skip to main content
10.1145/3459637.3482031acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
tutorial

Online Advertising Incrementality Testing: Practical Lessons And Emerging Challenges

Published:30 October 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Online advertising has historically been approached as an ad-to-user matching problem within sophisticated optimization algorithms. As the research and ad-tech industries have progressed, advertisers have increasingly emphasized the causal effect estimation of their ads (incrementality) using controlled experiments (A/B testing). With low lift effects and sparse conversion, the development of incrementality testing platforms at scale suggests tremendous engineering challenges in measurement precision. Similarly, the correct interpretation of results addressing a business goal requires significant data science and experimentation research expertise. We propose a practical tutorial in the incrementality testing landscape, including: The business need; Literature solutions and industry practices; Designs in the development of testing platforms; The testing cycle, case studies, and recommendations. We provide first-hand lessons based on the development of such a platform in a major combined DSP and ad network, and after running several tests for up to two months each over recent years.

References

  1. Alberto Abadie, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller. 2010. Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California's tobacco control program. Journal of the American statistical Association 105, 490 (2010), 493--505.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Joel Barajas, Ram Akella, Marius Holtan, and Aaron Flores. 2016. Experimental designs and estimation for online display advertising attribution in marketplaces. Marketing Science 35, 3 (2016), 465--483. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Joel Barajas and Narayan Bhamidipati. 2021. Incrementality Testing in Programmatic Advertising: Enhanced Precision with Double-Blind Designs. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021 (Ljubljana, Slovenia) (WWW '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2818--2827. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442381.3450106 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Joel Barajas, Narayan Bhamidipati, and James G. Shanahan. 2021. Online Advertising Incrementality Testing And Experimentation: Industry Practical Lessons. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining (Virtual Event, Singapore) (KDD '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4027--4028. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447548.3470819 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Joel Barajas, Tom Zidar, and Mert Bay. 2020. Advertising Incrementality Measurement using Controlled Geo-Experiments: The Universal App Campaign Case Study. (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Thomas Blake, Chris Nosko, and Steven Tadelis. 2015. Consumer heterogeneity and paid search effectiveness: A large-scale field experiment. Econometrica 83, 1 (2015), 155--174.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. David Chan, Rong Ge, Ori Gershony, Tim Hesterberg, and Diane Lambert. 2010. Evaluating Online Ad Campaigns in a Pipeline: Causal Models at Scale. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (Washington, DC, USA) (KDD '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 7--16. https://doi.org/10.1145/1835804.1835809 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ayman Farahat and James Shanahan. 2013. Econometric analysis and digital marketing: how to measure the effectiveness of an ad. In Proceedings of the sixth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. 785--785. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C. E. Frangakis and D. B. Rubin. 2002. Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 58, 1 (2002), 21--29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006--341X.2002.00021.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Brett R Gordon, Florian Zettelmeyer, Neha Bhargava, and Dan Chapsky. 2019. A comparison of approaches to advertising measurement: Evidence from big field experiments at Facebook. Marketing Science 38, 2 (2019), 193--225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Guido W. Imbens and Donald B. Rubin. 1997. Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects in Randomized Experiments with Noncompliance. The Annals of Statistics 25, 1 (1997), 305--327. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2242722Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Garrett A. Johnson, Randall A. Lewis, and Elmar I. Nubbemeyer. 2017. Ghost Ads: Improving the Economics of Measuring Online Ad Effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research 54, 6 (2017), 867--884. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0297 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0297Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Pavel Kireyev, Koen Pauwels, and Sunil Gupta. 2016. Do display ads influence search? Attribution and dynamics in online advertising. International Journal of Research in Marketing 33, 3 (2016), 475--490.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Ron Kohavi, Diane Tang, and Ya Xu. 2020. Trustworthy Online Controlled Experiments: A Practical Guide to A/B Testing. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Randall A. Lewis and Justin M. Rao. 2015. The Unfavorable Economics of Measuring the Returns to Advertising *. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 130, 4 (2015), 1941--1973.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Randall A. Lewis, Justin M. Rao, and David H. Reiley. 2011. Here, There, and Everywhere: Correlated Online Behaviors Can Lead to Overestimates of the Effects of Advertising. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web (Hyderabad, India) (WWW '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 157--166. https://doi.org/10.1145/1963405.1963431 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Hongshuang (Alice) Li and P.K. Kannan. 2014. Attributing Conversions in a Multichannel Online Marketing Environment: An Empirical Model and a Field Experiment. Journal of Marketing Research 51, 1 (2014), 40--56. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0050 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0050Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Tesary Lin and Sanjog Misra. 2020. The Identity Fragmentation Bias. arXiv:2008.12849 [econ.EM]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Donald B Rubin. 2005. Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 100, 469 (2005), 322--331. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001880 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001880Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Online Advertising Incrementality Testing: Practical Lessons And Emerging Challenges
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CIKM '21: Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management
          October 2021
          4966 pages
          ISBN:9781450384469
          DOI:10.1145/3459637

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 30 October 2021

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • tutorial

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

          Upcoming Conference

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader