This paper concerns the planning, execution and communication of the results of Turkeyâs first âindustryâ readership survey. Three sets of problems needed to be resolved. First, Turkish media competition is intense, particularly amongst the principal publishers, and success could only be achieved through a newly-established joint industry committee and subsequent negotiation publisher by publisher. Second, major technical obstacles had to be overcome, as in the lack of sampling frames or of trained interviewers. Third, there was low awareness of the type of data to be produced, of their interpretation and of suitable data delivery software.
This paper describes the results of a study commissioned by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office from Research Surveys of Great Britain (RSGB) to determine whether the World Service is effective in communicating a positive impression of Great Britain to the audience. The study was based on the results of an interview survey of 750 adult residents of Lisbon in Portugal which was carried out in April and May 1990. In essence, the survey was designed to facilitate comparisons between listeners to the World Service (both via direct transmissions and rebroadcasts) and non-listeners in terms of their attitudes towards Britain. However, since attitudinal differences between these groups could simply be due to characteristics, other than exposure to the World Service, on which listeners and non-listeners are also differentiated, it was necessary to employ particular statistical techniques in order to make comparisons which were unbiased by the effects of these other factors. By means of this statistical analysis, groups of people were examined who were similar in respect of other characteristics likely to be predictive of relevant opinions about Britain. Scores derived from a number of relevant summary measures (reflecting different aspects of a battery of attitudes towards Britain) definitely tended to be higher amongst listeners than for non-listeners.
The main objectives of this paper are to demonstrate the relevance and value of data fusion, as a technique, in the Media research area, by reference to two case studies; and to discuss the variety of opinions and difficulties attaching to the assessment of the 'quality' of data fusion results. Subsequent to this introduction, we first briefly recapitulate the decisions to be taken in relation to any specific fusion. We then review, rather more fully, the criteria which are or which should be (in our opinion) employed, post hoc, to test data fusion output. An account of our case studies follows, with emphasis on the particular. Problems they presented and the solutions adopted. We conclude this introduction with a brief word on terminology. We shall use the term fusion' to imply the merging of data from two initially discrete files, whether or not the transfer of data is in both directions, A > B and B > A, or only one- way, whilst recognizing that others may prefer to label only the former 'fusion' and to term the latter, unidirectional transfer 'ascription' or 'injection'. We shall denote any variable common to both files as X and recognize three sub-sets of common variables: critical Variables, on which the values of a data-donor and a data recipient must match exactly, if information is to be transferred between them; matching variables, which are common and employed in the pairing of donors and recipients, but nonuritical; and (rarely) control variables, which are common but held out from the matching process, for testing purposes. We shall employ Y to denote any variable initially unique either to the donor file or to the receiver file. Yd will stand for any donor variable; Yf for a donor variable, after fusion and then present, therefore, in the receiver file; and Yr any variable unique to a receiver file. For both X's and Y's, subscripts will only be added when it is necessary to distinguish between two or more variables in any group.
The history of media research displays not only continuing refinement of the methods of audience enumeration and classification, but also a questioning of the adequacy of 'mere numbers and repeated demands for more qualitative data. This paper examines what we mean by quality of impact; discusses what factors might be relevant; and examines such evidence as there is for their relative importance. It is concluded that, were fuller data on such variables available, either they might not be widely used or they might have limited effects on media selection, in practice. Whilst further, methodological research is favoured, the devotion of any large proportion of media audience research funds to measuring 'quality of impact factors is consequently questioned.
The ratio of the estimated readership of a newspaper or magazine to its net sale or circulation - 'readers-per- copy' - remains a controversial statistic, principally because many people believe, erroneously, either that similar publications should, necessarily, have the same numbers of readers-per-copy or that readership should increase or decrease proportionally with circulation. This paper develops a simple and robust, exponential model of the readership/circulation relationship, which generalises across publication types, readership measurement methods, countries, time periods and regions. Whilst the model is, intentionally, only descriptive, it can already assist in pointing towards comparative bias in readership estimation, between titles or measurement methods. In a final section, improvement of the predictive accuracy of the model is discussed, alongside the possible inclusion of other variables - notably the source of copies and the degree of interest in a newspaper or magazine shown by potential secondary readers.
This chapter is concerned with research into print media in the sense of newspapers and magazines, whether aimed at a wide, general audience or a narrower, more specialised one. This introductory section comprises, first, a brief review of the several purposes to which research in this area is put and, second, a synopsis of the order and content of the other parts of the chapter.
This paper both demonstrates that (at least in South Africa) media research does influence media planning and also shows the considerable value of measuring (rather than assuming) the needs, satisfactions and dissatisfactions of media data users.
What has really happened over those ten years? Does the contribution of the techniques outweigh the limitations of unresolved methodological issues? What is the evidence of practical marketing application? And how far does Europe lead or lag behind the USA? Without any pretence at a thorough technical evaluation, this paper attempts to provide at least partial answers to these questions. However, its desirable, first to recapitulate - necessarily briefly - what nonmetric multidimensional scaling is all about and second, to set its marketing application in an historical perspective.
Four basic problem areas are identified and discussed. An adequate conceptual framework of the advertising effect process, within which 'qualitative' media factors operate, is seen as comprising four elements: vehicle; message; audience; and contact situation. They must be regarded as interactive variables, not just additive ones. Individual factors to be hypothesised are re-grouped as physical vehicle characteristics on the one hand and aspects of the audience/vehicle interface on the other. Under the latter heading, 'behaviour' and 'attitudes' are seen as different aspects of the same phenomenon. In the measurement problem area, the main discussion is of the validity of the dependent variables used to assess the apparent effects of qualitative factors. Lastly, in the application of 'qualitative' data, the view is taken that they must, inevitably, be integrated with the existing, well developed techniques for comparative media assessment at the quantitative, vehicle audience level.
This paper falls into two main sections: In the first, some brief account is given, as background, of the history of joint readership research in Britain, of the present administration of the National Readership Survey and of Its methods, content, financing and data access. The second main part of the paper discusses some present problems of the NRS, but does not concern Itself with technical questions. The views expressed throughout are those of the author but not necessarily of JIGNARS officially.
My task, then, is to try and talk collectively about the problems of joint sponsored readership surveys on the basis of experience in five different markets, represented by the written papers. I think we might begin by taking a phrase from the Dutch paper which very much summarises what some people feel about joint sponsored surveys: "An inevitable but, we hope, a profitable evil" . 'Evil' in the sense that the sheer task of obtaining cooperation in a survey of this sort can give rise to very real problems, as we shall see, between the co-operating parties; but 'profitable' , we would hope, because in the long run it is better for these co-operating parties to act together than to act separately.
On behalf of certain Unilever marketing companies, Research Bureau conducts continuous brand image measurements under the title of the "Brand Performance Survey". This survey involves, for a given product field, some 6,000 interviews in a year with a multi-stage national sample of urban housewives; its quarterly reports contain data on awareness of, and attitudes to each major brand and its advertising. Although primarily designed to replace, by economic continuous research, ad hoc image studies, the BPS naturally includes specific measures of the type commonly employed in the assessment of the effect of advertising campaigns. During 1965, the Brand Performance Survey was used as a vehicle for investigating the apparent relationships of these measures to purchasing behaviour. In July of that year, re-contact was attempted with 4, 500 respondents first interviewed between July, 1964 and March, 1965; a success rate of approximately 75% was achieved. Four product fields were covered. At the second interview, the usership questions forming part of the regular BPS questionnaire were repeated. The present paper is restricted to results relating to one field only, the product being a low-ticket, frequently purchased item with high penetration. For simplicity, the data to be cited is only for the shortest period between initial interview and recontact, averaging five months approximately.