Posting in Technology
New research shows that our minds have no trouble making sense of super-short commercials.
While fifteen seconds might not seem like enough time to do much of anything, new research shows that it could be all our brains need to digest an advertisement.
According to NeuroFocus, a Nielsen-owned research group based in Berkeley, Calif., 30-second commercials can be just as persuasive to viewers when they’re condensed into 15-second spots and in some cases, these newly edited ads can be more effective than the originals.
To prove that ads clocking in at only one-fourth of a minute can work just as well as the longer varieties, the group used a technology called neuro-compression. Developed by NeuroFocus founder, Dr. A.K. Pradeep, the technique essentially selects the most effective scenes within a television ad and pastes them into a shorter, more “neurologically impactful” version.
To identify these neuro-friendly scenes, researchers measured the brain activity of subjects as they watched advertisements and looked for moments that triggered attention, emotion and memory in participants. Once these provoking scenes were noted, researchers were able to cut out less effective seconds and condense the ads to half of their original lengths.
“Our brains are so smart, they retain the key pieces of logic, the key pieces of the flow,” Pradeep said. “If you threw out all the fillers … and got to the core, it’s a lot more effective. [Neuro-Compression] ends up producing a better product.”
While the shorter, repackaged ads will most likely reduce costs for advertisers, they could also prove effective for short-attention span platforms like online and mobile, allowing marketers to use the same advertisement for each format.
The group is currently working with CBS Corporation to develop faster-paced commercials.
Jun 30, 2012
. . .they could also prove effective for short-attention span platforms like online and mobile, . . .. Just what I need, more drivel delivered to my phone. I hopr the volume legislation passed for TV applies to online as well. I hesitate to play any of the video news on my computer because the ads blast out so loud and then the actual thing I want to watch is barely audible even at boosted volume.
Ever since I've been using a DVR to skip forward 30 seconds at a time, I've realized that most commercials' content can be transmitted in seconds. If advertisers realized this, they'd no longer have to spend so much money on purchasing airtime.
Assuming anyone is actually watching! First thing I do is hit the Mute button then head to the kitchen. Ads are just so obnoxious and loud they turn me off. I've never bought anything as a result of a TV ad, so as far I'm concerned companies are wasting their money.
Anyone remember Blipverts from Max Headroom in the 1980's? As I recall the ads were so short with so much information that some people could not "absorb" them and died from watching them...
Make them shorter? Now in stead of having ten commercials per break they can get in twenty or thirty. Isn't there such a thing as commercial overload?
Actually, the better, the better. Some TV commercials are clever or catchy or funny, but when the commercial's over, you can ask your view companion, "what were they advertising", and they might not know.
It happens at about 7 minutes of commercials per hour. Anything more and people complain. Many shows today have up to 19 minutes of commercials in an hour long show. I think the average is around 15 minutes per hour. The proliferation of commercials has also altered TV screen play styles. TV shows in the 60s and 70s were designed around a 3 act script to allow for 3 commercial breaks. The flow of the show is built around these breaks. Today writers have to deal with 4 and 5 act scripts in a shorter time frame for the actual show because of more commercials, more frequently. This is a large part of why many of the better TV shows are either on the pay per view channels or, as I think it was Breaking Bad did last year, have sponsors for each episode to allow for minimal commercial breaks. If they were smart, and most TV executives are more lucky than smart, they would go back to 3 commercial breaks, the cut the average number of commercials per break by 10 percent and just shorten the breaks. That is what all the studies have been telling them for over 20 years.