毕业论文外文翻译网络广告任何人都看吗中英文对照翻译.docx

毕业论文外文翻译网络广告任何人都看吗中英文对照翻译.docx

《毕业论文外文翻译网络广告任何人都看吗中英文对照翻译.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《毕业论文外文翻译网络广告任何人都看吗中英文对照翻译.docx（11页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

毕业论文外文翻译网络广告任何人都看吗中英文对照翻译

中文3788字

标题：

InternetAdvertising:

IsAnybodyWatching?

外文原文

Abstract

Click-throughrateshaveemergedasthedefactomeasureofInternetadvertisingeffectiveness.Unfortunately,click-throughratesareplummeting.Thisdeclinepromptsfourcriticalquestions:

（1）whydobanneradsseemtobeineffective;

（2）whatcanadvertisersdotoimprovetheireffectiveness;（3）doesanimmediatemeasuresuchasclick-throughrateundervalueonlineadvertising;and,（4）arememory-basedmeasuressuchasrecallorawarenessmoreappropriate?

Toaddressthesequestions,weutilizedaneye-trackingdevicetoinvestigateonlinesurfers’attentiontoonlineadvertising.Thenweconductedalarge-scalesurveyofInternetusers’recall,recognition,andawarenessofbanneradvertising.

Ourresearchsuggeststhatthereasonwhyclick-throughratesarelowisthatsurfersactuallyavoidlookingatbanneradsduringtheironlineactivities.Thissuggeststhatthelargerpartofasurfer’sprocessingofbannerswillbedoneatthepre-attentivelevel.Ifsuchisthecase,click-throughrateisanineffectivemeasureofbanneradperformance.Ourresearchalsoshowsthatbanneradsdohaveanimpactontraditionalmemory-basedmeasureofeffectiveness.Thus,weclaimthatadvertisersshouldrelymoreontraditionalbrandequitymeasuressuchasbrandawarenessandadvertisingrecall.

Finally,ourstudyshowsthatalthoughrepetitionleadstolowerclick-throughrates,ithasabeneficialimpactonbrandawarenessandadvertisingrecall.

Introduction

AstheInternetmaturesintoaviablecommercialmedium,manywebsites（e.g.,Lycos,GoNetwork,Yahoo!

）relyonadvertisingtofinancetheiroperations.ThelureofadvertisingissuchthatsomecompaniesprovideuserswithfreeInternetaccess（e.g.,NetZ,FreeI.com）andevenfreecomputers（e.g.,Free-PC.com）inexchangefortheireyeballs（Berst1999）.Thisshouldnotcomeasasurpriseasadvertisershavelongusedeveryconceivablevehicletodisplaytheirmessagesinfrontofthegazingeyesofpotentialcustomers,beitmagazines,television,orracecars.

AstheInternetbecomesmoremainstream,manycompaniesarebudgetingsignificantdollaramountsforonlineadvertising.TheInternetAdvertisingBureau（1999）reports1998onlineadvertisingexpenditureof$1.92billion,morethandouble1997revenues.Thebulkofthisexpenditureisallocatedtobannerads.Banneradstypicallyconsistofrectangularimagesdisplayedatthetopofwebpagesandcontainthemessagethattheadvertiserwantstosendtowebsurfers.

Themostwidelyusedmeasureofonlineadvertisingeffectivenessisthepercentageofthetotalnumberofadexposuresthatinducethesurfertoactuallyclickonthebannerinresponsetotheadvertisedmessage.Thismeasureisknownastheclick-throughrate（NovakandHoffman1997）.Click-throughratehasbecomesuchadominantmeasurethatin1996ProcterandGamblemadeadealwithYahoo!

inwhichP&Gwouldpayonlyforclick-throughsandnotforexposures（AssociatedPress1996）.Theabilityofasitetogenerateclick-throughsalsoaffectstheadvertisingratesitcancommand（Hamilton1998）.

Click-throughratesstartedin1996ataroundsevenpercent.However,theyhavedeclinedsteadilytoaround0.6%in1999（Nielsen//Netratings1999）.Thisisproblematicbecauseadvertiserstypicallydonotknowinglyallocatebudgetstomediathatarenoteffective.Doesthistrendsuggestthattheonlineadvertisingcommunityisgoingtofritteralongwiththedeclineinclick-throughrates?

ShouldonesellhisorherstocksinYahoo!

?

Notnecessarily.Manyauthors（Ambler1998,Batra,Lehmann,Burke,andPae1995）arguethatgoodadvertisingaffectslong-termbrandequity,notnecessarilyshort-termsales.Theycontendthatequityvariablessuchasbrandoradawarenessarebettergaugesofadvertisingeffectiveness.Inthisspirit,BriggsandHollis（1997）haveshownusingMilwardBrown’sBrandDynamics™system（Dyson,Farr,andHollis,1996）,thatbanneradscanhaveanimpactonconsumers’attitudestowardabrandindependentofclick-through.

BriggsandHollis’study,combinedwiththedeclineinclick-throughrate,begsthequestions

（1）whydobanneradsseemtobeineffective;

（2）whatcanadvertisersdotoimprovetheireffectiveness;（3）doesanimmediatemeasuresuchasclick-throughrateunder-valueonlineadvertising;and,（4）aremoretraditionalmeasuressuchasrecallorawarenessmoreappropriate?

Thepurposeofthispaperistoanswerthesefourquestions.Weintendtoshowthatbecausebanneradsoperatemostlyatthepre-attentiveprocessinglevel（Shapiro,MacInnis,andHoyer1997）,traditionaleffectivenessmeasuresaremoreappropriatethanclick-throughrates.Wewillthenusethesemeasurestostudysomeofthefactorsthatmightimpactbanneradeffectiveness.

Theremainderofthepaperisorganizedasfollows.Thefirstsectiondiscussestheresultsofastudywhichutilizedaneye-trackingdevicetodeterminewhetherwebsurfersseebanneradsandwhichfactorsincreaseordecreasetheprobabilitythatabanneradisseen.Weusetheresultsfromthisfirststudytogeneratehypothesesaboutthecharacteristicsofbanneradsthatmightincreaseordecreaseviewers’attention.Thefollowingsectionrelatestheresultsofthefollow-upstudythattestedthehypothesesgeneratedinthefirststudyonabroadersampleofwebsurfers（807respondents）.ThestudyalsoexploredtheeffectsofInternetadvertisingonrecall,recognition,andawareness.Wethenconsidertheresultsofbothstudiesanddiscusstheirmanagerialrelevance.Finally,weclosewithconcludingremarks,adiscussionofthelimitationsofourmethodologyandresults,anddirectionsforfutureresearch.Study1:

Eye-tracking

TheInternetdiffersfromtraditionalmediainatleastonesignificantway.WhenanadvertiserusesTelevisionorRadiotodeliverhismessages,hepreemptstheprogrambeingbroadcast（e.g.,asitcomorsong）andusesallthebandwidthofthemediumtotransmithismessage.Thismeansthatbydefault,theviewerorlistenerispayingattentiontotheadvertisers,andthemessageisonlyinterruptedifthelistenerzapsaway.Zapping,however,isquiteinfrequent.Siddarth（1999）reportszappingratesforcommercialsoflessthan3%.Bycontrast,onlinebanneradssharetheirbandwidthwithotherelementsofthepagesinwhichtheyarebeingdisplayed.Abanneradtypicallyoccupieslessthan10%oftheareaofawebpageonastandardVGAcomputerscreen（640x480pixels）.Therefore,theattentionofthewebsurferisgenerallyfocusedonotherelementsofthepage.Thetaskofthebanneradistofirstgrabasurfer’sattentionandsecondtoinducethesurfertoclickonthead.Ifsurfersneverlookatabanner,theycannotclickonit!

Sharedbandwidthmightexplainwhyclick-throughratesarelow,butnotwhytheyaredeclining.Thereissomeevidencethatsomeonlinesurfersdislikebannerads（Bass1999）.Thisdislikeiswidespreadenoughthatvarioussoftwareexistthatactuallypreventbrowsersfromdownloadingads（AdsOff!

@Guard,JunkBuster...）.Onecanthushypothesizethat,assurfersgainmorefamiliaritywiththemedium,theylearntodifferentiateinformationalcontentfromadvertising.Ultimately,thiswouldgivethemtheabilitytodisregardbannerads.

Giventhispossiblelearningandavoidancebehavior,westartourinvestigationbymeasuringtheextenttowhichsurferspayattentiontobannerads.Webeginbyformulatingthefollowingtwohypotheses:

H1:

Internetusersavoidlookingatbannerads.

H2:

ThemoretimeusershavespentontheInternet,thelesstheypayattentiontobannerads.

Totestthesehypotheses,weaskedagroupofsubjectstolookatvariouswebpageswhilehookeduptoaneye-trackingdevicethatrecordstheireyemovementsandfixations.Eyetrackingstudiesarenotnew.Javal（1878）usedeye-trackingtostudyreadingpatternsmorethan100yearsago.Althoughreadingstudiesarestillbeingconductedthrougheye-tracking（Hyönä1995）,agrowingnumberofeye-trackingstudieshaverecentlyaddressedmarketingproblems.Forinstance,RussoandLeclerc（1994）studiedin-storebrandchoice,Fischeretal（1989）studiedwarninglabelsontobaccoads,Janiszewski（1998）lookedatexploratorysearchbehaviorwithcatalogs,Kroeber-Riel（1979）investigatedtheeffectofarousalonadvertisingcopyprocessing,andLohse（1997）studiedYellowPageadvertising.

Studydesign

Ourstudywasconductedusinginformationportalsasabackground.ThecoverstudywasanergonomicresearchonthedesignforoneofthelargestFrenchportals:

Voilà（www.voila.fr）.Thesubjectswereaskedtoperformfivesearchesusingthreeportals:

Voilà,analternatelayoutforVoilà（henceforthcalledVoilàBis）,andVoilà’slargestcompetitor.Threeofthesearchesrelatedtogeneraltopics（e.g.,findinformationabout‘LeLouvre’）,theothertwor，elatedtoindividuals（e.g.,findthephonenumberof‘JeanDupont’）.Eachofthethreegeneraltopicsearcheswasmadeusingadifferentportal.ThetwoothersearchesweremadewithVoilàandVoilàBis.Ourfirststudywasveryrevealing.Itprovidesuswithananswertothefirstquestionmotivatingthisstudy（Whyarebanneradsnoteffective?

）andahintofananswertothesecondandthirdquestions（Whatcanadvertisersdotoimprovebannereffectiveness?

Doesclickthroughrateunder-valueonlineadvertising?

）.Thestudyshowsthatoneoftheproblemshinderingbanneradeffectivenessisthathalfofthebannerexposuresarenotattendedto.Theproblemisnotonlythatsurfersdonotlookatthebanners,buttheyalsoseemtopurposefullyavoidlookingatthem（Hypothesis

1）.

Thereareatleasttwopossibleexplanationsforthisapparentlyclairvoyantbehavior.F