.
    7. Rademaker, Claudia A., 2011. "Hinders for Eco-friendly Media Selection," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2011:7, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 16 Nov 2011.
    8. O'Cass, A., 2000. "An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 545-576, October.
    9. Funk, Daniel C. & Haugtvedt, Curtis P. & Howard, Dennis R., 2000. "Contemporary Attitude Theory in Sport: Theoretical Considerations and Implications," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 125-144, November.
    10. Wei He & Chenyuan Jin, 2024. "A study on the influence of the characteristics of key opinion leaders on consumers’ purchase intention in live streaming commerce: based on dual-systems theory," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1235-1265, June.
    11. Heribert Gierl & Tina Großmann, 2008. "Imply-Benefit-Attribute im Bereich häufig gekaufter Konsumgüter," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 355-384, June.
    12. Pornpitakpan, Chanthika, 2012. "A critical review of classical conditioning effects on consumer behavior," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 282-296.
    13. Alcántara-Pilar, Juan Miguel & Del Barrio-García, Salvador & Rodríguez-López, Mª Eugenia, 2018. "Does language matter? A cross-national comparison of the moderating effect of language on website information-processing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 66-78.
    14. Muhammad Rifki Shihab & Audry Pragita Putri, 2019. "Negative online reviews of popular products: understanding the effects of review proportion and quality on consumers’ attitude and intention to buy," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 159-187, March.
    15. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.
    16. Li, Hui & Xu, Yunjie & Huang, Lihua, 2021. "When less is more? The contingent effect of product supply limitation in the release of new electronic products," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    17. Alexandre de Corniere, 2013. "Search Advertising," Economics Series Working Papers 649, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    18. Ana Suárez-Vázquez & José Quevedo, 2015. "Analyzing superstars’ power using support vector machines," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1521-1542, December.
    19. Christophe Bezes, 2011. "Types de risques perçus et réducteurs de risques dans le commerce électronique : le cas du site Fnac.com," Post-Print hal-02086726, HAL.
    20. Dolbec, Pierre-Yann & Chebat, Jean-Charles, 2013. "The Impact of a Flagship vs. a Brand Store on Brand Attitude, Brand Attachment and Brand Equity," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(4), pages 460-466.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:33:y:2014:i:1:p:27-46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.