Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

September 4, 2009 -

New research indicates that in-game advertisement which feature violent elements may be more memorable to players than nonviolent ads.

MIT's Technology Review reports on the study conducted in part at the University of Luxemburg

[Researchers] developed a simple racing game called AdRacer... A player drives around a virtual course and scores points by hitting targets along the way--as she drives, unobtrusive graphical ads are displayed as billboard graphics... while a camera records her eye movements. After playing, each player's ability to recall of brands shown on the side of the road was tested.

 

Those who played a violent version of the game, where the goal was to run down pedestrians, resulting in a blood-splattered screen, demonstrated significantly better recall of advertised brands than those who played the regular version...

Of course, while violent ads may increase the player's memory of the product, they could also be a public relations disaster in the making. Technology Review notes that University of Luxemburg researchers have also found that ad violence can lessen a gamer's opinion of a brand.

GP: The screenshot at left is from the University of Luxemburg's AdRacer.


Comments

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

So is to "hit along the way" the same as to "run down"? It's unclear. There is room for doubt. From the linked reports I couldn't tell if the targets are moving, or if the player just drives through them "along the way."

If the targets are moving in exactly the same patterns as the pedestrians, it would be hard to claim bias, but this is not necessarily what the article describes. If the targets are stationary, or in any way more predictable or easier to run down than the pedestrians, I think Kabyk and MechaTama31 might have a point about possible bias.

 

(If the targets move in exactly the same ways as the pedestrians, why wouldn't they say so in the article?)

 

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

It doesn't appear that the study accounted for the possibility that having a goal like aiming for targets, not necessarily the violence, may make people pay more attention to their surroundings. The violence is not, as some above have said, the only difference introduced. I'd be interested to see the results if they had players aim for objects in a non-violent way, like going through rings or sets of flags.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

They did.

"A player drives around a virtual course and scores points by hitting targets along the way..."

It doesn't make clear whether there are differences between the targets and the pedestrians, but it sounds like they built them to be very similar with just graphical effects differentiating the two.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

My understanding of the article is that is what they.

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

Seems pretty obvious to me. Violence (or at least some action) is interesting and can make things more memorable.

For example say you went to a resturant. You had a good meal, paid the bill and left, no big deal. Just another average meal. Now what if in the middle of your meal some stranger walked up, threw your food on the floor, punched you in the face, and ran out. I can guarentee you'll remember that forever!

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

Yet another bias study...How about the fact that players are more FOCUSED during a TIME TRIAL than when the goal is just to run over people?

I know personally I do, and CAN, pay more attention to the environment (includes billboards) when I'm just strolling around, rather than fervently trying to get to the end of the course before time runs out.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

Agreed with the above; the only bias here is your own against any study which even mentions media violence. (They aren't even saying that violent media is bad!)

This is basically how you do science. Take two copies of a scenario, change one element between them, and see if you get a difference in the results. They did. People remembered more about the ads when the game involved running people over. The two games were the same design ("follow the course and hit targets") but for some reason, violence made a difference.

What does this mean? God knows. Maybe violence => more interesting => more memorable, and the ads benefited from the proximity to violent scenes. Maybe it was the grounding in reality, where hitting something with your car probably will make a mess, which made the players more susceptible to the ads.

Or maybe the sample size was 5 people and 2 control and the whole thing is meaningless. That seems to come up often in violent media studies.

 

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

As I ranted above, my guess is that the effect ties into survivability.  When threats are high we are more aware of our surroundings (at least at a subconcious level) since if bad stuff is already happening, more bad stuff increases the chances of a nasty case of death.

While if non threatening situations are happening, we tend to relax and start to zone out a bit.  Combat patrols run into this problem a lot.  We just are not as aware of our surroundings.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

True, true. Blood splatter is not a normal sight for most people, so seeing it is immediately disconcerting and puts you on edge. Witness any of the numerous scenes in the Silent Hill series for a gaming example of that. Early on in the games you'll find a blood trail, and *foom* you're focused and on edge even though you're still just slogging through fog for the next few minutes. On the other hand, give someone a scene that looks like any boring old street and it will be just that: boring.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

OK genius, what's the bias?

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

How was this 'bais'?

They took a controlled test where the only differing factor was violence.  They then used an easily measured (and narrowly focused) metric.

Though it should be pointed out that they also found that when playing the violent version, the players spend LESS time looking at the ads but recall/imprint was greater.

Re: Study: Violent In-game Ads More Memorable to Players

This actually makes some sense.

I can imagine humans being tuned to be more aware of their enviroment when violent (and thus potentially dangerous) things are going on.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Wonderkarpits unattractive, andrew01/27/2015 - 3:46pm
Andrew EisenFant4stic. Ugh, they're doing the "replace a letter with a number" thing. I hate that. Does anyone think that's cool or attractive? Anyone at all?01/27/2015 - 1:56pm
IvresseEh, trailer's still better than all the Fantastic Four movies combined, tbh...01/27/2015 - 12:45pm
Matthew WilsonIt will never happen, but I wish fox would sell the rights back to disney.01/27/2015 - 11:05am
E. Zachary KnightWell, they went with whimsical and carefree for the first two and they bombed, so now they have swung the pendulum all the way in the other direction hoping it works.01/27/2015 - 11:01am
Andrew EisenIt's like Fox is trying to scare us off.01/27/2015 - 10:57am
Andrew EisenMaybe I'm just a curmudgeon but this is so amazingly the wrong tone for the Fantastic Four. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-BVs-KCSiA01/27/2015 - 10:53am
ConsterSince the ads are in the USA, you're technically correct. Personally, though, I feel the same way as you but in the opposite order: while the ads were legal and the defacing isn't, I really appreciate the sentiment.01/27/2015 - 8:21am
MechaTama31I appreciate the sentiment of the Ms Marvel thing, but defacing *is* still defacing, and free speech is a license to spread hate, if that's really what you want to do with it.01/27/2015 - 7:42am
ConsterAm I the only one imagining the Deep Silver spokesperson making scare quotes Dr Evil style while saying 'incorrectly classified'?01/27/2015 - 7:22am
Michael Chandrahttp://www.telecompaper.com/news/kpn-vodafone-fined-for-net-neutrality-violations--106167501/27/2015 - 5:10am
Michael ChandraThe other for allowing people to watch HBO through an app without being charged for the data-traffic, which was steering customers in their internet behaviour. Both of them against the Net Neutrality Law. 01/27/2015 - 5:10am
Michael ChandraYay, two dutch telephone companies got fined. :) One for blocking selective traffic at their free wifi-hotspots (internetcalling amongst others, prolly Skype and such).01/27/2015 - 5:09am
Andrew EisenHow many people do you think will return their copy for a censored version of the game? My money is on zero.01/27/2015 - 12:47am
Goth_Skunk@Cheater: If I were an Australian consumer, there's no way I'd be returning it.01/26/2015 - 10:43pm
Cheater87Ooops http://stevivor.com/2015/01/ps4-copies-saints-row-iv-re-elected-undergoing-product-recall-australia/01/26/2015 - 10:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, well I've passed the request along.01/26/2015 - 9:03pm
ZippyDSMleeI loath itunes..........01/26/2015 - 9:02pm
Goth_SkunkUNLESS you haven't downloaded the most 3 recent episodes. Then it cancels your subscription automatically.01/26/2015 - 8:56pm
Goth_Skunk@AE: No. iTunes instead just downloads it automatically, provided you've set it up to do so in your preferences.01/26/2015 - 8:56pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician