council for research excellence n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Council for Research Excellence PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Council for Research Excellence

Council for Research Excellence

228 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Council for Research Excellence

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Council for Research Excellence Nielsen National Client Meeting

  2. Council for Research Excellence Richard Zackon, Facilitator

  3. CRE Mission To advance the knowledge and practice of methodological research on audience measurement through the active collaboration of Nielsen Media Research and its clients.

  4. CRE Chronology • February 18, 2005: Nielsen Media Research announces it is making $2.5 million available for a special Research and Development Fund • June 10, 2005: First meeting of the Council for Research Excellence • March 14, 2006: Nielsen Media Research contributes an additional $2.5 million tothe fund

  5. CRE Goals • Organize its own structure and ongoing operations • Identify research and development priorities it chooses to explore • Draft various research proposals and requestsfor proposals • Select research providers to execute the proposed research • Track the progress of the execution of research • Report the research findings to Nielsen’sclient base

  6. Thank You • The Nielsen Company for funding and providing ongoing support to this effort • Paul Donato and Howard Shimmel

  7. CRE Chairman’s Report Mark Kaline, Ford Motor Company

  8. CRE Committees Steering Committee Four Research Committees • Non-Response • Media Consumption • Marketplace Practice • Universe Estimates

  9. Steering Committee   Chair, Mike Hess, OMD (CRE Vice Chair) 2006 Accomplishments: • Membership requirements • Charter and By-Laws 2007 Issues • New members (self nomination is sufficient) • New committees • Reporting Policies

  10. Non Response Chair, Ceril Shagrin, Univision Importance • Viewing of non-responders may vary from responders and their exclusion from the sample may create bias which weighting will not correct • This research will provide input to future research designed to improve response and compliance

  11. Non Response Parallel Studies executed by Nielsen • Metered sample: survey non-responders and initially designated HHs that refused to participate. Use multiple efforts and incentives to maximize response to survey • Diary sample: similar to Metered study but additional cells to include responders who did not return usable diaries

  12. Non Response Status: • Measurement instrument complete next month. Will be posted on website Research Partner: • University of Michigan Institute forSocial Research Timetable: • April, 2007: begin mailing questionnaire to metered sample HHs • May, 2007: begin mailing to diary sample HHs

  13. Marketplace Practices Chair, Ira Sussman, CAB • Mission: review current buying/selling methods for audience estimates to identify questionable practices • In-depth interviews were conducted with 21 media professionals • Topics included sample size, estimating, posting and third party software suppliers

  14. Marketplace Practices • Initial report posted on Council website • A large online survey is being considered for the next few months • We request your cooperation if you receive an invitation

  15. Universe Estimates Chair, Nancy Gallagher, NBC Universal • Mission: to determine accurate and reliable methods for creating media-related universe estimates to reflect rapidly changing technologies • Actions taken: literature search and study, discussions with current suppliers ofsimilar data • Next Steps: create RFP, discuss potential for cross-industry study(funding and/or implementation)

  16. Media Consumption and Engagement Co-chairs: • Shari Anne Brill, CaratSteve Sternberg, Magna Global • We will learn more about the work of this committee in this session

  17. 2006 CRE Successes • Commitment to three research studies • First report (from Marketplace Practice) • CRE has created a mechanism for ongoing proposal, selection and review of research projects within the community of buyers and sellers of commercial time • Full committee reports and written and audio transcript on website:

  18. 2007 CRE Goals • Three major studies fielded and reported out at next year’s meeting • Proposed Research for Marketplace Practice and Universe Estimates • Council will hold extended dialogue to uncover opportunities for additional research

  19. CRE Finances • Funding to date: $5.0 million • Committed to date: $1.6 million(mostly Non Response) • Full Media Consumption and Engagement Study likely to cost $1-2 million • Funds available for additional studies

  20. Media Consumption and Engagement Committee Update Shari Anne Brill, Carat Co-Chair Jack Wakshlag, Turner Broadcasting

  21. Media Consumption and Engagement Mapping consumer media behavior • How consumers interact with different media and how this changes over time • Home versus Workplace or other places • Rate of consumer adoption(Early versus late adopters) • What are the measurement implications?

  22. MCE Background Verify or dispel commonly held beliefs: • “The 30 second spot is dead; No one watches commercials any more” • “VCRs have gone away; Everyone is taping things on their DVRs” • “People are watching less TV; They’re all on the web or downloading shows ontheir iPods.”

  23. MCE Study Objectives • Dimension current consumption of media—focusing on television and video—and how it is changing over time in order to • Propose optimal form of video media measurement

  24. Mapping Media Usage • Divided between high-tech andlow-tech users • Time/duration of each medium consumed • Simultaneous media usage • Multi-tasking with other media and non-media activities • By demo, ethnicity, socio-economic class, etc.

  25. Mapping Media Usage • By high-speed broadband access • By ownership/usage of newer technologies • Incidence of time-shifting as well as means of navigating channel rich environments • Commercial vs. program behavior

  26. MCE RFP Process • Circulated a Request for Proposal document to the industry • Reviewed over a dozen proposals • Met with three finalists • Selected research proposal submitted by Ball State University and Sequent Partners • Received approval from Full Council in Fall ’06 to move ahead with the pilot study of 50 participants

  27. Data Generated by Direct Observation of Participants • Demographics (Adults 18+) • Media ownership/access inventory • Video consumption to be collected in ten second intervals • All television, computer, out-of-home video, gaming, and hand-held device activity • Recording/time-shifting • Presence of co-viewers • Intentional vs. unintended viewing

  28. Data Generated by Direct Observation of Participants • Exposure to non-screen media for context (general, not genre) • Life activities – including those concurrent with media use • Apparent focus of attention • Follow-up interviews the day after each observation • Part of the sample will include People from Households cycling off Nielsen’s national people meter sample (FTOs)

  29. Researching the Research • Met with Research Staff last week at CMDin Muncie, Indiana • Details of project management and executionwere shared • Spoke to trained observers and project supervisors • Met participants in former studies

  30. Success Criteria We’re successful if we demonstrate the ability • To build a sample representing target groups of interest, including: • Spanish-language dominant • African Americans • Inner-city subjects • Advanced video technology users • Nielsen forced turnover individuals • To capture data for an average observationalday of 14 hours

  31. Success Criteria • To compare well to Indianapolis DMA data for relevant dayparts • To measure video exposure across multiple platforms and multiple locations • To generate confidence in the data through observation of training processes and materials developed for the pilot

  32. Success Criteria • To develop useful companion instrumentsto measure relevant video media attitudes, perceptions and uses and gratifications • To identify gaps in video media measurement

  33. MCE Next Steps • Based upon our review of the pilot study findings, the committee will vote on whether to recommend that the full study be implemented

  34. Ball State/Sequent Report and Findings Mike Bloxham,Center for Media Design, Ball State University Bill Moult,Sequent Partners

  35. Understanding Audience Consumption of Mediato Further Its Measurement Ball State University Center for Media Design and Sequent Partners

  36. Remember the old video wall? Today’s media wall looks very different. And this is just the beginning… So how in the world can we measure all this?

  37. From one medium and many people… to one person at a time

  38. From one medium and many people… & many media to one person at a time

  39. Understanding video media consumption How? Devices, activities Who? Demographics, segments, e.g. low-tech vs. high-tech What? Content vs. advertising Where? Locations & setting Why? Attitudes, psycho- graphics When? Time of day, day of week, season

  40. Middletown Media Study I Examples of learning from MMS I A three-method comparative analysis interview vs. diary vs. observation Observation is superior to telephone interview or diary as a source of high- quality information on consumer exposure to multiple media Not asked % of total media time used concurrently Average online minutes at home

  41. Computer-Assisted Observation AlphasmarttmDana smart keyboards equipped with a custom “media collector” program Observers categorize media exposure, life activities, location and attention, via touch screen & keyboard Data are logged to file every 10 seconds

  42. Participant videos

  43. MMSII: The Media Day 2005 Split of the 8 hrs 41min time spent with media on an observed day, adjusted to 12 hrs 2 min including concurrent media exposure Mobile PhoneNewspaperBookGame Console Instant Msg.MagazineVCR 1% each 2% each 31% of the media day is simultaneous exposure to two or more media 58% of the media day exposure is concurrent with other life activities

  44. TV and computer are still a big deal…

  45. …but video goes well beyond Video-capable devices

  46. Status of the pilot • 7 observations completed • High-tech respondents • Some Spanish-speaking respondents • Average recorded day over 16 hours • Observation of FTO & diary respondents to begin in 2 weeks

  47. TV Video Portable video Radio Web Web video Email Instant Msg. Software Computer media Phone/Mobile Music Print Games Digital transfer Other Any online Any computer Any video Any music Any media Any screen Location Activity

  48. TV Radio Web Cell Email Any screen media Any media TV Radio Web Cell Email DVD Radio Software Cell CRE Pilot – Latino male, 32 7:30 a.m. 11:30 p.m.

  49. Thank you!

  50. Questions Responses to Ball State Report