Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 722
Search results for: weighted mean curvature
2 Older Consumer’s Willingness to Trust Social Media Advertising: An Australian Case
Authors: Simon J. Wilde, David M. Herold, Michael J. Bryant
Abstract:
Social media networks have become the hotbed for advertising activities, due mainly to their increasing consumer/user base, and secondly, owing to the ability of marketers to accurately measure ad exposure and consumer-based insights on such networks. More than half of the world’s population (4.8 billion) now uses social media (60%), with 150 million new users having come online within the last 12 months (to June 2022). As the use of social media networks by users grows, key business strategies used for interacting with these potential customers have matured, especially social media advertising. Unlike other traditional media outlets, social media advertising is highly interactive and digital channel-specific. Social media advertisements are clearly targetable, providing marketers with an extremely powerful marketing tool. Yet despite the measurable benefits afforded to businesses engaged in social media advertising, recent controversies (such as the relationship between Facebook and Cambridge Analytica in 2018) have only heightened the role trust and privacy play within these social media networks. The purpose of this exploratory paper is to investigate the extent to which social media users trust social media advertising. Understanding this relationship will fundamentally assist marketers in better understanding social media interactions and their implications for society. Using a web-based quantitative survey instrument, survey participants were recruited via a reputable online panel survey site. Respondents to the survey represented social media users from all states and territories within Australia. Completed responses were received from a total of 258 social media users. Survey respondents represented all core age demographic groupings, including Gen Z/Millennials (18-45 years = 60.5% of respondents) and Gen X/Boomers (46-66+ years = 39.5% of respondents). An adapted ADTRUST scale, using a 20 item 7-point Likert scale, measured trust in social media advertising. The ADTRUST scale has been shown to be a valid measure of trust in advertising within traditional different media, such as broadcast media and print media, and more recently, the Internet (as a broader platform). The adapted scale was validated through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), resulting in a three-factor solution. These three factors were named reliability, usefulness and affect, and the willingness to rely on. Factor scores (weighted measures) were then calculated for these factors. Factor scores are estimates of the scores survey participants would have received on each of the factors had they been measured directly, with the following results recorded (Reliability = 4.68/7; Usefulness and Affect = 4.53/7; and Willingness to Rely On = 3.94/7). Further statistical analysis (independent samples t-test) determined the difference in factor scores between the factors when age (Gen Z/Millennials vs. Gen X/Boomers) was utilised as the independent, categorical variable. The results showed the difference in mean scores across all three factors to be statistically significant (p<0.05) for these two core age groupings: Gen Z/Millennials Reliability = 4.90/7 vs Gen X/Boomers Reliability = 4.34/7; Gen Z/Millennials Usefulness and Affect = 4.85/7 vs Gen X/Boomers Usefulness and Affect = 4.05/7; and Gen Z/Millennials Willingness to Rely On = 4.53/7 vs Gen X/Boomers Willingness to Rely On = 3.03/7. The results clearly indicate that older social media users lack trust in the quality of information conveyed in social media ads, when compared to younger, more social media-savvy consumers. This is especially evident with respect to Factor 3 (Willingness to Rely On), whose underlying variables reflect one’s behavioural intent to act based on the information conveyed in advertising. These findings can be useful to marketers, advertisers, and brand managers in that the results highlight a critical need to design ‘authentic’ advertisements on social media sites to better connect with these older users, in an attempt to foster positive behavioural responses from within this large demographic group – whose engagement with social media sites continues to increase year on year.Keywords: social media advertising, trust, older consumers, online
Procedia PDF Downloads 771 Evaluation of Academic Research Projects Using the AHP and TOPSIS Methods
Authors: Murat Arıbaş, Uğur Özcan
Abstract:
Due to the increasing number of universities and academics, the fund of the universities for research activities and grants/supports given by government institutions have increased number and quality of academic research projects. Although every academic research project has a specific purpose and importance, limited resources (money, time, manpower etc.) require choosing the best ones from all (Amiri, 2010). It is a pretty hard process to compare and determine which project is better such that the projects serve different purposes. In addition, the evaluation process has become complicated since there are more than one evaluator and multiple criteria for the evaluation (Dodangeh, Mojahed and Yusuff, 2009). Mehrez and Sinuany-Stern (1983) determined project selection problem as a Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problem. If a decision problem involves multiple criteria and objectives, it is called as a Multi Attribute Decision Making problem (Ömürbek & Kınay, 2013). There are many MCDM methods in the literature for the solution of such problems. These methods are AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), ANP (Analytic Network Process), TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution), PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation), UTADIS (Utilities Additives Discriminantes), ELECTRE (Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Realite), MAUT (Multiattribute Utility Theory), GRA (Grey Relational Analysis) etc. Teach method has some advantages compared with others (Ömürbek, Blacksmith & Akalın, 2013). Hence, to decide which MCDM method will be used for solution of the problem, factors like the nature of the problem, types of choices, measurement scales, type of uncertainty, dependency among the attributes, expectations of decision maker, and quantity and quality of the data should be considered (Tavana & Hatami-Marbini, 2011). By this study, it is aimed to develop a systematic decision process for the grant support applications that are expected to be evaluated according to their scientific adequacy by multiple evaluators under certain criteria. In this context, project evaluation process applied by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) the leading institutions in our country, was investigated. Firstly in the study, criteria that will be used on the project evaluation were decided. The main criteria were selected among TÜBİTAK evaluation criteria. These criteria were originality of project, methodology, project management/team and research opportunities and extensive impact of project. Moreover, for each main criteria, 2-4 sub criteria were defined, hence it was decided to evaluate projects over 13 sub-criterion in total. Due to superiority of determination criteria weights AHP method and provided opportunity ranking great number of alternatives TOPSIS method, they are used together. AHP method, developed by Saaty (1977), is based on selection by pairwise comparisons. Because of its simple structure and being easy to understand, AHP is the very popular method in the literature for determining criteria weights in MCDM problems. Besides, the TOPSIS method developed by Hwang and Yoon (1981) as a MCDM technique is an alternative to ELECTRE method and it is used in many areas. In the method, distance from each decision point to ideal and to negative ideal solution point was calculated by using Euclidian Distance Approach. In the study, main criteria and sub-criteria were compared on their own merits by using questionnaires that were developed based on an importance scale by four relative groups of people (i.e. TUBITAK specialists, TUBITAK managers, academics and individuals from business world ) After these pairwise comparisons, weight of the each main criteria and sub-criteria were calculated by using AHP method. Then these calculated criteria’ weights used as an input in TOPSİS method, a sample consisting 200 projects were ranked on their own merits. This new system supported to opportunity to get views of the people that take part of project process including preparation, evaluation and implementation on the evaluation of academic research projects. Moreover, instead of using four main criteria in equal weight to evaluate projects, by using weighted 13 sub-criteria and decision point’s distance from the ideal solution, systematic decision making process was developed. By this evaluation process, new approach was created to determine importance of academic research projects.Keywords: Academic projects, Ahp method, Research projects evaluation, Topsis method.
Procedia PDF Downloads 586