Active Media: A framework for digital media effectiveness

Active Media: a Framework for Digital Media Effectiveness Jamil Alio*, Mohammad Ibrahim**, David Pickton***, and Marie Bassford**** De Montfort University, Leicester UK * ** [email protected], [email protected], *** [email protected], **** [email protected] Abstract

This paper defines active media as a new paradigm that captures the richness of digital media in affecting every aspect of our lives. The term active media embraces interactive, coactive, and proactive digital media. Active media provide more dynamic and individualised experiences, and target recipients more accurately. Active media allow the integration of different human-centric systems into the era of system of systems. This new paradigm also overcomes the shortcomings of the existing paradigms for media consumption that still consider humans as information processors where media are considered as passive information objects processed by humans. However, media play more active roles in shaping our lives and in changing our behaviour and outlook, thus the process-oriented separation of passive objects and information processors is no longer valid when representing the interaction between media and humans. In this paper, e-marketing is used as an example of the application of active media. Emarketing environments are evolving into becoming more active and this could have a significant impact on the success of products and services. Applying the proposed framework on e-marketing communications will overcome the limitations of existing assessing methodologies by introducing a far wider and richer set of measures to describe, assess, and enhance the effectiveness of active media. The paper introduces an effectiveness framework based on a set of deliberate media effectiveness measures, and gives a sound rationale for choosing these measures. The introduced framework will help in accurately understanding, assessing, and enhancing the impact of active media on human-centred activities.

1. Introducing active media

Digital media are the media produced and distributed by digital information processing machines. The term multimedia includes any combination of digital, analogue, spatial, and sensory inputs and outputs [1]. Interactivity adds an extra dimension to multimedia establishing a two-way information interchange connection and formulating what is known as rich media [2] or interactive media. The term

“interactive media” highlights the interactive connotation, which is considered the key difference between the older style linear multimedia and the new. While some traditional (non-digital) media enable twoway interactive communications (e.g. language in a Q&A session or a seminar) the term “interactive media” is usually applied to digital media only. The synchronised or coordinated use of multiple interactive media elements, in addition to scalability properties over multiple media-enabling devices (e.g. screens, frames in a web page) is known as simultaneous media consumption [3, 4], or media multitasking and this concept has a great effect on human attention and perception. Combining a media multitasking behaviour with interactive media results in what could be referred to as coactive media. Proactive computing and systems represent the next generation of digital systems and applications, and promise to overcome the limitations of existing interactive technologies [5]. Computerised proactivity can be naturally extended to include digital media systems and applications in order to create proactive media. With the evolution of the domain of computermediated communications, several issues are noteworthy [6]: First is the functional interchange taking place between the different communication domains (e.g. the broadcast domain with the interpersonal domain such as YouTube), second is the issue of adaption/adoption of new technologies (e.g. learning curves), third is the observed phenomenon of media multitasking, and finally, the role played by the Internet-related technologies and infrastructure which cannot be ignored. As a natural result of these issues, computer-mediated communications have evolved to enable information interchange in highly active situations. This evolution has also been reflected onto digital media. The digital media used in such active situations can be phrased as active media. Active media – that are being introduced in this paper for the first time – embrace interactive, coactive, and proactive media. The use of active media will radically change the way digital media are consumed, for example, active media have synergistic effects through the

simultaneous usage of multiple media elements. Compared to traditional media, active media promise to be more dynamic and individualised by including the integration of the depth of interactivity-based involvements. Active media also have the potential to target media recipients more accurately, and to track and analyse their response more efficiently. Contemporary theories on digital media treat media as passive (e.g. media richness theory and theory of media synchronicity [7]), even though some consider media objects as agents, they implicitly assume that media are passive due to the dichotomy of separating the data encoded within media from their process and functionalities. Our novel approach, however, introduces active media as a paradigm that mirrors the whole digital/virtual universe to the real physical world as shown in Figure 1. Media activity

interactivity, coactivity, and proactivity

Real world

Virtual world

Reflection / Fusion

Users

Active media

Digital media effectiveness should be examined through a social information processing view [6] in order to embrace important elements such as culture. Cultural elements have to be considered in order to create more effective media, because the way humans generate signals and interpret symbols depends on their cultural background [1]. Therefore, active media should implement such cues during their activity with humans in order to become more effective. The majority of work in current media and interaction analyses assumes a standard model that fits all different cultures, in which the only difference between systems deployed in different parts of the world is language. This language-only model expects people to adapt to different technologies using Western thought models [1]. It is believed that this approach discourages creativity and leads not only to a technology divide, but also to a content gap among different cultures and among different social classes. Moreover, the increased and simultaneous media consumption [14] requires a major re-thinking of how media are used [4], and raises the need for a new way of assessing the effectiveness of digital media.

3. E-marketing application

Biometrics / Empirical cues

Figure 1 Real / Virtual world mirroring

Active media have the potential to become the link that provides the integration and fusion between the real and virtual worlds. Within this context, it is beneficial to borrow from the real world theories, and extend them in regulating the active digital world; this extension will also capture the real life-like properties of active media. Social and human based theories (e.g. the structuration theory[8-11] and activity theory[12, 13]) are perfect examples of such theories. The use of a theory from one field (a social theory in this case) into another (active media) can be conceptualised in Figure 2 [11]: Theorise

Analyse

2. An overview of media effectiveness

Operationalise

Figure 2 uses of theory from one field in another field [11]

E-marketing environments represent new communication setups in which media are considered of a great importance. Examining active media effectiveness within the context of an e-marketing communications setup is beneficial, because emarketing communications enable relational exchanges within various digitally networked interactive environments [15]. Moreover, e-marketing environments are evolving into becoming more complex and more active, and this could have a significant impact on the success of both products and services. Marketers have realised the need for a comprehensive framework that grounds deliberate measures of media effectiveness [16, 17], not only because active media have changed marketing communication from a one-way process into a twoway process, but also because e-marketing environments are evolving into becoming more active. In addition, the value of active media does not only rest within the promotional element of the e-marketing mix, but also in other elements like product and price. Although the structuration theory - introduced by Giddens [8] and refined by Sewell [18] - was originally proposed for social studies, it has been applied into other fields of research [9, 19, 20]. The theoretical concepts of the structuration theory provide a strong and suitable foundation to be used in describing the

digital universe that active media establish. It can especially highlight the highly active environments in which active media objects exist such as active emarkets. The structuration theory was applied to analyse the e-marketing communication process in active environments. In this application, communication is considered as a set of interactions of active and knowledgeable (experienced) actors (or agents) that take place and evolve overtime towards achieving desired results, and these interactions do not necessary have to have a predetermined form, because they keep reshaping and developing through time. Figure 3 represents applying the structuration theory to online marketing communications [19]. Siginification

Interpretation

Marketing Communications

New Interaction Structure

Goals Sources Of Structure

Meaning

Effectivness

Interaction

Outcomes

Figure 3 applying the structuration theory to online marketing communications [19]

4. Assessing the effectiveness of active media

To assess the role that media play in the communication process, a plethora of quantitative measures are traditionally being used, in a web environment, for example, the set includes measures such as page impressions, visitor sessions, clickthrough rate, and hit counters [2, 21, 22]. Such “exposure” measures (in addition to sales’ figures) do not provide an answer to many important questions (i.e. who? and how often?) and they totally give no indication about many important effectiveness elements such as the visual effectiveness. They also ignore the synergistic effect of the coactive usage of media which reflects on effectiveness as well. In short such traditional exposure measures only indicate the number of eye-balls that were looking at media, and do not represent a complete answer to the question of how effective the media really are. In order to enhance the active communication process, the full range of the effects of goals on how consumers use the environment and respond to it has to be fully explored. Thus the traditional measures that try to observe response and outcome alone (such as level of awareness, liking, interest and enjoyment [23]) are far from being complete [19], because they eliminate the importance of consumers’ goals as they either ignore them or consider them as another descriptive variable.

Biometric data (such as eye movements’ data and brain waves) present a set of measurable attentional metrics that promise to be of a great importance in assessing the effectiveness of media, especially in human-based activities and interactions. The conventional measuring methods usually depend on conscious reflection and conscious control. Users’ description and verbalisation of their own behaviour might be biased in terms of social expectations, political correctness or simply to give a good impression, therefore, biometric data reveal higher validity in data compared to conventional methods, moreover, some biometric data experiments have even showed reverse results compared to data assessed with thinking aloud protocols and questionnaires [24]. Biometric data also demonstrate other elements not detectable with conventional measurements, for example, eye tracking data provide insight into at least one aspect of the internal action model [25]: how the agents disperse visual attention through a communication process, in addition, eye gaze offers some unique properties that make it an excellent modality for proactive interaction analysis [26]. Using biometrics minimises the awareness of the test situation and guarantees more natural test environments as well as eliminates the unwanted effects of conscious and social expectations, it also promises to overcome the limitations of conventional assessment methods and thinking aloud protocols. Therefore, we believe that it is beneficial to use biometric data for measuring the effectiveness of active media. In active e-markets (which represent highly active communication setups), there are four essential elements to be recognised as the basic elements for assessing communication effectiveness [19]: interactivity, goals, effects of substitution and complementarity, and media characteristics (Figure 4). Interactivity

Goals Effectivness

Effects of substitution and complementarity

Media characteristics

Figure 4 the basic elements of communication effectiveness in active e-markets [19]

Researchers have shown an increasing interest in exploring interactivity and describing its effects, especially in computer-mediated environments [6, 2731]. However, current traditional measures are unable to capture the unique characteristics of interactivity [6], therefore depending only on these measures to evaluate active media will definitely give a dismal picture of their contribution towards the computer-mediated communication process.

Interactivity in the context of e-environments can serve two purposes: one is to be considered as means of communication in service of achieving goals, and the other is considering interactivity as a goal by itself in order to achieve smoother communication and richer information exchange. These prevailing views on interactivity can be categorised into two perspectives: a device-centric and a message-centric. A device-centric perspective looks at the technological infrastructure of the computer-mediated communications, while the message-centric focuses on the communication patterns enabled by the technological infrastructure. Considering the special nature of the electronic marketplace, interactivity effectiveness measurements should cover the following four dimensions of interactivity [6]: • Bidirectionality: the two-way communication characteristics. • Timeliness: e.g. no delay in the interactive communication [29]. • Mutual controllability: the ease of use in the interactive communication process. • Responsiveness: e.g. the level of engagement in the interactive communication process [29]. Measuring the effectiveness of any particular process cannot be completed without considering the context in which this process is taking place, hence, considering the goals is necessary. The most important goal measuring parameters are [19]: • Ideals: represent the abstract attributes (e.g. actions or behaviour) that are to be possessed to best serve the fulfilment of a certain goal. • Goodness of fit: describes, on the other hand, how strongly a certain attribute is linked to a certain goal. The effects of substitution and complementarity are closely related to goals, as it is difficult to address substitution and complementary activities apart from understanding the goals driving the activity. The effects of substitution and complementarity are of a special importance in e-marketing communications, because these effects affect the communication process, and change the whole value of the interaction, as well as the agents’ interpretations of the communication activities. Measuring these effects can be achieved through two metrics: • Value effect: as these effects may add, reduce, or have no effect on the values of a certain activity. • Alternatives for achieving specific goals [19]: many activities are considered substitutes for the same outcome, while the others are expected complements for overall communication activity. To measure media characteristics we propose a set of measures to include: structural, exposure, selfcontained and usability characteristics.

The proposed effectiveness summarised in Figure 5.

parameters

are

Effectivness Interactivity

Goals Ideals

Bidirectionality

Goodness Timeliness

of fit

Mutual controllability

...

Effects of Substitution

Media

and complementarity

charecterstics

Value effect

Structural

Alternatives for specific goals

...

Responsiveness

Exposure

Multimediatility

Impressions

Hypermdeiatility

Sessions

Integration

...

...

Selfcontained

Usability

Colour

Learnability

Graphics

Reliability

Size

Efficiency

Click-through rate

Location Hit counters

Satisfaction

...

... Figure 5 active media effectiveness parameters

5. Building the new effectiveness framework

Our effectiveness framework for e-marketing communications covers the previously mentioned effectiveness measures as shown in Figure 6:

Figure 6 Active media effectiveness framework for e-marketing communications

The upcoming framework (as shown in Figure 7) handles effectiveness as a portion of a quality assurance (QA) framework for active media. This QA framework will integrate with the overall metaframework that will potentially regulate the whole digital world. Meta-framework Reflection framework

Fusion framework

QA framework

Media activity framework

.....

Figure 7 Active media meta-framework's components

...

6. Conclusion

This paper introduces active media as the digital media that have the following properties: interactivity, simultaneous media consumption, and proactiveness, and highlights the potential contribution of active media against current traditional paradigms. The paper also discusses media effectiveness based on a set of deliberate measures, details the rationale for choosing these measures, and examines the effectiveness of active media in communication activities using emarketing as an example of such activities. Finally, the paper introduces an effectiveness framework optimised for e-marketing communications as a portion of a quality assurance framework for active media.

7. References

1. Jaimes, A., Human-Centered Multimedia:Culture, Deployment, and Access. Visions and Views - IEEE, 2006. 13(1): p. 12-19. 2. Green, J.S., e-media: How to Use Electronic Media for Effective Marketing Communications. 2000: World Advertising Research Center. 3. Jaffe, J. Tap into Simultaneous Media Consumption. 2003 [cited; Available from: http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/1080.asp. 4. Pilotta, J.J., D.E. Schultz, and G. Drenik, Simultaneous media usage: A critical consumer orientation to media planning. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 2004. 3(3): p. 285-292. 5. Tennenhouse, D., Proactive computing, in Communications of the ACM. 2000. p. 43-50. 6. Yadav, M.S. and R. Varadarajan, Interactivity in the Electronic Marketplace: An Exposition of the Concept and Implications for Research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2005. 33(4): p. 585-603. 7. Dennis, A.R. and J.S. Valacich. Rethinking Media Richness: Towards a Theory of Media Synchronicity. in Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 1999: IEEE. 8. Giddens, A., The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. 1986: Polity Press, Cambridge in association with Basil Blackwell, Oxford. 9. Jones, M.R. and H. Karsten, Review: Structuration Theory and Information Systems Research. 2003, The Judge Institute of Management, University of Cambridge. 10. DeSanctis, G. and M.S. Poole, Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory. Organization Science, 1994. 5(2): p. 121147. 11. Rose, J., Evaluating the contribution of structuration theory to the information systems discipline, in 6th European Conference on Information Systems. 1998. 12. Kaptelinin, V. and B.A. Nardi, Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design (Acting with Technology). 2006: The MIT Press. 13. Widjaja, I. and S. Balbo, Structuration of activity: a view on human activity, in Proceedings of the 19th conference of the computer-human interaction special interest group (CHISIG) of Australia on Computer-human interaction: citizens online: considerations for today and the future. 2005, Computer-Human

Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG) of Australia Narrabundah, Australia: Canberra, Australia. 14. BIGresearch, Simultaneous Media Survey (SIMM). 2007, BIGresearch: Columbus, OH , USA. 15. Kalyanam, K. and S. McIntyre, The E-Marketing Mix: A Contribution of the E-Tailing Wars. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2002. 20(487). 16. Hoffman, D.L. and T.P. Novak, Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations Journal of Marketing, 1996. 60(3): p. 50-68. 17. Zeff, R. and B. Aronson, Advertising on the Internet 2nd ed. 1999, NewYork: John Wiley. 18. Sewell, W., Toward a Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation. 1989, Center for Research on Social Organization. 19. Stewart, D.W. and P.A. Pavlou, From Consumer Response to Active Consumer: Measuring the Effectiveness of Interactive Media. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2002. 30(4): p. 376-396. 20. Algesheimer, R. and C. Gurau, Introducing structuration theory in communal consumption behavior research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 2008. 11(2): p. 227 - 245. 21. Haig, M., the e-marketing handbook. 2001, London, UK: Kogan Page Limited. 22. Cannon, H.M., Addressing New Media with Conventional Media Planning. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 2001. 1(2). 23. Blythe, J., Essentials of Marketing. 3rd ed. 2005: Financial Times Prentice Hall. 24. Schiessl, M., et al., Eye tracking and its application in usability and media research. Journalausgabe "Sonderheft: Blickbewegung" MMI-interaktiv Journal, 2003. 25. Duchowski, A., Eye Tracking Methodology Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. 2007: Springer-Verlag London Limited. 26. Hyrskykari, A., P. Majaranta, and K.-J. Räihä. Proactive Response to Eye Movements. in Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT'03. 2003: IOS Press. 27. McMillan, S.J., A Four-Part Model of CyberInteractivity: Some Cyber-Places are More Interactive Than Others. New Media and Society, 2002. 4(2): p. 271-291. 28. Downes, E.J. and S.J. McMillan, Defining Interactivity: A Qualitative Identification of Key Dimensions New Media & Society, 2000. 2(2): p. 157-179. 29. Hwang, J.-S. and S.J. McMillan. The Role of Interactivity and Involvement in Attitude toward the Web Site. in Proceedings of the 2002 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising. 2002. 30. McMillan, S.J. and J.-S. Hwang, Measures of Perceived Interactivity: An Exploration of the Role of Direction of Communication, User Control, and Time in Shaping Perceptions of Interactivity. Journal of Advertising, 2002. 31(3): p. 41-54. 31. McMillan, S.J. Interactivity Is in the Eye of the Beholder: Function, Perception, Involvement, and Attitude toward the Web Site. in Proceedings of the 2000 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising 2000.