Straight from CBL: How to Make Your Media Plan Work 6x Harder

Our Straight from CBL series features highlights from "Behavioral Science for Brands,” the official podcast of the Consumer Behavior Lab (CBL). Co-founded by Method1 President MichaelAaron Flicker and Senior Behavioral Science Advisor Richard Shotton, and including Method1 Head of Brand Allison Arling-Giorgi, the CBL decodes how consumers make choices and translates those insights into practical strategies—the science behind how Method1 partners with challenger brands to create category leaders.

Your media brief arrives, sounding admirably precise: Target women 25-54 who index high on premium indulgence purchases. But what if this obsession with demographics is causing you to miss the moments when any consumer, regardless of age or gender, is most primed to buy your brand?

It’s an all-to-common mistake. Understanding why marketers make it is the first step toward media dollars that work harder.

In Episode 72 of “Behavioral Science for Brands,” MichaelAaron Flicker and Richard Shotton point to the “fundamental attribution error.” This bias drives us to overestimate the importance of who people are while underestimating the situation they're in—a crucial difference when building media plans on limited budgets.

Psychologists Darley and Batson first demonstrated the fundamental attribution error through a study of seminary students. The participants were asked to go deliver a sermon on the Good Samaritan. On their way, each passed a man slumped in a doorway, clearly in need of aid.

What determined whether they stopped? Not their values. Not even the topic of their talk. It was whether they believed they were late.

Just 10% of those who felt they were in a rush stopped to help. But of those who believed they had time, 63% did, making them 6x more likely to intervene.

Surprised? You’re not alone. Conventional marketing wisdom practically treats demographics as destiny. But when it comes to making choices, a stressed 25-year-old and a stressed 50-year-old have more in common than two relaxed people of the same age.

The insight pairs brilliantly with indulgence. People don't reach for a premium bourbon or afternoon snack because of who they are. They reach because the time and occasion feels right, the moment giving them permission to choose a moment of joy.

With their consumer’s situation in mind, indulgence brands can multiply the value of their media spend by targeting emotional states:

• When people are tired and need a pick-me up
• When they’ve worked hard and deserve a reward
• When life presents them with reasons to celebrate

Demographics alone can’t predict purchase decisions. But prioritize the right moments over the "right" people, and you’ll give your media the 6x advantage.

PODCAST EXCERPT

The “Behavioral Science for Brands” podcast from the Consumer Behavior Lab
Episode 72: Media Planning
Note: Transcript edited for brevity and clarity
Speakers: MichaelAaron Flicker (MAF), Richard Shotton (RS)

RS: The fundamental attribution error showed we have this tendency to think about explaining situations by focusing on who someone is, rather than what state they're in. Think about the briefs that clients send out. They always, always, always say who the target audience is. They very rarely say what the target context should be. But you—as a media planner—should put as much time, attention and money towards thinking about what the right target context is.

MAF: Let's explore what we mean by context so everybody can really understand it.

RS: If you're targeting for context, it could be someone who is in a good mood or someone who’s got plenty of time. Someone is approaching their birthday. It's these areas that are fleeting and changeable, that vary according to when and where you are rather than eternal characteristics of personality.

[…]

There's a whole raft of work about the importance of reaching people in a good mood. Fred Bronner at the University of Amsterdam did a lovely, simple experiment. He gets 1,287 participants; they all flick through a newspaper for about 15 minutes. He then asks people what mood they're in and cuts the recall data by people's mood.

If people are in a negative mood—stressed or unhappy—they recall about 34-35% of the ads. If they are in a good mood—happy or relaxed—that goes up by virtually 50%.

MAF: So the takeaway for media planners is that the audience’s mood when they experience advertising will greatly impact the chances that it will be noticed or recalled.

RS: When I first read about Bronner's study, I thought, “Why don't we rerun this, but test other metrics?” So I recruited an even larger sample, showed them automotive ads and asked how much they liked the ads, then cut that data by mood. Liking went from 17% when people are unhappy to 28% when people are in a good mood. You've got this 62% swing in likability.

MAF: The next question in my mind is intent to purchase or actual purchase. It would be very interesting to see if it doesn't only increase marketing metrics, but also business metrics.

RS: I did a follow-up study, and we showed people promotional ads and asked them to rate the value of the ads. When people were in a bad mood, 60% rated the promotional offers as a “good” or “great” value. When they were in a great mood, that went up to 76%. So you get this 26% improvement in the rating of exactly the same promotional offer.

MAF: Does it mean that we want to advertise during a live sporting event? When their team wins, people are more likely to be in a good mood and therefore more likely to recall your ad. Is that the practical implication?

RS: That would be one example. You could use time targeting—people are more likely to be in a good mood in the evenings and weekends. Could be activity targeting. The London subway is pretty bloody unpleasant, so that would not be a place to find people in a good mood. Maybe in a cinema, for example. You could also prioritize upbeat, funny content on YouTube.

MAF: This behavioral science insight can be really helpful in linear TV buying, in radio, potentially in out-of-home or in your non-programmatic placements. Because you have the chance to think, “Well, where can we find people that might be in a better mood?” If everything else is the same, why not buy with that lens?

[…]

RS: The amazing thing is if you use these studies when presenting to clients, it makes your job easier. If you bring these neutral, peer-reviewed studies to your presentation, it switches the question from "Should we focus on target context?" to "Which target context should we reach?"

To hear more about applying behavioral science to media planning, listen to Episode 72 of the “Behavioral Science for Brands” podcast in its entirety here.

To see behavioral principles in action making indulgence brands irresistible, explore Method1's work.