Talk:Annoyance factor

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Annoyance factor article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Marketing & Advertising Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Dramatic structure#Rising action|rising action]] The anchor (#Rising action) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Analysis exhibit involving annoyance factor

Factor analysis of perceptual items and attitude measures in online advertising:

I put this here with the hope that someone might artfully explain it in laymen language for possible inclusion in the article.

("The Function of Format: Consumer Responses to Six On-Line Advertising Formats," by Kelli S. Burns, PhD, and Richard J. Lutz, PhD, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 35, No. 1, Spring 2006, pps. 53–63; OCLC 4646618174; ISSN 0091-3367; accessible via JSTOR at www.jstor.org/stable/20460712)

Academicians Kelli S. Burns, PhD, and Richard J. Lutz, PhD, surveyed online users in 2002. In doing so, they chose six online ad formats: (i) banners, (ii) pop-ups, (iii) floating ads, (iv) skyscrapers, (v) large rectangles, and (vi) interstitials.

To develop perceptual factors, ratings of the 15 perceptual items for all six on-line ad formats were run through principal components analysis with varimax rotation. The authors inferred – from a scree plot – a possible three-factor solution. The first three factors accounted for over 68% of the total variance. The remaining 12 reflected no more than 5% of the variance, each. Table 1, below, produced by Burns and Lutz, shows the loadings of the factors generated through principal component extraction and varimax rotation.

Table 1
Summary of Factor Loadings for the Rotated Three-Factor Solution for Perceptual Items
	Perception	Factor scores
		Factor I entertainment	Factor II annoyance	Factor III information
1)	Innovative	0.81	(0.01)	0.07
2)	Different	0.75	(0.01)	(0.06)
3)	Entertaining	0.75	(0.27)	0.14
4)	Sophisticated	0.72	(0.07)	0.22
5)	Amusing	0.71	(0.34)	0.11
6)	Elaborate	0.70	0.24	0.17
7)	Eye-catching	0.70	0.24	0.17
8)	Attractive	0.64	(0.37)	0.32
9)	Disruptive	(0.04)	0.89	(0.21)
10)	Intrusive	0.06	0.87	(0.14)
11)	Overbearing	(0.03)	0.86	(0.23)
12)	Annoying	(0.12)	0.85	(0.25)
13)	Informative	0.08	(0.23)	0.84
14)	Useful	0.29	(0.37)	0.74
15)	Beneficial	0.35	(0.45)	0.65
(2002)		Green boldface data indicate items loading on each factor

Table 2
Mean Scores for Perceptual Factor Indices (with Coefficient ∝) for Each On-line Ad Format
	Banner	Pop-up	Skyscraper	Large rectangle	Floating	Interstitial
Attitude	n = 102	n = 102	n = 97	n = 117	n = 76	n = 81
Entertainment
M	2.87	2.94	3.20	3.19	4.01	3.51
SD	0.59	0.81	0.60	0.68	0.56	0.72
∝	0.79	0.89	0.83	0.87	0.78	0.89

Annoyance
M	2.95	4.19	2.23	2.96	3.69	3.18
SD	0.95	0.90	0.70	0.96	1.00	1.09
∝	0.85	0.84	0.88	0.90	0.94	0.95

Information
M	3.11	2.58	3.59	3.47	2.87	3.17
SD	0.89	0.85	0.72	0.72	0.88	0.79
∝	0.82	0.81	0.85	0.81	0.79	0.78
(2002)		Note: 1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree

Table 3
Mean Scores for Attitude Indices (with ∝) for Each On-line Ad Format
	Banner	Pop-up	Skyscraper	Large rectangle	Floating	Interstitial
Attitude	n = 102	n = 102	n = 97	n = 117	n = 76	n = 81
A_ad
M	3.42	2.86	4.05	3.90	3.40	3.53
SD	0.88	1.19	0.87	0.83	1.35	1.19
∝	0.86	0.94	0.94	0.89	0.96	0.95

A_format
M	3.25	1.85	3.83	3.36	3.07	3.29
SD	1.00	1.07	0.82	0.92	1.41	1.06
∝	0.92	0.95	0.92	0.92	0.97	0.95
(2002)

Table 4
Regression Results (β Weights and R²) for Predictors of A_format for All Formats
	Banner	Pop-up	Skyscraper	Large rectangle	Floating	Interstitial
Entertainment factor	0.23*	0.23*	0.42**	0.37**	0.30**	0.33**
Annoyance factor	(0.42)**	(0.42)**	(0.42)**	(0.47)**	(0.60)**	(0.51)**
Information factor	0.24*	0.24*	0.11	0.12	0.12	0.31**
Adjusted R²	0.44**	0.44**	0.53**	0.63**	0.69**	0.80**
p < 0.05 *p < 0.01
(2002)

Table 5
Regression Results (β Weights and R²) for A_format for All Formats
	Banner	Pop-up	Skyscraper	Large rectangle	Floating	Interstitial
Attitude towards format	0.39**	0.56**	0.68**	0.75**	0.81**	0.86**
Adjusted R²	0.14**	0.30**	0.45**	0.56**	0.66**	0.74**
p < 0.05 *p < 0.01
(2002)

Table 6
Regression Results (β Weights and R²) for Predictors of A_format for All Formats
	Banner		Pop-up		Skyscraper		Large rectangle		Floating		Interstitial
	w/o	with	w/o	with	w/o	with	w/o	with	w/o	with	w/o	with
Entertainment factor	0.31**	0.27*	0.53**	0.46**	0.36**	0.14	0.27**	0.04	0.28**	0.09	0.32**	0.08
Annoyance factor	(0.07)	0.00	(0.16)	(0.05)	(0.18)	0.05	(0.29)**	(0.01)	(0.39)**	(0.02)	(0.54)**	(0.17)
Information factor	0.25*	0.21	0.03	(0.03)	0.23*	0.18	0.25**	0.18*	0.26*	0.19*	0.18	(0.04)
A _format	—	0.16	—	0.27*	—	0.52*	—	0.62**	—	0.63**	—	0.72**
Adjusted R²	0.25	0.25	0.39	0.42	0.37	0.49	0.44	0.57	0.56	0.68	0.64	0.74
p < 0.05 p < 0.01 **All significant, p < .01
(2002)

Table 7
Percentage of Respondents Reporting Ad-Related Behaviors and Attitude-Behavior Correlations for Each On-line Ad Format
	Banner	Pop-up	Skyscraper	Large rectangle	Floating	Interstitial
	n = 102	n = 102	n = 97	n = 117	n = 76	n = 81
Behavioral measure	75.5	37.3	55.7	40.2	21.1	24.4
Percent clickthrough
Percent visits later	59.8	23.5	42.3	36.8	13.2	19.5
Clickthrough frequency
0	35.3	75.5	60.8	67.5	80.3	80.5
1–2	48.0	21.6	29.9	20.5	15.8	17.1
3 or more	16.7	2.9	9.3	4.3	3.9	2.4

Correlation between A _format and ...
Percent clickthrough	0.46**	0.34**	0.27**	0.14	0.29*	0.27*
Percent visits later	0.31**	0.26**	0.21*	0.08	0.21	0.33**
Clickthrough frequency	0.38**	0.42**	0.14	0.16	0.27*	0.23*
Behavioral index	0.46**	0.42**	0.25*	0.16	0.28*	0.33**
p < 0.05 *p < 0.01
(2002)