Summary

\n
• Final advertisements from designers who prototyped designs in parallel performed better on advertising analytics compared to ads from designers who prototype designs serially. Specifically, ads from parallel prototypes got a higher click-through rate than serial (~445 clicks per million vs. 397)
  \n
  • (Table 1)
  \n
  • (Figure 7)
  \n
  • (p. 11)
  \n
  • (p. 12)
  \n
  \n
\n

Grounding Context

\n
• Measure: Performance, in terms of click-through rates and Google Analytics for target website (N visitors, time spent, N pages visited daily from each ad) over 15-day campaign, and independent judgments in terms of creativity/originality, visual appeal, tastefulness, and adherence to design principles
  \n
  • (p. 7)
  \n
  \n
\n
• StudyDesign:: between-subjects design: serial vs. parallel prototyping structure
\n
• Procedure:: ~150 mins total, ~10 mins to create each prototype. Main difference is whether get critique from ad expert (experimenter) after each prototype (serial), or after three prototypes (parallel). Experimenter critiques drew from a pre-created list of critique statements for consistency across participants
  \n
  • 
  \n
  • (p. 7)
  \n
  • (p. 9)
  \n
  \n
\n
• Participants:: N=33 students, none professional designers, ~half with some prior experience in ad/graphic design
  \n
  • 
    (pp. 5-6)
  \n
  \n
\n
• Materials:: use Flash-based AdBuilder tool to design a banner ad to be hosted on a social networking site, for a fictional student-led design publication
  \n
  • (p. 6)
  \n
  • (p. 6)
  \n
  \n
\n

\n
• Status:: #resultGrounded
\n
• Annotator:: [[Joel Chan]]
\n
• ResultGrounding:: [[table]]
\n