It's not the environment that determines the advertising impact, but primarily the quality of the advertisingBy Wolfgang KoschnickIn a magazine for deep-sea fishing, ads for power saws have no place. True. But the editorial or program environment is not always responsible for the high or low advertising impact of ads or commercials. This is the conclusion reached by numerous studies on the interaction between editorial content and advertising.
A large part of practical media planning is environment-oriented. Tourism advertising is placed in travel supplements, food advertising in food magazines, advertising for fine perfumes in classy glossy magazines, and sex programs on TV are avoided as an environment for "serious" products. But what if all this is based on a plausible but fatal error in thinking?
The media-related environment hypothesis on factors influencing advertising impact states quite generally that the environment in which an ad or commercial is placed has an influence on advertising impact. One naturally assumes a positive influence: Regardless of the content of the advertisement itself, the advertising has a stronger effect.
Why should that be? If a lot of good things are written about liquor in an editorial article, why should a liquor ad next to it have a stronger impact than if the article describes how a chainsaw works? Science offers three psychological theories to explain this:
According to the Gestalt theory, the perception of a "Gestalt" is co-determined by the conditions of the entire field of perception.
According to the field theory, the percipient's field of perception is structured by his own needs.
According to learning theory, learning success also depends on the way the content to be learned is embedded in other content.
The first study on this topic was conducted in the USA in 1959. A larger number of further studies followed up to the present. These measured the same ads in different magazines and compared them with the effect of these ads in a "neutral" environment.
The decisive influence of the advertising medium on the ads was particularly evident among regular readers in the "image" and "purchase stimulation" impact dimensions. Among readers as a whole, the impact dimension "credibility of the advertising message" stood out in particular. In practically all the studies in the USA, there were no significant findings for advertising effects that could have been attributed to the editorial environment.
In Germany, there are two studies on this subject that are already several decades old: "The Significance of the Editorial and Advertising Environment for the Effect of Advertising Messages" by Erich M. Ruczinski and Karl Suthoff from 1971 and "Advertising Environment and Advertising Effect" by Axel Springer Verlag from 1972.
The overall alignment determines the advertising environment
In the survey by Ruczinski and Suthoff, there was "no clear clarification of the problem of the environment effect on ads." The study summarizes, "The null hypothesis, which states that the environment in the sense we defined would not be...effective on the test ad, could not be rejected because of the consistently low correlation. Thus, the likelihood that such environmental effects exist is low."
The findings of the 1972 study by Axel Springer Verlag are even clearer. It states: There is no significant difference between the attention, use and evaluation of advertisements that are placed in a thematic or neutral page environment.
The results of other studies on the magazine environment, i.e. the overall thematic environment of an advertising medium, on the other hand, show that the overall thematic orientation of a magazine has a favorable influence on advertising attention. This, in turn, is rather self-evident: in a magazine for deep-sea fishing, advertisements with equipment for deep-sea fishermen can naturally be accommodated much better than in a magazine for chainsaw owners.
Do you have to do empirical research to find out? Better not. It is possible that science will not find out the connection at all and will bother the experts for decades with the statement that, according to their findings, there is no connection at all.
There are always some findings, such as a study "Parents Shopping Magazine" by Parents magazine, which show that thematically fitted ads get higher attention than ads that are not thematically fitted, and that ads presented cohesively in a coherent block, namely in a kind of ad magazine, get higher attention than individual ads.
Environmental influences are also overestimated
The topic environment seems to reinforce the latent product interest and leads to an intensified selection for "suitable" ads. As soon as the ads are given their own environment as an advertising magazine, the differences between ads that are appropriate to the topic and those that are not are largely blurred. The ads that are appropriate for the topic only improve their impact in the magazine to a lesser extent; the ads that are not appropriate for the topic catch up strongly and are just as well noticed and used as the ads that are appropriate for the topic.
Environmental influences only in eighth place in impact research
In 1976, the German media researcher Klaus Peter Landgrebe prepared a comprehensive analysis on the subject of "Advertising Environment and Advertising Impact" for the publishing house of the news magazine Der Spiegel, Hamburg. He found that, although there were contradictory results, there was no clear finding in favor of the influence of the environment. The overall thematic environment probably had a certain effect, but less in the sense of improving the impact of ads appropriate to the topic than in the sense of intensifying selection.
As soon as the thematic influence is neutralized by a separate advertising environment, this selectivity is also cancelled out. Moreover, Landgrebe concludes that - even if there were environmental influences - they would only become effective as an eighth-order factor in the context of the overall success of marketing measures - i.e. they would in any case end up in the lowest ranks among the factors of advertising and media impact.
In Austria, by the way, copy tests by the Institute for Market and Social Analyses (Imas), Linz, have shown that the editorial environment can have a detailed effect, namely when an ad is placed next to a boring article that attracts little reader interest. This can reduce readers' attention to such an extent that they no longer notice anything about the ad next to it either.
Strenuous TV scenes reduce perception
The programming environment is somewhat different in electronic media, especially television. Studies have shown that viewers' and listeners' attitudes toward the program have a strong influence on advertising effectiveness. The more viewers like a program, the higher the recall values for "spot seen" and for "recall of the advertising message.
In 1991, an American study by Norbert Mundorf, Dolf Zillmann, and Dan Drew on "Effects of disturbing televised events on the acquisition of information from subsequently presented commercials" examined how television commercials are perceived, retained, and judged when they are shown after a very exciting, emotionally stirring scene.
As part of a news program, 50 test subjects first saw a real suicide scene - the American politician Ed Dwyer shot himself in front of running cameras in 1986 - after which the program continued with news and commercials. The commercials were either placed directly after the suicide scene or after two or four minutes and were each 30 seconds long.
The commercials that followed directly or two minutes after the scene described were followed much less attentively compared to a control group. Memory and recognition tests further showed that the test subjects could hardly remember the product information contained in the commercials.
Only for the spot placed four minutes after the initial scene did the subjects' attention and recall return to the level of the control group.
Until then, it had usually been assumed that the stimulus content of "strong" scenes with a lot of action supported attention over interrupting advertising. However, these results suggest that very strongly emotionalizing scenes have the opposite effect, namely a decrease in attention and retention.
The authors saw the reason for this in the limited processing capacity of the recipients, who are already busy mentally coping with a highly emotional scene for a certain time.
Funny commercials belong in a fun TV environment
Two studies, also published in 1991, investigated how emotional program quality affects the evaluation of interruptive commercials. In these studies, subjects watched television programs in which both the actual program and the emotional quality of the television commercials varied systematically: They were either cheerful and upbeat to funny or more somber and serious to sad.
Funny and entertaining commercials were rated best in such a program environment: Attitudes toward the commercial itself, toward the commercial, and product evaluation and purchase intention were more positive than in a negative program environment.
Serious and/or sad spots achieved better results in a correspondingly serious environment. If, on the other hand, they were placed in a funny-entertaining environment, a negative rating was achieved. Funny spots in a sad environment, on the other hand, were rated rather undifferentiated. Thus, a consistency hypothesis can be assumed: The best advertising effects are achieved when the mood of the program environment and the advertising match (matching).
A study also published in 1991 examined the influence of cognitive involvement on the effectiveness of radio versus television advertising. Depending on the category of effect, different effects were found:
When the number of spontaneous thoughts (cognitive elaboration) and personal connections (personal connectedness) that the advertising triggered in the recipient was measured, no differences were found between radio and TV advertising at low levels of involvement. At high levels of involvement, however, the radio ads triggered significantly more thoughts than the TV ads.
In brand recognition, low-involved individuals achieved better results after a television commercial. Subjects who were highly involved produced identical recognition performances after radio and television commercials.
? recall of specific product information was also better under the Low Involvement condition after the TV commercials than after the radio commercials. Under the High Involvement condition, radio spot listeners did as well as TV spot viewers. However, for both media, higher involvement produced better overall recall scores.
Thus, both media genres have specific characteristics: Radio enables a more "undisturbed" cognitive processing due to the advantage of no interference between image and sound. Television, on the other hand, offers the possibility of immediate emotional access. The cognitive activities in television advertising are more related to the perception of an overall (image-based) impression, especially when viewers are only slightly involved.
Television advertising thus has clear advantages in the low-involvement area. Radio, on the other hand, is particularly effective at high levels of involvement; here, product-related thoughts and assessments as well as personal evaluations tend to predominate compared to TV advertising.
Because of their different impact qualities, it therefore seems sensible to use radio and TV advertising in a coordinated way in media planning, for example to advertise a product in different media with the help of different copy strategies.
According to findings from the German "Seherqualität" study, environment-related placement has a high priority in the planning of advertising television. "Seherqualität" also sorted the spots by the content of the program that follows each commercial break.
By far the highest impact levels were found for commercial breaks before or within sports programs and feature films. Advertising before or in quiz programs also has a slightly higher chance of having an effect, while all other programs had a below-average effect.
Short commercial breaks
guarantee attention
However, the relatively high impact level of feature films and sports broadcasts is not only environment-related. There is another influencing factor: the average block length. The advertising blocks before and within feature films and sports programs contain on average only about ten spots. And the study found that advertising in very short blocks has almost three times the chance of being effective than advertising in long blocks with 16 or more spots.
Since sports programs often have very many small advertising islands with few spots, this explains the relatively high impact level of these programs. On the other hand, the findings on spot length also give rise to a practical planning problem: feature films also have a shorter spot length on average than other programs, but only on average.
Especially the attractive feature films with high ratings often have very long commercial breaks. This cancels out the environmental advantage. If you switch to feature films with short blocks, you can take full advantage of the environment advantage, but you have to accept lower ratings.
In Germany, the MGM MediaGruppe Munich, together with the Nuremberg research institute Icon, developed "ad pro" in the mid-1990s, a continuous instrument that examines the influence of various environments on advertising impact in several survey waves.
In each wave of the study, which is announced as a program test, five test groups are each shown a different program, into which two commercial breaks of nine spots have been integrated. The commercials are always the same, only the environment changes. Afterwards, a total of one thousand test persons are interviewed about both the environment and the commercials. In this way, the experience profile of the program as well as the individual spots and the advertising impact can be determined. Indicators are unaided spot awareness and likeability, which is calculated from various positive statements. The central result of the study is the finding that the program exerts a significant influence on the communication performance of a commercial. Although the effectiveness of a commercial depends primarily on the advertising presence and the product group; the program environments can also significantly control the advertising success. Between individual commercial appearances, average recall varies by 43, and within a commercial type by as much as 4 to 15 percentage points from environment to environment.
All in all, advertising and media research has had to make some pretty sweaty contortions in order to prove the little bit of environmental influence that is now indisputable.
Was it worth it? Yes. It has been proven that both the editorial environment and the program environment are among the least influential in advertising impact. It is not worth the effort to try very hard to find the right environment. There are more important things to do. Media planners should not make it a priority. And ad and advertising people should stop bugging editors and program makers about matching programmatic or editorial content to surrounding advertising. And if the clients don't want to believe that, then they'll just have to read this article where they can read all about it....
Various environmental effects
Transfer effects: Program environments with a positive mood promote retention, recall and evaluation of the spots and vice versa.
Contrast effects: Program environments with negative mood promote retention, recall, and evaluation of the spots and vice versa.
Congruence effects: Similar mood of program environment and spot promote the advertising effect and vice versa.
Divergence effects: Different moods of the program environment and the spot promote the advertising effect and vice versa.
Curvilinearity: A medium level of arousal in the program environment promotes the advertising effect; particularly low and particularly high levels of arousal are a hindrance.
How advertising really works
With this article by Allensbach-based specialist journalist Wolfgang J. Koschnick, WerbeWoche continues its series of articles on advertising impact. Each article in this series aims to provide answers to burning questions about the current state of knowledge on the impact of advertising. This should also be seen as an invitation to the readers of WerbeWoche. If you have any questions about aspects of advertising impact, please send them to us (info@werbe woche.ch). We will answer them to the best of our knowledge.
In selecting topics for this series, Koschnick can draw on several hundred scientific studies on advertising impact that have been published in Germany and abroad over the past 50 years.