The Creativeness and Effectiveness of Online Interactive Rich Media Advertising
Ginger Rosenkrans
Pepperdine University
Abstract
This field experiment attempts to determine whether online, interactive, rich media advertising garners more user interactivity, measured as click-throughs, than non-interactive, rich media ads run during the same time frame on a major regional newspaper's Web site. The interactive rich media ad may generate more interactivity with regard to its click-through rates compared with mouse rollovers. Various interactivity theories, creativity literature, and distinctiveness theory provide a framework. The online, interactive, rich media ad designed for this study appeared on a major regional newspaper's host site for two weeks to obtain comparative data with non-interactive, rich media ads. The analysis of the comparative data used descriptive and inferential statistics. The interactive, rich media ad earned significantly higher click-through rates than the non-interactive, rich media ads. It also garnered more user engagement and encouraged more user interactivity. The interactive ad exhibits higher levels of interactivity, which increase user involvement, as indicated by the mouse rollover findings.
Keywords: rich media, interactivity, online advertising, creativity, effectiveness, rollovers, click-throughs
Introduction
Online advertising spending's change in growth for 2008 was 10.5%, and it is expected to experience a 0.1% change in ad spending growth in 2009 and 10% change in growth in 2010 (Emarketer 2009b). In 2007, online ad spending for search, display, and rich media reached $21.2 billion in 2007, and these levels reached $23.5 billion in 2008 (Emarketer 2009a). Online ad spending for the same ad formats likely will reach $24.4 billion in 2009 and $26.7 billion in 2010..
By 2005, the Internet was available to 1 billion people worldwide, and approximately 845 million people used it regularly (Emarketer 2006). The United States contains one of the largest Internet populations, with 175.4 million online users. Broadband users spend an average of one hour and forty minutes online each day (Emarketer 2007). Furthermore, 80% of advertisers use the Internet (Wesiman 2006), and online ad spending is likely to keep growing as more advertisers recognize the potential for building brands and delivering online and offline sales.
The interactive nature of the online medium offers rich potential for research opportunities, including examinations of the effectiveness of rich media advertising (Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004). The design and metrics employed determine online advertising recall and behavioral responses. Accurately measuring online advertising thus is essential for advertisers, who employ metrics to evaluate online ads and facilitate informed decisions about advertising strategies (Bhat, Bevans, and Sengupta 2002).
Despite the prevalent use of rich media ad formats, little understanding clarifies its effects on attention, the definition or measurement of user engagement, means to enhance interactivity by increasing conversion events or click-through rates, or accurate measures of effectiveness (Gatarski 2002; Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004). Cost per thousands (CPMs) or impressions, performance models such as click-through rates (CTR), and hybrid models offer means to measure ad performance (Emarketer 2005). In the first half of 2005, 48% of total online ad revenue was generated through CPMs, 40% from performance models, and 20% from hybrid models. Marketers often use the CTR to understand how customers interact with sites (Totty 2003).
For advertisers, online advertising campaign decisions may be complicated by the array of ad formats and insufficient knowledge about their effectiveness (Burns and Lutz 2006). Therefore, they require greater understanding about the use, effectiveness, and measurement of interactive online rich media (Burns and Lutz 2006; Gatarski 2002; Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004; Simon and Pappas 2004), as well as more studies of the interactivity of consumers and ad messages (Stewart and Pavlou 2002). Stewart and Pavlou (2002) assert the need for more studies of the interactivity of consumers and ad messages is most likely due to the nature of the interactive medium, which requires a different way to conceptualize measures of advertising effectiveness.
Internet interactivity and its implications for the emerging electronic marketplace require greater understanding as well (Carlson, Grove, and Stafford 2005; Yadav and Varadarajan 2005). The application of distinctiveness theory to online advertising has generated some research in the area of animated banner ads; however, more research is needed pertaining to the application of this theory to Internet advertising (Phillips and Lee 2005). Furthermore, research should consider the types of metrics that can best determine online advertising effectiveness (Carlson, Grove, and Stafford 2005; Lemonnier 2008).
This field experiment study therefore tries to address these research needs by applying literature pertaining to interactivity, distinctiveness theory, and creativity to an online rich media advertising context. The design and development of the study's interactive rich media ad emphasizes user engagement in the form of clicks and mouse rollovers. The interactive rich media ad appeared on a regional newspaper's host site (i.e., venturacountystar.com) for two weeks, during which time the ad was measured for its effectiveness using behavioral analysis metrics. By investigating the effectiveness of this online ad format, this study provides researchers and advertisers with information about consumer involvement in online interactive rich media ads and suggests some metrics to evaluate online ads that may facilitate more informed decisions about advertising strategies. This study also provides further research opportunities pertaining to user engagement with online rich media ad formats.
Literature Review
Rich Media
In 2007, rich media/video was the most popular ad format, followed by lead generation, paid search, classified, display ads, sponsorships, and e-mail (Emarketer 2008b). Online rich media include a range of interactive methods that display motion and exploit sensory traits, such as video, audio, and animation (Chabrow 2006). The term "rich media" provides an umbrella expression to describe online content that has multimedia elements, such as sound, video, or content that moves when a user clicks on the page that features the content (Shaw 2004). A patent issued on February 14, 2006, allows almost any rich media Internet application to perform across a range of devices and networks. The patent covers all rich media technology implementations, including Flash, Java, Ajax, Flex, and XAML (Chabrow 2006). Chabrow (2006) asserts that online rich media coupled with handheld devices and embedded technology represents a convergence among consumers, workplaces, and appliance interactions. Types of rich media include but are not limited to online commercials, floating ads, expandable ads, video ads, interactive ads, Webisodes, expandable banner ads, podcasts, ghost ads, advergames, and video ads with blogs (Belch and Belch 2007; Internet Advertising Bureau 2008b).
The widespread adoption of Internet technologies (e.g., Flash, Java, Virtual Reality Modeling Language) has made rich media on the Internet to enhance interactivity increasingly popular. Companies that specialize in rich media advertising (e.g., Unicast, Eyeblaster, PointRoll) contribute to the growth of rich media advertising design (Shaw 2004). Table 1 offers some examples of online rich media ads (Eyeblaster 2006; Internet Advertising Bureau 2006b, 2008b; PointRoll 2006; Unicast 2006).
Table 1. Examples and Descriptions of Online Rich Media Ads
| Ad | Description |
| 1. Commercial break/ infomercial/Webmerical | Full-page ad that plays on site entry or before any other site page. |
| 2. Full-page overlay (full-page floating ad, takeover ad) | Plays within transparent layer over entire Web page. |
| 3. Floating ads | Overpage ads display messages in phases that "float" ads on top of a Web page. Floating ads move within transparent layers. |
| 4. Wallpaper ads | An image that replaces the Web page background for set duration. |
| 5. Expandable ads | Launches a floating ad, expandable ad, or full-page overlay. Plays on mouse-over or automatically. |
| 6. Fold-over ads | Play when users open the corner to expand a message behind the content page. |
| 7. Transitional ads | Full- or partial-page text and image server-push ads that appear in the transition between two pages of content, such as pop-up windows and splash screens. |
| 8. Digital video ads | Appear before, during, and after content, including streaming video, gaming, animation, and music video, as well as digital video that appears in live, archived, and downloadable streaming content. |
| 9. Ghost ads/snipes | Appear at the bottom of the player or video screen for a few seconds, then disappear if users do not click on them. |
| 10. Advergames | Online games that incorporate ads around or in the game play. |
Distinctiveness Theory and Creativity
If a stimulus has unique features that distinguish it from the rest of the visual field, it can be considered distinctive (Phillips and Lee 2005). Distinctive advertising elements draw attention, and viewers recall ads with distinctive features better. Distinctiveness theory precedes the Internet, but its exploration through online advertising has generated research into animated banner ads (Phillips and Lee 2005). Few studies consider the effects of rich media ads, including online animated ads, but it appears that animated ads have the potential to generate immediate recall (Li and Bukovac 1999) and yield higher click-through rates than static ads (Cho, Lee, and Tharp, 2001; Heo and Sundar 2000; Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004). When online animated ads are distinctive from the text that surround them, distinctiveness theory claims they should draw attention and be better recalled than static banner ads. These effects may lead to more positive attitudes toward ads and stronger purchase intentions (Choi, Miracle, and Biocca 2001).
Distinctiveness theory also purports that certain elements in an environment grab attention. An ad is distinct if it conveys unique characteristics that differentiate it from other ad stimuli (Heiser, Sierra, and Torres 2008). Creative ads have the potential to be more distinctive than noncreative ads. Although there is no consensus regarding the definition of creativity (Kilgour 2006), a common definition involves originality, novelty, or newness and appropriateness (Ang and Low 2000; Kilgour 2006; West, Kover, and Caruana 2008). If an ad's stimuli and design are unique or different from those of other ads, it boasts novelty. Creative ads involve divergent thinking, risk, newness, or a sense of humor (Ang and Low 2000), which induces greater recognition (Baack, Wilson, and Till 2008). Ang and Low (2000), in a study of the effects of creative ad treatments, find that people react emotionally to unexpected stimuli, such that an unexpected ad highlights the effects of positive feelings. However, the advantage obtained from employing unexpected ads, compared with expected ads, is limited to ads that evoke positive feelings. Thus, emotional experiences determine whether an ad is novel, which can influence its acceptance by consumers.
Creative characteristics of online ads also can influence click-through rates (Baltas 2003). In Baltas's (2003) empirical study of user responses to online banner ad designs, creative characteristics stimulate higher click rates.
Li and Bukovac (1999) also study the effectiveness of banner ad size and type on viewer cognition, with a focus on the stimulus factor. They find that the distinctiveness of a banner ad may attract viewers' initial attention away from the rest of the Web page content. Furthermore, large banner ads attract viewers' attention, and banner ad size and user mode interact to affect CTR. Large banner ads earn higher CTR among Web surfers than among information seekers, which highlights the importance of user mode. Distinctive, interactive stimuli in online ads also can change attitudinal and behavioral responses for online users (Lang et al. 2002).
This discussion of distinctiveness theory, research pertaining to distinctiveness in banner ads, and creativity literature suggests the following hypothesis:
H1: An interactive rich media ad earns a significantly higher click-through rate than non-interactive rich media ads.
User Interactivity
Interactivity often depends on the context (Faber, Lee, and Nan 2004; Johnson, Bruner, and Kumar 2006; Liu and Shrum 2002). For example, in the technology sector, interactivity refers to applications (e.g., instant messaging, online games) or features (e.g., multimedia, hypermedia, video). Advertisers also are interested in how to apply technology to communication. Interactivity thus may be conceptualized as "a characteristic of computer-mediated communication in the marketplace that increases with the bidirectionality, timeliness, mutual controllability, and responsiveness of communication as perceived by consumers and firms" (Yadav and Varadarajan 2005, p. 585).
The potential for interactivity on the Internet differentiates it from traditional media (Song and Zinkhan 2008; Stewart and Pavlou 2002). This interactivity enables consumers to participate in the persuasion process by controlling advertising messages (Pavlou and Stewart 2000; Song and Zinkhan 2008). It also gives users control in a mediated environment by allowing them to select the content, timing, and communication act (Li, Daugherty, and Biocca 2002). When users have active control over their Internet experience, they can engage in two-way communication in real time (Cho and Leckenby 1999; McMillan 2000). Liu and Shrum (2002) propose a three-dimensional construct of interactivity: user-machine, user-user, and user-message. They also compare the seven most popular forms of online advertising tools with regard to their degree of interactivity according to three dimensions: active control, two-way communication, and synchronicity. Active control occurs in an interactive online experience because it requires users' close attention and cognitive involvement in processing (Liu and Shrum 2002). Higher interactivity can lead to greater user involvement.
When an online ad includes at least some of the properties identified by these definitions of interactivity, it should be perceived by users as interactive. In addition, it should induce a greater behavioral response rate than other rich media ads because of its interactivity, including active user controls and higher user involvement (Cho and Leckenby 1999; Liu and Shrum 2002; McMillan 2000). Thus,
H2: In an interactive rich media ad, rollovers should generate a significantly greater level of interactivity than click-throughs (CTRs).
Metrics and Measurement of Interactive Rich Media
Advertisers want evidence that their online ads are effective. Internet advertising proponents posit that the online advertising medium offers a measurable context, because marketers can collect data about users' interactions with ads (Baker and Hempel 2006; Rosenkrans 2006). In addition, it offers multiple ways to gauge effectiveness, including online behavior and offline purchases. When Pepsi ran ads on Yahoo for a sweepstakes promotion tied to the release of Star Wars, the company discovered that consumers exposed to the online ads were more likely to purchase 12- or 24-packs of Diet Pepsi than were those who never saw those online ads (Kesmodel 2006).
Despite the lack of industry-wide metric standards (Chen and Wells 1999; Hoffman and Novak 2000a; Maddox 2002; Menn 2000), the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) has published recommended guidelines to standardize the measures. The adoption of measurement guidelines could offer more meaningful Web advertising metrics for advertisers and perhaps encourage the online advertising industry to use the same terminology to sell, purchase, and evaluate online advertising performance.
Advertisers attempt to influence the minds of their consumers, measure their responses, and then predict what will happen next (Baker and Hempel 2006). The choice of a Web metric therefore depends on the measurement objective, as well as the advertiser's budget, technology, and time limits (Bhat, Bevans, and Sengupta 2002). Some common Web metrics include page impressions, ad impressions, and clicks (Bhat, Bevans, and Sengupta 2002; Carrabis 2005; Dainow 2004, 2005, 2006; Hoffman and Novak 2000b; Roche 2005; Rosenkrans 2007).
For example, ad impressions measure the response by a delivery system to an ad request from a user's browser (Bhat, Bevans, and Sengupta 2002; Internet Advertising Bureau 2004, 2005; Rosenkrans 2007). Impressions, or page views (i.e., how many times a web page is viewed), measure an ad's reach and visibility on a Web page (Bhat, Bevans, and Sengupta 2002; Rosenkrans 2005), or the overall exposure of an online ad. Although the ad impressions measurement cannot reveal user involvement, it provides advertisers with a good measure of the ad's success in terms of brand recognition or brand visibility. The cost per thousand (CPM) model counts the number of visitors exposed to an online ad (e.g., banner ad) on a particular site, and advertisers also have access to site traffic information (Hoffman and Novak 2000c; Rosenkrans 2006). However, ad impressions do not track user involvement with the ad.
The Internet Advertising Bureau (2004) defines three kinds of clicks: click-through, in-unit click, and mouse-over. The click-through rate (CTR) measures the number of clicks divided by the number of ads requested or clicked on by users during a specified time period (Rosenkrans 2007). A click-through occurs when a user clicks on an ad and enters another online location, such as another browser window or Web site. Click-throughs can be tracked and reported by the ad server (Internet Advertising Bureau 2004); because they indicate a behavioral response, they also provide countable measures for online ads (Baltas 2003; Chatterjee, Hoffman, and Novak 2003; Kania 1999; Online Advertising 1998; Rosenkrans 2006; Young 2000). These click-through metrics are easy to observe (Chatterjee, Hoffman, and Novak 2003; McLuhan 2000; Rosenkrans 2006) and indicate an immediate interest in the advertised brand (Lawrence 2000; Rosenkrans 2006; Singh and Dalal 1999). The average click-through rate is 0.01% (Cherecwich 2009). Mouse-overs or in-unit clicks might not take a user to another site but instead occur when users roll a mouse over an image and/or copy. Additional research is needed to determine the value of mouse rollover metrics and time spent with the ad as metrics (Lemonnier 2008).
In line with metrics research pertaining to ad exposure and behavioral responses, H1 and H2 use impressions to measure ad exposure and click-throughs and mouse rollovers to measure interactivity.
Methods
Participants and Procedure
The participants in this study included visitors to The Ventura County Star's Web site during a two-week run-of-site (ROS) application of one interactive and two non-interactive rich media ads. The site is owned by The E.W. Scripps Company (Scripps 2006); the newspaper serves Ventura County, California, and enjoys a daily circulation of approximately 89,000, a Sunday circulation of 100,000, and an online presence that attracts 37,671 page views each week (Alexa 2008). The Appendix lists the companies owned by Scripps.
The researcher obtained research grants and explored three potential online media sites; the Ventura County Star's online site offered several benefits, including a long-term research relationship. The site also was willing to participate, design and deploy the two non-interactive rich media ads, provide a ROS, below-the-fold line, CPM discount for the interactive rich media ad, and provide metrics (i.e., Doubleclick) for all three rich media ads. In addition, the site ran 12 online display ads (non-rich media).
Three local merchants agreed to participate in the study by allowing the researcher to design a 300×250 pixel interactive rich media ad using Flash technology to promote their product or service on venturacountystar.com. However, Newbury Park Pet Supply provides the study subject because it provided full access to the advertising metrics. Newbury Park Pet Supply, which was established in Ventura County in 1965, participates in an animal rescue program. It did not pay for the development or design of the ad or to run the ad on the site.
To quantify the effectiveness of the online ad deployed, this study uses third-party server software. The Doubleclick software allows host sites, such as venturacountystar.com, to measure online advertising exposures through impressions and measure responses to each ad according to users' rollovers and click-throughs.
Design
In laboratory experiments, respondents' behavior is often unnatural (Huizingh and Hoekstra 2003), because they know they are part of a research project and must perform tasks they otherwise might not. Huizingh and Hoekstra (2003) assert that such disadvantages can decrease the effectiveness of experimental Web sites. More online advertising research thus is needed outside laboratory settings (Carlson, Grove, and Stafford 2005), and a field experiment can measure real behavior instead of behavioral intentions, so this research uses a field experimental design.
The impact of ad interactivity on click rates is the dependent variable. The independent variable consists of two levels: high and low interactivity. In the high interactivity condition, the ad offers both click and rollover capacities, whereas the low interactivity ads allow only click-throughs.
The investigation of the interactive rich media ad also notes differences between click rates and mouse rollovers-that is, whether users rolled their mouse over the ad more often than they clicked on it.
Stimuli
The interactive and non-interactive rich media ads were randomly deployed on venturacountystar.com by Doubleclick as run-of-site (ROS) implementations over the same two-week period. The interactive ad ran below the fold line, whereas the non-interactive ads appeared above the fold line, alongside 12 other online display ads.
The interactive rich media ad is creative and distinct from the other ads. Distinctiveness exists when a stimulus has unique features, including creativity, that separate it from the rest of the visual field (Phillips and Lee 2005). The focal interactive ad meets the criterion for distinctiveness because it involved unique motion (i.e., paws walking diagonally across the ad space) that attracted attention, then morphed into the image of one large paw with four toes and a paw pad. Furthermore, it was the only ad that provided rollover interactivity; users could roll their mouse over components of the ad (e.g., horse, chicken, dog, or cat toes). No other ads on the site used such unique rich media design features.
Furthermore, greater interactivity can generate greater cognitive involvement among users, because they gain more active control (Liu and Shrum 2002; Stewart and Pavlou 2002). The interactive rich media paw ad offers more interactivity than other rich media ads, because users become engage in the ad when they roll their mouse over it. All rich media ads are ROS, the same size (i.e., 300×250 pixels), and in color, and they all employ motion to encourage user interactivity and engagement. The differences among ads pertain to the unique motion of the interactive paw ad and the content and the location, such that the interactive rich media ad appeared below the fold line, so users had to scroll down the page to view the ad.
When online advertising uses rich media, it means the creative unit includes user interaction or uses rich media technology, such as Macromedia Flash, AJAX, adInterax, Java, Flex, and XAML (Chabrow 2006). The researcher designed the online rich media ad using rich media technology (i.e., Flash) for a 300×250 pixel size space. When the page with this ad loaded, black paws walked diagonally across the 300×250 pixel space and then expanded into one large black paw with a white background, which quickly morphed into a green background. Each toe contained an inscription: dog, cat, horse, and chicken. The paw pad read "Newbury Park Pet Supply 805-498-2415." When users rolled their mouse over the dog toe, it morphed into an enlarged dog picture; rolling over the cat toe produced an enlarged cat picture, and so on. Clicking on any of the toes or the paw pad sent users to Newbury Park Pet Supply's Web site. The interactive rich media paw ad promoted Newbury Park Pet Supply, a local pet store in Ventura County. Figure 1 displays the frames of the interactive rich media paw ad, and Figure 2 represents the .swf file of the interactive ad, though without click-through capabilities.
Figure 1. Frames of the Interactive Rich Media Paw Ad
a. Paws walk across 300×250 pixel space
b. Large paw appears
c. Large paw with green background and inscription on toes and paw pad appear
d. When users roll mouse over dog toe
e. When users roll mouse over cat toe
f. When users roll mouse over horse toe
g. When users roll mouse over chicken toe
Figure 2. Interactive Rich Media Ad
The two non-interactive rich media ads, for education and an automotive dealer, were designed by the Ventura County Star's digital team. They were the same size as the interactive paw ad and deployed run-of-site (ROS), though they appeared above the fold line, because these clients paid for that positioning. The Ventura County Star requested the confidentiality of the names of these businesses whose ads that ran during the same time as the experimental interactive rich media paw ad. The automotive ad and the education ad were designed with Flash and employed motion. The former featured frames of the car in an outdoor setting with a butterfly that flew in and out of the frames, whereas the frames in the latter depicted a school and its degree offerings.
The research grant helped pay to deploy the interactive rich media ad on the Ventura County Star's site on an ROS basis, such that ad rotated across various pages on the site (e.g., news, sports, business, entertainment). The measure of effectiveness for all three ads included click-throughs and mouse rollovers, and inferential and descriptive statistical analyses indicate whether a statistically significant difference exists among them. The interactive rich media ad also was tested for any statistically significant differences between the number of mouse rollovers and click-throughs.
Results and Interpretation of Results
Hypothesis 1
The results indicate that the three ads differ significantly in their average daily click rates (F (2, 39) = 39.85, p < .001, eta2 = .67). The Tukey pairwise comparisons reveal that the paw ad (M = 47.21, SD = 26.58) achieves a significantly higher average daily click rate than both the education (M = 2.64, SD = 1.08) and automotive (M = 1.85, SD = 1.56) ads. However, the average daily click rate does not differ statistically between the two non-interactive ads (see Table 2).
Table 2. Average Click Rates
| Paw | College | Car | |
| Daily mean (SD) | 47.21 (26.58)a | 2.64 (1.08)b | 1.85 (1.56)b |
| Weekly | .33% | .12% | .11% |
Notes: Means that do not share subscripts are significantly different (p < .05, Tukey comparison).
Hypothesis 2
For the interactive rich media ad, a significant difference emerges between the average weekly click rates (M = 35, SD = 5.35) and rollovers (M = 2741.50, SD = 711.67; t (3) = 7.56, p = .005, r2 = .67). That is, there are significantly more rollovers than click-throughs.
Hypothesis 1 reflects the influence of distinctiveness theory and creativity literature (Ang and Low 2000; Baltas 2003; Cho, Lee, and Tharp 2001; Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004; Li and Bukovac 1999; Phillips and Lee 2005) and predicts that an interactive rich media ad achieves a significantly higher click rate than other rich media ads. During a two-week span, the Doubleclick data indicate that the three test ads differ significantly in their average daily click rates (F (2, 39) = 39.85, p < .001, eta2 = .67). The Tukey pairwise comparisons further indicate that the paw ad (M = 47.21, SD = 26.58) attains a significantly higher average daily click rate than either the education (M = 2.64, SD = 1.08) or car (M = 1.85, SD = 1.56) ads. However, the average daily click rate does not differ statistically between the college and car ads. The interactive rich media paw ad earned a .33% click-through rate (CTR) during the two-week time frame, whereas an average online ad reaches .01% CTR (Cherecwich 2009). Rich media ads thus attain higher CTRs than the overall online ad. Some specific sectors appear to benefit particularly from rich media ads, such as automotive, financial services, media and entertainment, retail, travel, and wellness (Emarketer 2008a). The interactive rich media paw ad outperformed not only the average .01% CTR but also the average rich media CTRs for various sectors, even though it ran ROS below the fold line.
In addition, distinctiveness theory indicates that distinctive elements draw viewers' attention. The interactive rich media ad, with its motion and rollover elements, appears to have engaged users. The creativity and uniqueness of this had an effect on interactivity and user engagement, because it was unique from and more novel than the other ads. This result offers support for the distinctiveness theory (Phillips and Lee 2005) and creativity literature (Ang and Low 2000; Baltas 2003; Kilgour 2006; West, Kover, and Caruana 2008), and it also is consistent with laboratory research that indicates CTRs improve with greater distinctiveness (Li and Bukovac 1999).
In line with interactivity literature (Biocca 1997; Cho and Leckenby 1999; Coyle and Thorson 2001; Heo and Sundar 2000; Liu and Shrum 2002; McMillan 2000; Phillips and Lee 2005), H2 predicts that in the interactive rich media ad, rollovers would generate a significantly greater level of interactivity than would click-throughs. During a weekly ROS, users engaged in significantly more mouse rollovers (M = 2741.50, SD = 711.67) than clicks (M = 35, SD = 5.35). The interactive rich media ad thus encouraged higher levels of interactivity, which led to greater user involvement, as indicated by the rollover significance. This finding supports Liu and Shrum's (2002) results and indicates that greater interactivity can generate more user involvement. It also supports prior results from non-field experimental research that implies interactive ads have the potential to yield a higher CTR than non-interactive ads (Cho, Lee, and Tharp, 2001; Heo and Sundar 2000; Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004).
Discussion
Online Ad Placement
A potential barrier to advertising effectiveness is the volume of ads to which consumers are exposed (Taylor, Franke, and Bang 2006). Consumers often limit their information exposures by engaging in selective perception, by which they process a limited number of ads and ignore others. Internet advertising studies indicate that online ad position may play a role in attracting viewers, sustaining their interest, and determining their choices (Eyetrack III 2004; Heo and Sundar 2000; Lohse and Spiller 1998). Serial position also matters (Heo and Sundar 2000; Lohse and Spiller 1998; Monti 2000). According to Murphy's (1999) study of Web searchers' and surfers' clicking behavior and the Eyetrack III (2004) study on ad placement performance, an image at the bottom of the screen prompts less clicking behavior, whereas an ad toward the top of a Web page garners more attention. When an image appears at the top of the page, it attracts a majority of site visitors (61% according to Murphy 1999; 68% according to Eyetrack III 2004). In addition, Murphy's (1999) study, online visitors who saw four images on the top of the Web page clicked significantly more (61%) than did online visitors who received four images on the bottom of the Web page (50%).
Heo and Sundar (2000) also study emotional responses to Web advertising and find that viewers pay more attention to ads near the top of a page than ads near the bottom or along the side. Viewers approach media content with the expectation that the most important information will appear at the beginning of the page.
Studies that examine sponsorship effects online also have revealed significant benefits for sponsors of content Web sites (e.g., newspapers). For example, sponsors whose products match the news content induce higher memory, attitudes, and purchase intentions for the sponsored brand than do sponsors and stories that do not match (Rodgers, Cameron and Brill 2005). An experimental study also empirically demonstrates that users' attitudes toward the sponsor are more negative when the sponsorship ad appears in the middle of the news story (Rodgers, Cameron, and Brill 2005) rather than at the beginning of the news story. Although attitudes toward the sponsor are positive when the ad occurs at the beginning of the news story, this study also confirms that memory (i.e., brand recognition) is highest in the middle and lowest for ads placed at the beginning.
Ads placed within the article text may attract the most attention (Eyetrack III 2004). Embedded ads (300×250 pixels) within an article attract 56% of study participants, better than half-page ads (368×850 pixels) next to the news articles, skyscrapers ads (160×800 pixels) placed on the upper left portion of the page, standard banner ads (468×60 pixels) at the bottom or top, and small banner ads (184×90 pixels) in the right column. The 300×250 pixel ad is becoming one of the most popular sizes, especially for the delivery of rich media ads. Table 3 summarizes some findings regarding the performance of ads on pages with articles according to their sizes.
Table 3. Ad Performance Per Size
| Type of Ad (size and placement) | Average Viewing Time (seconds) | Percentage Seeing Ad |
| Half page (368×60) | 5.8 | 38 |
| Embedded in article text (300×250) | 4.6 | 56 |
| Skyscraper (160×800) | 3.9 | 44 |
| Standard banner, bottom of page (468×60) | 2.0 | 3 |
| Standard banner, top of page (468×60) | 1.6 | 12 |
| Small banner, right column (184×90) | 1.3 | 8 |
Source: Eyetrack III (2004)
Because of the limited research funding, the interactive rich media ad ran below the fold line of the site, which meant users had to scroll down the page to view the ad. Yet the metrics revealed that this ad still garnered more clicks than the non-interactive rich media ads above the fold line. It even outperformed the industry average CTR of .01% for online ads (Cherecwich 2009) and .06-.17% for online rich media ads (Emarketer 2008a). Apparently, users were engaged not only with the interactive rich media ad but also with the website. This finding offers additional insight into online ad placement and suggests the need for further research in this area. Some previous research indicates the benefits of placing ads at the top of Web sites (Eyetrack III 2004; Heo and Sundar 2000; Lohse and Spiller 1998; Murphy 1999), but other research (Rodgers, Cameron, and Brill 200) indicates that brand recognition is highest when the ad appears in the middle of a news story and lowest when placed at the beginning (i.e., above the fold line).
General Discussion
This field experiment contributes to interactive advertising research by extending understanding of rich media advertising creativity and effectiveness. Specifically, it applies interactivity and distinctiveness theories to online rich media advertising (Hong, Thong, and Tam 2004; Phillips and Lee 2005; Song and Zinkhan 2008). Furthermore, this study contributes to ongoing investigations into online ads' creativity and the types of metrics that best determine online advertising effectiveness (Carlson, Grove, and Stafford 2005; Lemonnier 2008). Researchers should consider this information about the involvement of consumers in online interactive rich media ads and the metrics employed to evaluate online rich media ads. This field experiment also meets the ongoing need for additional research outside laboratory settings (Carlson, Grove, and Stafford 2005).
Consistent with prior interactivity studies that do not employ field experiments (Liu and Shrum 2002; Pavlou and Stewart 2000; Stewart and Pavlou 2002), this study indicates that an interactive rich media ad engages users and captures higher levels of user interactivity, as demonstrated by the significantly higher number of mouse rollovers than clicks in the interactive rich media ad. The more cognitively involved they are in processing an interactive online experience, the more users exhibit their active control (Liu and Shrum 2002; Stewart and Pavlou 2002). That is, a higher level of interactivity has the potential to generate more user involvement (Liu and Shrum 2002).
The interactive rich media ad was creative and distinctive, which differentiated it from other ads on the site (Phillips and Lee 2005). No other ads offered the unique rich media design of the interactive rich media ad. Consistent with research by Li and Bukovac (1999), CTRs improve with distinctiveness; consistent with Baltas (2000), ad creativity also affects CTRs. The field experiment specifically shows that the interactive rich media ad earned a significantly higher average daily CTR than the non-interactive rich media ads, which prompted statistically equivalent average daily click rates. Therefore, the distinctiveness and creativity of the interactive rich media ad clearly affected CTR, which revealed that users were more engaged with the interactive ad than with the non-interactive rich media ads.
Limitations and Further Research Recommendations
The editorial content of the site might have some effects on users' behavior (i.e., clicks and rollovers). The editorial content varied each day and updated consistently throughout the day by the Ventura County Star's online editorial team. Because the three rich media ads were randomly deployed by Doubleclick for ROS, they might have appeared next to editorial content that could have affected their appeal; however, this factor cannot be assessed, because Doubleclick randomly deployed the ads for two weeks..
This study also paves the way for additional research in interactive rich media advertising, which might attempt to determine the value of mouse rollovers and other metrics (Lemonnier 2008). Both rollovers and click-throughs represent behavioral analysis metrics (Baltas, 2003; Chatterjee, Hoffman, and Novak 2003; McLuhan 2000; Internet Advertising Bureau 2007; Rosenkrans 2007); additional research might investigate the significance or usefulness of rollover metrics (Lemonnier 2008). For example, a test might include an interactive rich media measure of a mouse rollover when there is either no encouragement or encouragement to interact with the ad. Measuring the time users spend with the ad could reveal whether the rollovers are intentional and provide more insights into the meaning of user engagement through the mouse rollover metric. In addition, because the interactive online ad that appeared below the fold line garnered more user interactivity than the other rich media ads that ran above the fold line, further research should continue to concentrate on online ad placement. Furthermore, a study in a controlled setting might offer a between-subjects comparison of respondents who are exposed to an interactive rich media ad and others who are exposed to a non-interactive rich media ad. Their behavioral responses thus could be compared with their awareness measurements.
Appendix
Companies Owned by Scripps (Scripps 2008).
Scripps Newspapers: Daily and community newspapers in 15 markets and the Washington-based Scripps Media Center (headquarters of Scripps Howard News Service). Scripps newspapers include (1) Rocky Mountain News in Denver (2) Commercial Appeal in Memphis, (3) Knoxville, (4) News Sentinel, and (5) Ventura County Star.
Interactive Media: (1) HGTV.com, (2) FoodNetwork.com, (3) DIYnetwork.com, (4) FineLiving.com, (5) GACTV.com, (6) Recipezaar.com, and (7) FrontDoor.com.
Scripps Television Station Group: Six ABC-affiliated stations, three NBC affiliates and one independent. Scripps operates broadcast television stations in (1) Detroit, (2) Cleveland, (3) Cincinnati, (4) Phoenix, (5) Tampa, (6) Baltimore, (7) Kansas City, (8) West Palm Beach, (9) Tulsa, and (10) Lawrence.
Scripps Networks: (1) HGTV, (2) Food Network, (3) DIY Network, (4) Fine Living, and (5) GAC.
References
Alexa (2008), "Traffic Details," June 30, available at http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/venturacountystar.com (accessed June 30, 2008).
Ang, Swee Hoon and Sharon Y.M. Low (2000), "Exploring the Dimensions of Ad Creativity," Psychology & Marketing, 17 (10), 835-854.
Baack, Daniel, Rick T. Wilson, and Brian D. Till (2008), "Creativity and Memory Effects," Journal of Advertising, 37 (4), 85-95.
Bachman, Karen (2007), "Local Online Ad Spend to Hit $2.9 Bil. in '07," Media Week (September), available at http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003637775 (accessed September 10, 2007).
Baker, Stephen and Jessi Hempel (2006), "The Future of Technology, Wiser about the Web," BusinessWeek, March 27, available at http://www.businessweek.com/content/06_13/b3977401.htm (accessed March 27, 2006).
Baltas, George (2003), "Determinants of Internet Advertising Effectiveness: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Market Research, 45 (4), 505-513.
Belch, George E. and Michael A. Belch (2007), Advertising and Promotion, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bhat, Subodh, Michael Bevans, and Sanjit Sengupta (2002), "Measuring Users' Web Activity to Evaluate and Enhance Advertising Effectiveness" Journal of Advertising, 31 (3), 97-106.
Biocca, Frank (1997), "The Cyborg's Dilemma: Progressive Embodiment in Virtual Environments," Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2).
Burns, Kelli and Richard J. Lutz (2006), "The Function of Format," The Journal of Advertising, 35 (1), 53-64.
Carlson, Les, Stephen J. Grove, and Marla Royne Stafford (2005), "Perspectives on Advertising Research: Views from Winners of the American Academy of Advertising Outstanding Contribution to Research Award," Journal of Advertising, 34 (2), 117-140.
Carrabis, Joseph (2005), "Usability Studies 101: Defining Visitor Action," Imedia Connection, July 15, available at http://www.imediaconnection.com (accessed July 15, 2005).
Chabrow, Eric (2006), "U.S. Grants Patent for Broad Range of Internet Rich Applications," Information Week, February 22, available at http://www.informationweek.com/story/showarticle.jhtml?articleID=180206472&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News (accessed February 22, 2006).
Chatterjee, Patrali, Donna L. Hoffman, and Thomas P. Novak (2003), "Modeling the Clickstream: Implications for Web-Based Advertising Efforts," Journal of Marketing Science, 22 (4), 520.
Chen, Qimei and William D. Wells (1999), "Attitude Toward the Site," Journal of Advertising Research, 39 (5), 27.
Cherecwich, Rich (2009), "The Last Hope for Online Advertising," Imedia Connection, available athttp://www.imediaconnection.com/summits/coverage/21967.asp.
Cho, Chang-Hoan, Jung-Gyo Lee, and Marye Tharp (2001), "The Effects of Different Forced Exposure Levels to Banner Advertisements on the WWW," Journal of Advertising Research, 41 (July/August), 45-56.
--- and John D. Leckenby (1999), "Interactivity as a Measure of Advertising Effectiveness: Antecedent and Consequences of Interactivity in Web Advertising," in Proceedings of the American Academy Advertising Conference, Marilyn S. Roberts, ed. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, 162-179.
Choi, Yung Kyun, Gordon Miracle, and Frank Biocca (2001), "The Effects of Anthropomorphic Agents on Advertising Effectiveness and the Mediating Role of Presence," Journal of Interactive Advertising, 2 (Fall), available at http://www.jiad.org.
Coyle, James and Esther Thorson (2001), "The Effects of Progressive Levels of Interactivity and Vividness in Web Marketing Sites," Journal of Advertising, 30 (3), 65-78.
Dainow, Brandt (2004), "Web Analytics 101," iMedia Connection, November 2, available at http://www.imediaconnection.com (accessed July 14, 2005).
--- (2005), "Things that Throw Your Stats (Part 2)," Imedia Connection, March 7, available at http://www.imediaconnection.com (accessed July 14, 2005).
--- (2006), "Visit vs. Session," Imedia Connection, January, available at http://www.imediaconection.com (accessed January 19, 2006).
Emarketer (2005), "Online Ads Soared in First Half," September 28, available at http://www.Emarketer.com (accessed September 28, 2005).
--- (2006), "One Billion People Online!" March 20, available at http://www.Emarketer.com/Article.aspx?1003975 (accessed May 18, 2006).
--- (2007), "Broadband Users Make Online Time a Priority," May 15, available at http://www.Emarketer.com/Article.aspx?id=1004916 (accessed May 15, 2007).
--- (2008a), "U.S. Rich Media Metrics, by Industry," September, available at http:///www.emarketer.com (accessed January 30, 2009).
--- (2008b), "Where Is Ad Spending Headed?" May 2, available at http://www.emarketer.com (accessed May 2, 2008).
--- (2009a), "US Online and Total Advertising Spending, 2007-2012 (billions and % of total)," February 26, available at http://www.emarketer.com (accessed March 11, 2009).
--- (2009b), "US Online Advertising Spending Growth, by Format,2008-2010 (%change)," February 2, available at http://www.emarketer.com (accessed February 13, 2009).
Eyeblaster (2006), "Ad Formats," available at http://www.eyeblaster.com (accessed March 13, 2006).
Eyetrack III (2004), "Online News Consumer Behavior in the Age of Multimedia," available at http://www.poynter.org (accessed July 31, 2006).
Faber, Ronald J., Mira Lee, and Xiaoli Nan (2004), "Advertising and the Consumer Information Environment Online," American Behavioral Scientist, 48 (4), 447-667.
Gatarski, Richard (2002), "Breed Better Banner: Design Automation Through Online Interaction," Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16 (1), 2-13.
Heiser, Robert, Jeremy Sierra, and Michelle Torres (2008), "Creativity via Cartoon Spokespeople in Print," Journal of Advertising, 37 (4), 75-84.
Heo, Nokon and S. Shyam Sundar (2000), "Emotional Responses to Web Advertising: the Effects of Animation, Position, and Product Involvement on Physiological Arousal," paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Phoenix, AZ.
Hoffman, Donna L. and Tom P. Novak (2000a), "How to Acquire Customers on the Web," Harvard Business Review, (May/June), 179-188.
--- and --- (2000b), "When Exposure-Based Web Advertising Stops Making Sense (And What CD Now Did About It)," Working paper, Owen Graduate School of Management, E-Commerce Lab, Vanderbilt University, May/June, available at http://www.ecommerce.vanderbilt.edu (accessed May 24, 2000).
--- and --- (2000c), "Advertising Pricing Models for the World Wide Web," in Internet Publishing and Beyond: The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property, D. Hurley, B. Kahin, and H. Varian, eds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hong, Weiyin, James Y.L. Thong, and Kar Yan Tam (2004), "Does Animation Attract Online Users' Attention? The Effects of Flash On Information Search Performance and Perceptions," Information Systems Research, 15 (1), 60-87.
Huizingh, Eelko K. R. E. and Janny C. Hoekstra (2003), "Why Do Consumers Like Websites?" Journal of Targeting, Measurement & Analysis for Marketing, 11 (4), 350-162.
Internet Advertising Bureau (2004), "Interactive Audience Measurement and Advertising Campaign Reporting And Audit Guidelines," September, available at http://www.iab.net (accessed January 2005).
--- (2005), "Terms and Definitions," available at http://www.iab.net (accessed July 11, 2005).
--- (2006b), "Rich Media Guidelines," available at http://iab.net (accessed April 3, 2006).
--- (2007), "Ad Unit Guidelines," available at http://iab.net (accessed November 30, 2007).
--- (2008a), "Internet Advertising Revenues in Q3 '07 Surpass $5.2 Billion, Setting a New High," November 12, available at http://iab.net (accessed January 8, 2007).
--- (2008b), "Rich Media Creative Guidelines," May, available at http://www.iab.net/iab_products_and_industry_services/1421/1443/Rich_Media (accessed May 15, 2008).
Johnson, Grace J., Gordon C. Bruner, and Anand Kumar (2006), "Interactivity and its Facets Revisited," Journal of Advertising, 35 (4), 35-54.
Kania, Deborah (1999), "Order Up! Serving Up Targeted Banners," ClickZ, March 9, available at http://www.search.com/Articles/0309991.shtml (accessed January 28, 2000).
Kesmodel, David (2006), "Brand Marketers Return to the Web, Driving New Growth in Display Ads," The Wall Street Journal, May 10, available at http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB114356904672010265.html (accessed May 10, 2006).
Kilgour, Mark (2006), "Improving the Creative Process: Analysis of the Effects of Divergent Thinking Techniques and Domain Specific Knowledge on Creativity," International Journal of Business and Society, 7 (2), 79-108.
Lang, Annie, Jennifer Borse, Kevin Wise, and Prabu David (2002), "Captured by the World Wide Web: Orienting Structural and Content Features of Computer-Presented Information," Communication Research, 29 (June), 215-245.
Lawrence, Stacy. (2000), "Beyond Banner Clicks," The Standard, (June 12), available atwysiwys://2/http://thestandard.com/research/metrics/display/0,2799,15855,00.htm (accessed June 30, 2000).
Lemonnier, Jonathan (2008), "Rich Media," Ad Age, (79) 11, 48.
Li, Hairong, and Janice I. Bukovac (1999), "Cognitive Impact of Banner Ad Characteristics: An Experimental Study," Journalism and Mass Communication, 76 (2), 341-354.
---, Terry Daugherty, and Frank Biocca (2002), "Impact of 3-D Advertising on Product Knowledge, Brand, Attitude, and Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Presence," Journal of Advertising, 31 (3), 59-67.
Liu, Yuping and L.J. Shrum (2002), "What Is Interactivity and Is It Always Such a Good Thing? Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising Effectiveness," Journal of Advertising, (31) 4, 53-66.
Lohse, Gerald L. and Peter Spiller (1998), "Electronic Shopping," Communications of the ACM, 41 (7), 81-87.
Maddox, Kate (2002), "IAB Issues Net Ad Metrics Standards, B to B, (February 11), 87(2), 14.
McLuhan, Richard (2000), "Ways to Make Clicks Measure Up," Marketing, June 22, 35.
McMillan, Sally J. (2000) "Interactivity Is in the Eye of the Beholder: Function, Perception, Involvement, and Attitude Toward the Web Site," in Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising, M. A. Shaver, ed. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, 71-78.
Menn, Joseph (2000), "Web Firms May Vastly Inflate Claims of Hits," Los Angeles, Times, April 17, A1, A8, A9.
Monti, Ralph (2000), "Better Web Designs Boosts Sub Sales," Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, 29 (2), 54.
Murphy, Jamie (1999), "Surfers and Searchers: An Examination of Web-site Visitors' Clicking Behavior," Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 40 (2), 84.
Online Advertising Effectiveness Study (1998). Internet Advertising Bureau, Available at http://www.iab.net (accessed January 19, 2000).
Pavlou, Paul A. and David W. Stewart (2000), "Measuring the Effects and Effectiveness of Interactive Advertising: A Research Agenda," Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (1), 1-22.
Phillips, Barbara and Wei-Nei Lee (2005), "Interactive Animation: Exploring Spokes-Characters on the Internet," Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 27 (1).
PointRoll (2006), "Products Overview," available at http://www.pointroll.com (accessed June 7, 2006).
Roche, Jamie (2005), "Conversion is the New Acquisition," iMedia Connection, January 12, available at http://www.imediaconnection.com (accessed July 14, 2005).
Rodgers, Shelly, Glen T. Cameron, and Ann M. Brill (2005), "Ad Placement in E-Newspapers Affects Memory, Attitude," Newspaper Research Journal, 26 (1), 16-28.
Rosenkrans, Ginger (2005), "Online Auctions as Advertising Revenue in the Media Mix," Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6 (1).
--- (2006), "Online Banner Ads and Metrics Challenges," International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 3 (3), 193-218.
--- (2007), "Online Advertising Metrics and Web Analytics," in Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurements. Idea Group Reference.
Scripps (2006), "The EW Scripps Company," available at http://www.scripps.com (accessed June 5, 2006).
--- (2008), "The EW Scripps Company," available at http://www.scripps.com (accessed July 10, 2008).
Shaw, Russell (2004), "Evolution of Rich Media," Imedia Connection, January 15, available at http://www.imediaconnection.com (accessed January 15, 2004).
Simon, John and Spero C. Peppas (2004), "An Examination of Media Richness Theory In Product Web Site Designs: An Empirical Study," Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media, 6 (4), 270-281.
Singh, Surendra N. and Nikunj P. Dalal (1999), "Web Home Pages as Advertisements," Communications of the ACM, 42 (8), 91-98.
Song, Ji Hee and George M. Zinkhan (2008), "Determinants of Perceived Web Site Interactivity," Journal of Marketing, 72, 99-113.
Stewart, David W. and Paul A. Pavlou (2002), "From Consumer Response to Active Consumer: Measuring the Effectiveness of Interactive Media," Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 30 (4), 376-397.
Taylor, Charles R., George R. Franke, and Hae-Kyong Bang (2006), "Uses and Effectiveness of Billboards," Journal of Advertising, 35 (4), 21-35.
Totty, Michael (2003), "E-Commerce (A Special Report)-Business Solutions," The Wall Street Journal, June 16, R4.
Unicast (2006), "Gallery," available at http://www.unicast.com (accessed June 7, 2006).
Wesiman, Robert (2006), "Virtual Ads Pose Real Threat to Traditional Media," Boston Globe, February 12, available at http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/02/12/virtual_ads_pose_real_threat_to_traditional_media/ (accessed February 12, 2006).
West, Douglas C., Arthur J. Kover, and Albert Caruna (2008), "Practitioner and Customer Views of Advertising Creativity," Journal of Advertising, 37 (4), 35-45.
Yadav, Manjit S. and Rajan Varadarajan (2005), "Interactivity in the Electronic Marketplace: An Exposition of the Concept and Implications for Research," Academy of Marketing Sciences, 33 (4), 585-204.
Young, Susan (2000), "Getting the Message: How the Internet Is Changing Advertising," Harvard Business School Bulletin, April, available at http://workingknowledge.hbs.edu/pubexprin...%20Internet%20is%20Changing%20Advertising (accessed May 19, 2000).
Acknowledgments
The author thanks the JIAD Editor Dr. Hairong Li; JIAD Associate Editor Dr. Karen Lancendorfer; the anonymous reviewers; Dr. Pat Rose, Dr. Keli Finnerty, and Dr. J.D. Wallace; and the Ventura County Star's Digital Media team: Digital Media Director John Kunze, Digital Media Ad Coordinator Allyn Vogel, Graphic Designer Korey Nagel, and Digital Sales Manager Nick Oliveri. This study was made possible through two Seaver Research Council grants.
About the Author
Ginger Rosenkrans (Ph.D., Nova Southeastern University) is Associate Professor of Advertising at Pepperdine University. Her research interests include interactive advertising, online advertising effectiveness, online advertising metrics and Web analytics, and online ad design and interactivity.
