IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v34y2015i2p281-296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Reach and Persuasiveness of Viral Video Ads

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine E. Tucker

    (MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02142; and National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02138)

Abstract

Many video ads are designed to go viral so that the total number of views they receive depends on customers sharing the ads with their friends. This paper explores the relationship between the number of views and how persuasive the ad is at convincing consumers to purchase or to adopt a favorable attitude towards the product. The analysis combines data on the total views of 400 video ads, and crowd-sourced measurement of advertising persuasiveness among 24,000 survey responses. Persuasiveness is measured by randomly exposing half of these consumers to a video ad and half to a similar placebo video ad, and then surveying their attitudes towards the focal product. Relative ad persuasiveness is on average 10% lower for every one million views that the video ad achieves. The exceptions to this pattern were ads that generated views and large numbers of comments, and video ads that attracted comments that mentioned the product by name. Evidence suggests that such ads remained effective because they attracted views due to humor rather than because they were outrageous.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine E. Tucker, 2015. "The Reach and Persuasiveness of Viral Video Ads," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 281-296, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:34:y:2015:i:2:p:281-296
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2014.0874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2014.0874
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.2014.0874?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. Randall Lewis & David Reiley, 2014. "Online ads and offline sales: measuring the effect of retail advertising via a controlled experiment on Yahoo!," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 235-266, September.
    2. Anindya Ghose & Sang Pil Han, 2011. "An Empirical Analysis of User Content Generation and Usage Behavior on the Mobile Internet," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1671-1691, September.
    3. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. "An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    4. Sinan Aral & Dylan Walker, 2011. "Creating Social Contagion Through Viral Product Design: A Randomized Trial of Peer Influence in Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1623-1639, February.
    5. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    6. Wendy W. Moe & David A. Schweidel, 2012. "Online Product Opinions: Incidence, Evaluation, and Evolution," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 372-386, May.
    7. Dellarocas, Chrysanthos, 2003. "The Digitization of Word-of-mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Working papers 4296-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    8. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2003. "The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1407-1424, October.
    9. Amalia R. Miller & Catherine Tucker, 2013. "Active Social Media Management: The Case of Health Care," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 52-70, March.
    10. Yuxin Chen & Yogesh V. Joshi & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2009. "A Theory of Combative Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 1-19, 01-02.
    11. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    12. Anindya Ghose & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis & Beibei Li, 2012. "Designing Ranking Systems for Hotels on Travel Search Engines by Mining User-Generated and Crowdsourced Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 493-520, May.
    13. Morwitz, Vicki G. & Steckel, Joel H. & Gupta, Alok, 2007. "When do purchase intentions predict sales?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 347-364.
    14. Goldfarb, Avi & Prince, Jeff, 2008. "Internet adoption and usage patterns are different: Implications for the digital divide," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 2-15, March.
    15. Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2012. "Impact of social network structure on content propagation: A study using YouTube data," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 111-150, March.
    16. Catherine Tucker, 2008. "Identifying Formal and Informal Influence in Technology Adoption with Network Externalities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(12), pages 2024-2038, December.
    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. Schwenzow, Jasper & Hartmann, Jochen & Schikowsky, Amos & Heitmann, Mark, 2021. "Understanding videos at scale: How to extract insights for business research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 367-379.
    2. Chawla, Yash & Chodak, Grzegorz, 2021. "Social media marketing for businesses: Organic promotions of web-links on Facebook," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 49-65.
    3. Matthew McGranaghan & Jura Liaukonyte & Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2022. "How Viewer Tuning, Presence, and Attention Respond to Ad Content and Predict Brand Search Lift," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 873-895, September.
    4. Giuliana Isabella & Andressa Freitas de Melo & Marcela Carvalho Gonzalez, 2023. "Going viral on advertising YouTube video: Detecting the influences," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 27(Vol. 27 N), pages 220300-2203.
    5. Yi-Lin Tsai & Elisabeth Honka, 2021. "Informational and Noninformational Advertising Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 1030-1058, November.
    6. Hongshuang (Alice) Li, 2022. "Converting free users to paid subscribers in the SaaS context: The impact of marketing touchpoints, message content, and usage," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(5), pages 2185-2203, May.
    7. Jeffrey K Lee & Enric Junqué de Fortuny, 2022. "Influencer-Generated Reference Groups [Nonprofits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(1), pages 25-45.
    8. Chen Luo & Zizhong Zhang & Jing Jin, 2023. "Recommending Breast Cancer Screening to My Mum: Examining the Interplay of Threat, Efficacy, and Virality on Recommendation Intention in the Chinese Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-15, January.

    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. Khim-Yong Goh & Cheng-Suang Heng & Zhijie Lin, 2013. "Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior: Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer-Generated Content," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 88-107, March.
    2. Catherine Tucker, 2011. "Virality, Network Effects and Advertising Effectiveness," Working Papers 11-06, NET Institute.
    3. Dominik Gutt & Jürgen Neumann & Steffen Zimmermann & Dennis Kundisch & Jianqing Chen, 2018. "Design of Review Systems - A Strategic Instrument to shape Online Review Behavior and Economic Outcomes," Working Papers Dissertations 42, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    4. Ana Babić Rosario & Kristine Valck & Francesca Sotgiu, 2020. "Conceptualizing the electronic word-of-mouth process: What we know and need to know about eWOM creation, exposure, and evaluation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 422-448, May.
    5. Marios Kokkodis & Theodoros Lappas, 2020. "Your Hometown Matters: Popularity-Difference Bias in Online Reputation Platforms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 412-430, June.
    6. Christoph Schneider & Markus Weinmann & Peter N.C. Mohr & Jan vom Brocke, 2021. "When the Stars Shine Too Bright: The Influence of Multidimensional Ratings on Online Consumer Ratings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3871-3898, June.
    7. Rajiv Garg & Rahul Telang, 2018. "To Be or Not to Be Linked: Online Social Networks and Job Search by Unemployed Workforce," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3926-3941, August.
    8. Saeed Tajdini, 2023. "The effects of internet search intensity for products on companies’ stock returns: a competitive intelligence perspective," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(3), pages 352-365, September.
    9. Yipu Deng & Jinyang Zheng & Warut Khern-am-nuai & Karthik Kannan, 2022. "More than the Quantity: The Value of Editorial Reviews for a User-Generated Content Platform," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6865-6888, September.
    10. Tobias Reckmann, 2017. "Verwendung von Word of Mouth-Daten zur Identifikation von Asymmetrie im Wettbewerb: Eine textbasierte Analyse am Beispiel deutscher Automobilmarken [Identification of asymmetric competition by usin," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 173-201, June.
    11. Jorge Mejia & Shawn Mankad & Anandasivam Gopal, 2019. "A for Effort? Using the Crowd to Identify Moral Hazard in New York City Restaurant Hygiene Inspections," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1363-1386, December.
    12. Marios Kokkodis, 2021. "Dynamic, Multidimensional, and Skillset-Specific Reputation Systems for Online Work," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 688-712, September.
    13. Anja Lambrecht & Catherine Tucker & Caroline Wiertz, 2018. "Advertising to Early Trend Propagators: Evidence from Twitter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 177-199, March.
    14. Jinyang Zheng & Youwei Wang & Yong Tan, 2023. "Platform Refund Insurance or Being Cast Out: Quantifying the Signaling Effect of Refund Options in the Online Service Marketplace," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 910-934, September.
    15. Hui, Xiang & Klein, Tobias & Stahl, Konrad, 2022. "Learning from Online Ratings," CEPR Discussion Papers 17006, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Natalia Levina & Manuel Arriaga, 2014. "Distinction and Status Production on User-Generated Content Platforms: Using Bourdieu’s Theory of Cultural Production to Understand Social Dynamics in Online Fields," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 468-488, September.
    17. Tianshu Sun & Sean J. Taylor, 2020. "Displaying things in common to encourage friendship formation: A large randomized field experiment," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 237-271, September.
    18. Mingfeng Lin & Nagpurnanand R. Prabhala & Siva Viswanathan, 2013. "Judging Borrowers by the Company They Keep: Friendship Networks and Information Asymmetry in Online Peer-to-Peer Lending," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 17-35, August.
    19. Pauwels, Koen & Aksehirli, Zeynep & Lackman, Andrew, 2016. "Like the ad or the brand? Marketing stimulates different electronic word-of-mouth content to drive online and offline performance," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 639-655.
    20. Qingliang Wang & Fred Miao & Giri Kumar Tayi & En Xie, 2019. "What makes online content viral? The contingent effects of hub users versus non–hub users on social media platforms," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1005-1026, November.

    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:34:y:2015:i:2:p:281-296. 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.