Television advertising television: measuring the ability of television promos to deliver ratings for new programs using single-source data

References

• Asquith, Kyle and Alison Hearn. 2012. Promotional prime time: “Advertainment,” internal network promotion, and the future of canadian television. Canadian Journal of Communication 37, no. 2: 244–57.
   Google Scholar
• BARB. 2013. The viewing report. Last Modified November. http://www.barb.co.uk/file/download/news/BarbViewingReport_HighRes.pdf. ( accessed September 10, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Barwise, Patrick, and Andrew Ehrenberg. 1988. Television and its audience. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Bedell, S. 1981. Up the tube: Prime-time TV and the silverman years. New York: Viking Press.
   Google Scholar
• Billings, Andrew C, Susan Tyler Eastman, and Gregory D Newton. 1998. Atlanta revisited: Prime-time promotion in the 1996 summer olympics. Journal of Sport & Social Issues 22, no. 1: 65–78.
   Google Scholar
• Broadbent, Simon. 1996. The gatekeeper takes the lie-detector test. Admap 31, no. December: 34–9.
   Google Scholar
• Broadbent, Simon. 1999. When to advertise. Henley-on-Thames: NTC Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Danaher, Peter J, Andre Bonfrer, and Sanjay Dhar. 2008. The effect of competitive advertising interference on sales of packaged goods. Journal of Marketing Research 45, no. 2: 211–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deloitte. 2014. Media consumer 2014: The digital divide. Machelen: Deloitte LLP.
   Google Scholar
• Easley, Richard W., Charles S. Madden, and Van Gray. 2012. A tale of two cultures: Revisiting journal editors' views of replication research. Journal of Business Research 66, no. 9: 1457–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastman, Susan Tyler. 2000. Research in media promotion, ed. Susan Tyler Eastman. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Eastman, Susan Tyler, Douglas A. Ferguson, and Robert A Klein. 2006. Media promotion and marketing for broadcasting, cable and the internet 5th ed., ed. Susan Tyler Eastman, Douglas A Ferguson, and Robert A Klein. Burlington, MA: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eastman, Susan Tyler, and Gregory D Newton. 1998. The impact of structural salience within on-air promotion. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 42, no. 1: 50–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastman, Susan Tyler, and Gregory D Newton. 1999. Hitting promotion hard: A network response to channel surfing and new competition. Journal of Applied Communication Research 27, no. 1: 73–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastman, Susan Tyler, Gregory D Newton, and Paul D Bolls. 2003. How promotional content changes ratings: The impact of appeals, humor, and presentation. Journal of Applied Communication Research 31, no. 3: 238–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastman, Susan Tyler, Gregory D Newton, and L Pack. 1996. Promoting prime-time programs in mega-sporting events. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 40, no. 3: 366–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrenberg, Andrew. 2000. Data reduction - analysing and interpreting statistical data. Journal of Empirical Generalisations in Marketing Science 5: 1–391.
   Google Scholar
• Ephron, E. 1995. More weeks, less weight: The shelf-space model of advertising. Journal of Advertising Research 35, no. 3: 18–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ephron, E. 1997. Recency planning. Journal of Advertising Research 37, no. 4: 61–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evanschitzky, Heiner, Carsten Baumgarth, Raymond Hubbard, and J Scott Armstrong. 2007. Replication research's disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research 60, no. 4: 411–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodhardt, Gerald, Andrew Ehrenberg, and Martin A Collins. 1975. The television audience - patterns of viewing. Hants: Gower Publishing Company Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Goodhardt, Gerald, Andrew Ehrenberg, and Martin A Collins. 1987. The television audience - patterns of viewing: An update. 2nd ed. Hants: Gower Publishing Company Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Edward C Malthouse, Christian Friege, Sonja Gensler, Lara Lobschat, Arvind Rangaswamy, and Bernd Skiera. 2010. The impact of new media on customer relationships. Journal of Service Research 13, no. 3: 311–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard, Raymond, and J Scott Armstrong. 1994. Replications and extensions in marketing: Rarely published but quite contrary. International Journal of Research in Marketing 11, no. 3: 233–48.
   Google Scholar
• Jardine, Bryony, Jenni Romaniuk, John G Dawes, and Virginia Beal. 2016. Retaining the primetime television audience. European Journal of Marketing 50, no. 7/8: 1290–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, John Philip. 1995a. Single-source research begins to fulfil its promise. Journal of Advertising Research 35, no. 3: 9–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, John Philip. 1995b. When ads work: New proof that advertising triggers sales. 1st ed. New York, NY: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, Rachel, Colin McDonald, and Byron Sharp. 2008. Pure single source data and take off time for project apollo. Admap 491, no. February: 32–5.
   Google Scholar
• Larguinat, Laurent, and Bill Harvey. 2011. The new research is bringing transparency between marketing and finance. ARF Audience Measurement 6.0. June 13.
   Google Scholar
• Lodish, Leonard M. 1998. STAS and behaviorscan - it's just not that simple. Journal of Advertising Research 38, no. 2: 54–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, Colin. 1992. How advertising works: A review of current thinking. Henley-on-Thames: Advertising Association in conjunction with NTC Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, Colin. 1996. Advertising sales effects. Admap, no. April: 39–43.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, Colin. 1997. Short-term advertising effects: How confident can we be? Admap, no. June: 36–9.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, Colin. 2003. Is your advertising working: A guide to evaluating campaign effectiveness. 9 vols. London, UK: World Advertising Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, Colin D P. 1969. Relationships between advertising exposure and purchasing behaviour. Market Research Society Conference. 67–98.
   Google Scholar
• Napoli, Philip. 2003. Audience economics: Media institutions and the audience marketplace: Columbia: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen. 2014. An era of growth: The cross-platform report. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2014/an-era-of-growth-the-cross-platform-report.html
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen. 2016. Arianna. Nielsen. http://en-us.nielsen.com/sitelets/cls/arianna.html. ( accessed October 14, 2016.).
   Google Scholar
• Owen, B. M. 1974. Television economics. New York, NY: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• OzTAM. 2010. Australian television audience measurement: Universe estimates year 2011. OzTAM. http://www.oztam.com.au/. ( accessed November 18, 2010).
   Google Scholar
• OzTAM. 2013. Time spent watching TV. http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/Stats_&_Graphs/Time_Spent_Viewing/Time_Spent_Viewing.pdf. ( accessed November 18, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Petrilli, Alex. 2011. Promo conversion: The tune in test. AM+ Virtual Conference. September 21–22.
   Google Scholar
• Reichel, W and L Wood. 1994. Beyond effective frequency. In Effective frequency. New York, NY: Advertising Research Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, Andrew. 1996. What do we know about advertising's short-term effects? Admap, no. February: 42–5.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, Andrew. 1998. Measuring the short-term sales effects of TV advertising. Admap, no. April: 50–6.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, Andrew. 1999. Recency, frequency and the sales effects of TV advertising. Admap, no. February: 40–4.
   Google Scholar
• Romaniuk, Jenni. 2012. Lifting the productivity of TV advertising: Nothing matters more than the brand. nothing. Journal of Advertising Research 52, no. 2: 146–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharp, Byron, Virginia Beal, and Martin Collins. 2009. Television: Back to the future. Journal of Advertising Research 49, no. 2: 211–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, Julian L, and Johan Arndt. 1980. The shape of the advertising response function. Journal of Advertising Research 20, no. 4: 11–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, David W., and David H Furse. 2000. Analysis of the impact of executional factors on advertising performance. Journal of Advertising Research 40, no. 6: 85–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, David W, and Scott Koslow. 1989. Executional factors and advertising effectiveness: A replication. Journal of Advertising 18, no. 3: 21–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, Jennifer, Rachel Kennedy, and Byron Sharp. 2009. Making generalizations about advertising's convex sales response function: Is once really enough? Journal of Advertising Research 49, no. 2: 198–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tellis, Gerard J. 2009. Generalizations about advertising effectiveness in markets. Journal of Advertising Research 49, no. 2: 240–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tellis, Gerard J., and Doyle L Weiss. 1995. Does TV advertising really affect sales? The role of measures, models, and data aggression. Journal of Advertising 14, no. 3: 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, James R. 1993. Catchy, yes but does it work?: The impact of broadcasting network promotion frequency and type on program success. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 37, no. 2: 197–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, James R. 2003. On-air promotion effectiveness for programs of different genres, familiarity, and audience demographics. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 47, no. 4: 618–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webster, James G, and Patricia F Phalen. 1997. The mass audience: Rediscovering the dominant model, communication series. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Webster, James G, Patricia F Phalen, and Lawrence Wilson Lichty. 2006. Ratings analysis: The theory and practice of audience research. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, Leslie. 2009. Short-term effects of advertising: Some well-established empirical law-like patterns. Journal of Advertising Research 49, no. 2: 186–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar