1 2-3 4-6 6-10
In addition several relevant attitudinal statements are asked:
-
I use the coupons I find in magazines or on packets
-
I often enter competitions run by newspapers or magazines
-
I don't read the ads in newspapers and magazines
-
I enjoy buying magazines
These statements record general attitudes to magazines — not to specific titles.
The Experiment Back to top
In having the largest Single Source Survey database in the world Wilson MLI was ideally placed to test involvement as an indicator of higher advertising exposure. Is involvement a better predictor of advertising effectiveness (as measured by recall)?
We hypothesised that highly involved readers should demonstrate higher levels of advertising recall compared with readers attributed with lower levels of involvement. In addition, it was decided to take the research a step further and attempt to identify the relationship of involvement with increased purchase of brands advertised. Thus the effectiveness of measuring recall as a surrogate for involvement could also be tested.
Question Content
There is no universally accepted definition of involvement or quality of reading. From the review of international work Wilson MLI has identified those variable most commonly identified as good indicators of involvement.
To quality for inclusion we sought variables that had been tested successfully. Notably, we eliminated attributes which respondents found difficult to answer. The work done by RSL (as reported by Hilary Cade in San Francisco) was particularly useful here. Most notably the RSL study (among others) demonstrated readers have great difficulty in estimating the time spent reading a publication (failing to correlate with observation or proportion of copy read). Therefore, we excluded this measure from our experiment.
In general any measurement requiring a calculation by the respondents would be likely to encounter a high degree of error, thus the scale used to estimate the proportion of copy read was, minimised to reduce errors.
No attempt was been made to measure mood. The RSL study also demonstrated that meaningful results are difficult to obtain due to the diversity of response, which must be incorporated into a coding frame. More work is needed on this and the entire mood issue respondent and interviewer is the subject of other work currently being done by Wilson MLI.
Rationale
In formulating our approach we attempted to include only measures that could be applied meaningfully to all publications. Attributes likely to illustrate the relative strengths of specific groups of titles have been therefore eliminated. For example, statements such as in this publication are useful for my work relevant for only business and special interest publications were not included.
The existing Wilson MLI database (of respondents who previously participated in the syndicated study) was used to identify readers of publications included in our experiment. Sampling stratification took into account both primary and pass-along readers at different levels of frequency of reading claims. Respondents who qualified for selection were selected at random form the pool of all qualifying respondents.
Three significant "Women's" titles were included in the experiment. Each was represented by 200 readers as follows:
Frequency of Reading |
Family Circle |
House and Garden (Monthly) |
Who Weekly (Monthly) |
3 or 4/4 issues |
100 |
100 |
100 |
1 or 2 /4 issues |
100 |
100 |
100 |
Total |
200 |
200 |
200 |
Although frequency of reading alone has been widely discredited as an indicator of involvement, it still proved a useful basis on which to construct reader stratification.
Respondents were screened to include only those who had read the most recent edition of the given publication and had access to a copy of the publication to refer to during interview. In order to maintain representation from less frequent readers (and those who had read someone else's copy) it was found necessary to mail copies of the publication to some respondents in order to complete the through the book the experiment.
In the case of the two monthly titles interviewing commenced in the third week of the month when readership had reached a sufficient level for targets to be met.
Interviewing was completed over the telephone using a CATI based system to reduce the margin for interviewer error.
Major demographics were checked for changes since the major interview was conducted and current reading habits obtained.
Only experienced interviewers selected from those who have achieved "Gold Standard" within the organisation (from working on our syndicated study) were used for this experiment.
All interviewers were fully briefed by Wilson MLI's National Field Manager who has been running the main syndicated project, together with all ad hoc projects conducted by the company, since 1989.
Interviewers introduced themselves from Wilson MLI and explained they were not representing a publisher but conducting some general research on magazines.
Ad recall — unprompted
Recall was conducted in the first instance as George Gramse and Peter Beike found (in their work for Die Zeit in West Germany) that "when the contact-qualifying questions are posed after the copy test, the variables change to a certain extent".
A general question on whether the respondent remembered any advertising in the most recent issue was followed by a prompt for product categories and brands. A measure of claimed and validated unaided recall was therefore available.
Purchase involvement
A list of product categories relevant to advertisements included in the pages of the magazine being tested was then read. The respondent was instructed to stop the interviewer if they had been involved with purchase activity within that product category within the past month (week, in the case of Who Weekly).
For all categories selected respondents were asked to nominate the brand purchased. Results were recorded as either the advertised brand or another brand from within the same product category.
Ad recall — prompted
Respondents were asked to find the magazine. If the respondent no longer had possession of the magazine, arrangements were made to forward a copy by mail and an appointment made to call back.
Respondents were asked to review the first 15 pages of the magazine and mention any articles or advertisements they remembered seeing, however briefly. They were encouraged to mention all pages looked at, even if only for a second, leaving out only those they only turned the corner on in search of a page number.
Respondents then skipped to the back of the magazine and work backwards answering the same questions (for 15 pages).
Identifying copy
Respondents were then asked to take a further look at the articles and advertisements they mentioned and identify those they considered interesting for whatever reason. Answers were recorded using a five-point scale:
Level of appeal was then measured using the same technique.
Respondents were then asked to respond to a number of attitudinal statements concerning the magazine.
Number of times picked up
Number of times a specific issue is read or looked into was expected to correlate with Opportunities To See and therefore with recall of advertising. Respondents were, therefore, asked:
How many times have you read or looked into the copy of ** you are currently holding?
1 2-3 4-6 6-10
Respondents were informed that the rest of the questionnaire did not refer to a specific issue of the magazine but to their general attitudes toward the publication.
Favourite Magazines
Although others have discredited (e.g. Reference RSL) was not impressed with this measure (males in particular appeared reluctant to use this emotive expression) the preference given to it by other researchers (most notably the early work done by Mueller (1976) warrants its inclusion in the Australian study, that is:
Would you say that ** is one of your favourite magazines?
Thoroughness of reading
To eliminate the need for respondents to quantify reading time or make an estimate of the proportion of magazine read, the following attitudinal statement was used:
1) I usually read all the articles in **.
Loyalty
2) If necessary, I would go to great trouble to obtain every issue of this magazine.
Identity
The Hansen (Barcelona 1988) question (with a reduced scale) was used here:
3) You sometimes say of a person that you are very close to him or not so close. This can also be applied to magazines. Would you please tell me for whether in general you identify very closely with this magazine or not so closely?
The following statements were used by the researchers:
4) I like looking at the adverts
5) I find the advertising helpful
6) I find the advertising a useful source of product information
Editorial
Attitudes to editorial were measured using the following statements:
7) I have complete confidence in the editorial
8) I believe what I read in it
9) I learn a lot from it
Source of copy
-
Bought it personally from shop or newsagent
-
Someone else in household bought it
-
Home-delivered by newsagent
-
Paid subscription delivered to home
-
Free copy delivered to home
-
Office/work copy
-
Friend's/relative's copy
-
Seen at a library, waiting room or other public place
-
None of these
Reaction if no longer available
The work presented by Cade in San Francisco in particular prompted us to include this measure in our experiment.
How would you feel if ** were no longer available?
Analysis Back to top
Due to the limited time available for completion of this project preliminary results reported are restricted to the two monthly titles included in our survey.
Stage 1
Cross-tabulations were produced to examine recall and purchase behaviour across all the involvement indicators used in the study.
Virtually all the variables measured in our survey could have (and often have) been argued to be indicators of involvement. From an advertisers perspective the most important outcome of involvement must be a greater response to advertising. For involvement to be a useful selling tool, advertisers must satisfy themselves that involved readers are more likely to respond to advertising within a selected publication.
Four measures of advertising effectiveness were recorded by the survey:
-
Unaided recall summary (where respondents were simply asked to state whether or not they remembered any advertising in the issue)
-
Unaided recall (where respondents were asked to nominated specific adverts they remembered seeing in the issue)
-
Prompted recall (where respondents were asked to look through selected portions of the magazine and nominate pages they remembered seeing before)
-
Purchase behaviour (where respondents were asked about their recent purchase activity within selected product categories)
Early analysis (based on the simple unaided recall summary) suggested the most obvious correlation with an increase in the number of respondents who recall an ad was with the number of times respondents opened the magazine.
FAMILY CIRCLE
Percent of respondent who claimed to recall any advertising
Graph 1
HOME BEAUTIFUL
Percent of respondent who claimed to recall any advertising
Graph 2
The most significant difference appears to be between those respondents who had only read or looked into the magazine three times or less and those who had looked into the magazine at least four times.
Also of significance was frequency of reading and source of copy.
FREQUENCY OF READING
Percent of respondent who claimed to recall any advertising
Graph 3
SOURCE OF COPY
Percent of respondent who claimed to recall any advertising
Graph 4
Higher recall scores were associated with respondents who said: they identify closely with the publication, like looking at the adverts, find the adverts helpful, find the adverts a useful source of product information, have 100% confidence in the editorial, believe what they read and would be disappointed if the publication was no longer available. The replies to all three of the advertising related questions (4 to 6 above) appeared to hold significant relationships with purchase behaviour while only two of the three editorial variables (7 to 9 above) showed signs of a relationship. (Whether a respondent agreed they learnt from the publication or not appeared to have no effect on advertising recall).
The above analyses were based on the results to the question, "Can you recall any advertising in the issue?" For the purposes of more detailed analysis recall scores were calculated as a percentage of the total number of advertisements in the tested sections of the magazine. In the case of unaided recall respondents were encouraged to nominate advertisements they remembered seeing. Whereas aided recall was measured by respondents looking through the selected sections of the magazine being tested and nominating adverts they remembered seeing before.
Multivariate analysis
Multivariate factor analysis was used in an attempt to examine the nine general attitudinal variables (labelled 1-9 above) from this survey (following the work presented in San Francisco by Cade from RSL and Perry & Philport for Y&R).
A varimax rotation resulted in three factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 and factor loadings greater than 0.3 with no cross loadings greater than 0.3.
Based on the meanings of the individual questions these factors have been labelled:
Ad relevance
5) I find the advertising helpful
6) I find the advertising a useful source of product information
4) I like looking at the adverts
Trust
8) I believe what I read in it
9) I learn a lot from it
7) I have complete confidence in the editorial
Commitment
2) If necessary, I would go to great trouble to obtain every issue of this magazine
1) I usually read all the articles in it
3) You sometimes say of a person that you are very close to him or not so close. This can also be applied to magazines. Would you please tell me for whether in general you identify very closely with this magazine or not so closely?
Rotated Factor Matrix |
Factor 1 |
Factor 2 |
Factor 3 |
Variable |
Ad relevance |
Trust |
Commitment |
5) ads help |
.84793 |
.21993 |
.14990 |
6) ads useful |
.80967 |
.23427 |
.08474 |
4) like ads |
.79622 |
.03854 |
.20259 |
8) believe |
.13938 |
.80580 |
.03158 |
9) learn lots |
.18141 |
.73938 |
.15957 |
7) editorial confidence |
.12404 |
.68474 |
.28805 |
2) go to trouble to obtain |
.08378 |
.24236 |
.79847 |
1) read all articles |
.20301 |
.02957 |
.77537 |
3) identify closely |
.13159 |
.27956 |
.66002 |
Responses for all nine attitudinal questions were measured using ratings on five point Likert scales. Eight of the variables were anchored by 1 = Strongly Agree to 5 = Strongly Disagree. Question 3 was scaled using 1 = Very Close and 5 = Not At All.
Factor scores were computed as averaged linear composites, so as to preserve the original scaling information. For the structural equation analysis, factor scores were reverse scored, i.e. Strongly Agree = 5.
When these factors were correlated with outcomes, such as purchase behaviour and ad recall, the following results were achieved.
The factor "Ad Relevance" was found to have the strongest relationship with purchase behaviour (with a correlation coefficient of .2416).
The three variables which explain the factor "Trust" were also found to have a significant relationship with purchase behaviour (.1699). The factor " Reader Commitment" appeared to have a weaker direct relationship with actual purchase behaviour (.1198) although still significant.
"Reader commitment" however, had a strong relationship with "Aided Recall" (.2719) but a significantly weaker relationship with unaided recall (.1345). Similarly, "Ad Relevance" though having a strong relationship with "Aided Recall" (-.2251), had no significant relationship with "Unaided Recall".
Path analysis
In order to examine the complex interrelationships between the variables of interest, and to develop an exploratory causal model of these relationships, the structural equation modelling technique, LISREL 7, was used (Joreskog and Sorbom, 1988). As the researchers were primarily interested in overall effects, data from the two monthly titles were combined.
The nine variables included in this analysis were:
1) Brand purchased
2) Unaided ad recall
3) Aided ad recall
4) Ad relevance *
5) Trust *
6) Disappointment if magazine no longer available
7) Times an issue read
8) Number of issues bought
9) Reader commitment *
* = Factors summarising three core variables each as described above
The input for the LISREL analysis was the correlation coefficient matrix:
Variable |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
1 |
1.00 |
||||||||
2 |
0.16* |
1.00 |
|||||||
3 |
0.14* |
0.13* |
1.00 |
||||||
4 |
0.24* |
0.11 |
0.23* |
1.00 |
|||||
5 |
0.17* |
0.07 |
0.02 |
0.39* |
1.00 |
||||
6 |
0.06 |
0.05 |
0.16* |
0.24* |
0.39* |
1.00 |
|||
7 |
0.10 |
0.12* |
0.06 |
0.06 |
0.09 |
0.11 |
1.00 |
||
8 |
0.00 |
0.02 |
0.09 |
0.02 |
0.11 |
0.11 |
0.03 |
1.00 |
|
9 |
0.12* |
0.14* |
0.27* |
0.37* |
0.41* |
0.49* |
0.16* |
0.20* |
1.00 |
* = significant relationship
It was hypothesised that Trust would be the central exogenous variable and that through various causal paths, would influence the other variables. The aim was to explore this theoretical hypothesis using the empirical data relationships found in the survey.
LISREL is usually used for confirmatory model testing, however it is also used for exploratory model development (Hayduk, 1957). Recent editions of journals such as The Journal of Marketing, Journal of Advertising Research, Journal of Consumer Research testify to the popularity of LISREL analysis for exploratory analysis (see Crosby, Evans and Cowles, 1990; and Morgan and Hunt, 1994 for examples).
Caution should be observed when generalising models that result from data-driven modifications of models (MacCullum, Roznowski & Necowitz, 1992). Nonetheless use of this exploratory technique is useful for theory building followed with subsequent confirmatory testing.
In using the exploratory procedure to develop the structural equation model, successive paths were specified, building each time on the assessment of individual estimated parameter fit for each previously specified model (Byrne, 1989). A series of models were subsequently specified and estimated until one was obtained which exhibited not only an acceptable statistical fit but also indicated a substantively meaningful representation of the observed data.
The final LISREL model (see chart) is a good fit, Chi-Square (with 21 degrees of freedom) = 20.89 (p = .47). The adjusted goodness-of-fit index (GFI) is 0.99 and root mean square residual (RMR) is 0.03. All parameters are significant at p<0.5. Significant causal paths between variables are shown in the model below. Where no arrows exist between variables, no significant direct relationship exists between them. Path coefficients are maximum likelihood parameter estimates.
| Analysis for both Monthlys combined (N=414) | Developed by M. Edwardson for Wilson MLI August 1995 |
Trust and Commitment were found to be strongly related with our hypothesis being that reader commitment is established through trust for a detailed summary of social and organisational research on trust and commitment (which supports our hypothesis) see Morgan & Hunt (1994). That paper concludes that, "Social exchange theory explains this casual relationship through the principles of generalized reciprocity, which holds that "mistrust breeds mistrust and as such would also serve to decrease commitment in the relationship and shift the transaction to one of more direct short-term exchanges" (McDonald 1981, p.834). Therefore, we posit, as does Achrol (1991) that, "trust is a major determinant of relationship commitment." In other words Trust gives rise to Commitment and Commitment to Action.
Reader commitment and trust are both strongly related to advertising relevance, aided advertising recall and disappointment if the publication ceased to exist. Disappointment however, is an outcome and does not have any further influence in the model.
Reader commitment plays a pivotal role. In addition to advertising relevance, aided recall and disappointment reader commitment is also strongly related to the number of issues read, the number of times a publication is picked up and unaided advertising recall. The researchers point our that commitment is predicated on trust.
The model goes on to demonstrate that advertising relevance is related to aided advertising recall and advertising response (as measured by purchase involvement with advertised brands).
The number of times an issue is read is related to unaided advertising recall, which is related to advertising response. However, this same variable did not hold a significant relationship with aided advertising recall.
No significant direct relationship was found between the number of issues read (as measured through a standard frequency question) and advertising response. The number of issues read was, however, related to aided advertising response. Further work will attempt to analyse this relationship with reference to the historical schedules of the advertisers included in the experiment. Higher aided recall scores would be expected to be associated with advertisers who have supported their campaigns with significant schedules.
Many variables previously agreed by media researchers to be determents of advertising responsiveness may in fact be no more than outcomes of two key psychological drivers, i.e. Reader Trust and Reader Commitment.
Notably you do not need to be a 3 or 4 out of 4 reader to be committed to a magazine, find the ads relevant or buy the brands advertised.
Implications for syndicated readership studies Back to top
All readership research providers are struggling to balance the demands from publishers and advertisers to provide the depth of data against respondent fatigue. Most notably early MPX work clearly demonstrated additional questions, asked with the main readership question, decrease overall levels of readership claims.
Publishers want a measure of involvement that can be used to increase advertising revenue.
Media planners want access to an indicator that shows what proportion of a readership is highly involved AND therefore more likely to respond to the advertising appearing in that publication.
Everyone, and especially researchers, wants the solution to be easily measurable. To be included in syndicated projects the selected indicator(s) of involvement must not over burden the respondent. Much work (referred to above) has shown that readership claims will decrease if the readership question is extended significantly — and no one wants that.
To become a valuable selling tool any measure of involvement must accurately reflect higher advertising recall among involved readers and, preferably, a higher propensity to purchase advertised brands.
This experimental research suggests the most useful, easily measurable, direct indicators of quality of reading may lie in reader attitudes toward advertising. Asking readers their assessment of the relevance of advertising in a publication certainly gives a good indication of likely response to advertising and could predict purchase behaviour. From an advertiser's perspective this may be the only measure of quality of reading required! Measures of trust, e.g. "believe what I read", should also become integral to future measures as it appears to be a key psychological driver to reading and advertising effectiveness.
Results from the disappointment question were also encouraging (following Cade's qualitative work for RSL). Measuring this outcome would appear to give a good indication of the respondents' trust and commitment level toward the publication, although more as an outcome of trust and commitment than a component. This measure then does not solely focus on the advertising departments requirements but may tell more about the reader's relationship with any given publication.
Further work Back to top
The sample for this pilot survey was relatively small (414 respondents for the two monthly titles combined). Analysis of the effects of certain variables was, therefore, not possible to complete with satisfactory reliability. For example, identifying the importance of copy factors (as measured by interest and appeal of advertisements) was not possible with any degree of statistical validity. In addition the importance of source of copy could not be isolated in our analysis.
However, from this initial analysis there is some evidence to support the claim that advertisements at the back of the magazine attract lower validated recall scores and the effects of this needs to be examined in the light of purchase behaviour. This suggests our research may again challenge the traditional findings associated with projects such as STARCH.
Some of the relationships referred to in our model are not strong, although they are statistically significant. Further work with a larger sample size needs to be completed to validate the results of this survey.
In addition, only two monthly titles have been included in our analysis, any claims as to the relevance of the model as a global definition of involvement needs to be tested against a wider selection of titles.
Wilson MLI financed this pilot survey and it is hoped the findings will generate sufficient interest from the industry to finance a larger study.
Conclusion Back to top
Given that this is only our first experiment, the researchers advocate some caution in interpreting the findings. Not withstanding this, clearly the relationship between reader and magazine is more important than ever. That relationship cannot be understood by knowing the number of issues read, whether the reader bought the copy or from many other behavioural measures. In fact, there appears to be two fundamental psychological drivers, which produce advertising response in terms of perceived reader relevance of advertising and ultimately purchasing of advertised brands. Reader trust epitomised by the statement, "I believe what they write", along with commitment appear to predetermine a positive disposition to advertising i.e. anticipation of reader relevance in that the ads meet certain needs from the reader's lifestyle portfolio. As a consequence, advertising response in the form of purchasing can be expected to result more often than chance.
Notably this new model shows behavioural measures such as frequency of reading more likely to be an outcome of reader involvement. The researchers advocate a paradigm shift to psychological measures for measuring reader involvement with measures of behaviour as a second choice option only.
Partners
The authors would like to thank the following three publishing houses for their assistance with this project:
Murdoch Magazines (Family Circle)
Pacific Publications (Home Beautiful)
Time (Who Weekly)