Getting the User’s Attention:
The Effectiveness of Two Mediums of
Online Advertising
David Orr
Steve Pautz
Chris Coker
Katherine Hinds
Mandy Elkins
{dorr, spautz, clcoker, hindsk, elkinsa}@clemson.edu
Abstract

Study to determine which type of internet
ad is more effective at capturing user
attention
– Static, animated
Participants engaged in a visual search of
a web page
 Eye tracker data used to determine
fixations within the banner ad
 Recognition task was given after the web
page to determine how well the adds
promoted recognition memory

Previous Research: Strayer,
Drews, and Johnston




Participants drove simulated highway talking on
cell phone or not
Cell phone conversation impaired memory for
billboards
Eye tracker showed 2/3 of billboards fixated on
during experiment
Indicates failure of divided attention
Previous Research: Benway and
Lane
 Study
concerning banner objects
 Questions could either be answered
using text links or banners
 Text link questions answered 94% of
the time, banner questions answered
58% of the time
 Altering grouping of banner did not
change results
 “Banner Blindness”
Previous Research: Yantis and the
New Object Hypothesis
Salient events like motion often thought to
capture attention
 User presented with large letter comprised
of smaller letters. Asked to name identity
of the larger letter
 One of the small letters sometimes
exhibited motion, response slower during
these trials
 New objects in scene may automatically
receive high attentional priority

Four Hypotheses

Members of the alternating banner group will
perform more fixations on ads than the static
banner group

Members of the alternating group will exhibit
longer search times

Members of the alternating banner group will
have increased recognition memory for the ads

Members of the alternating banner group will
exhibit a more negative attitude toward the
advertisements
Methods



Participants searched a simulated website for the
answers to six questions.
Alternating banners or static banners present on
the screen during the search task.
Participants’ eyes were tracked as they searched
the experimental website.
Independent Variable

Type of banner advertisement present
- Static banner advertisement
- Alternating banner advertisement

Variable manipulated between subjects

Participants randomly assigned to either group
IV: Banner Advertisements
Six ads, each one advertising a different
product, each ad shown only once
 Each ad shown for the length of one
question, ad shown changed each time the
participant clicks the “Done” button and
returned to the homepage
 Order in which the ads were presented
randomized using a Latin Square design

Dependent Variables
Attention capture, measured by the
number of fixations performed in the ROI
(banner area) during entire experiment
 Search times for the experimental
questions
 Implicit memory for the advertisement
content, measured by a recognition task
 Attitude toward the ads, measured by a
questionnaire

Participants
 10
participants
 2 male, 8 female
 Age range 18-21
Materials
 Simulated
website implemented in
C++ and OpenGL
 Replicated an Internet news site, The
Herald Online
 Contained buttons and text links for
the user to click on
 Banner always present at the top
center of the screen
Materials
 Recognition
task implemented in
Flash and taken online
 Shown 12 images of ads, only 6 of
which had actually been present
during the experiment
 Attitude questionnaire
Materials: Eye Tracker Lab
Materials: Capture Program
Materials: Capture Program
Materials: Recognition Task
Procedure




Six questions asked, one at a time, each one
read aloud to participants
Participants clicked a “Done” button present on
the screen before stating the answer they found
aloud
Participants who made incorrect answers were
allowed to move on
All search times measured with a stopwatch,
began when experimenter finished reading
question aloud, ended when participant clicked
“Done” button
Procedure
 During
experiment, participants were
presented with 6 different banner
advertisements
 Used eye tracker to measure total
number of fixations
 Each question had a different banner
 Banner changed only when
participant clicked “Done”
Procedure


After completing the search task,
participants performed the recognition
task using a web browser
Participants then completed the attitude
questionnaire (Answered on a 5 point
Likert-type scale)
Results: Average Number of Fixations
Static banner group made an average of
43 fixations (SD=54.19).
 Alternating banner group made an
average of 166 fixations (SD=224.8).
 No significant differences between the
alternating banner group and the static
banner group (p=0.27).
 Alternating banner group made more
overall fixations than the static banner
group.

Results: Scanpath Example
Results: Scanpath Example
Results: Average Number of Fixations
Results: Search Times


No significant difference between the groups for
each of the experimental questions.
Alternating banner group had a higher overall
mean search time than the static banner group
(p=0.04).
Results: Search Times
Static
Alternating
t-test significance
Q1
44.60
(SD=53.3)
26.00
(SD=8.9)
.062
Q2
37.40
(SD=11.5)
35.40
(SD=14.5)
.942
Q3
34.00
(SD=11.1
35.80
(SD=20.7)
.414
Q4
31.40
(SD=24.4)
63.80
(SD=41.7)
.363
Q5
87.80
(SD=51.8)
110.4
(SD=46.1)
.478
Q6
56.40
(SD=40.5)
71.60
(SD=50.5)
.412
Results: Recognition Task
 Scored
as a ratio of hits and a ratio
of false alarms
 Alternating banner group exhibited
ratios closer to chance (.50)
 Static banner group performed
better on recognition task
Results: Attitude Survey
 Answered
using a 5 point Likert-type
scale
 Both groups exhibited a neutral
attitude toward the ads that were
presented
 No significant differences between
the groups for each question mean
Results: Attitude Survey
static
2.5
2
alternating
2.2
1.8
1.8 1.8
1.8
1.6
1.5
1
0.5
0
Q1
Q2
Q3
Discussion





Neither banner ad was significantly more
effective at capturing user attention
The number of fixations did not promote the
recognition memory for the ads
Contrary to the hypothesis, both groups exhibited
a neutral attitude toward the banners ads
Overall users pay little attention to the banner
ads which supports the idea of “Banner
Blindness”
Further research on the topic should investigate
other forms of Internet advertising