According to the latest research by MediaBrix, TrueImpact and Neurons Inc. A small mobile advertising built into the context of applications has higher rates of involvement, visual attention and action than the larger intermediate mobile advertising.

The report is based on a personal analysis in which participants were offered to play a mobile game and showed an intermediate video advertisement (opening up on the whole screen) and built-in advertising (small size, targeted based on user actions and context).

The researchers used three methods to determine the response to advertising: sensors for tracking eye movement and pulse, a neurometric monitor to determine cognitive load and positive / negative emotional reactions, and post-test interviews for a detailed review. Participants in the study viewed contextual advertising three times more often than the intermediate one.

The focus of the users was most often transferred to the edges of the banner when the video ads appeared in full screen: most likely they were looking for the close button. When viewing contextual advertising, the view remained concentrated on the center of the screen, where the banner was located.

Interrupting advertising on the whole screen twice was more often assessed by participants negatively in comparison with the built-in advertisement. More information about the study in this infographics:


Brand Perceptions in the Mobile

The Purpose

Evaluate how different types of mobile advertising affect the perception of users, key brand metrics, attention and actions after the show.

Intermediate full-screen video

  • Inserted between pages with content / game levels
  • 10 times larger than traditional banner advertising

Built-in opt-in advertising format

  • It is targeted at the moments when the user needs it.
  • Included in the application environment and contains native elements proposed by the publisher
  • Receiving a reward for interaction

Using neurometric and biometric technologies and open surveys, researchers measured brain and body response to various types of mobile advertising, the environment and content remained unchanged

Key findings and results


The most popular answers to the request to describe the experience were:

built-in opt-in advertisement

  • Pleasant
  • Valuable
  • Friendly

Intermediate advertisement

  • Annoying
  • The interrupting
  • The distracting

The key conclusion: when viewing the intermediate advertisement, even on the whole screen, viewers rated the experience as annoying, interrupting and distracting.

Intermediate advertising is present in two-thirds of mobile games, over the past year, they regularly played 180 million (US) users. ( eMarketer)


Visual involvement

90% viewers were browsing 100% 30 -second built-in opt-in commercials


25% viewers were browsing 100% intermediate advertisements

The key conclusion: People are more attracted to mobile video advertising, which is relevant, embedded in the context and offering a reward, and it is better remembered compared to the intermediate advertisement.

Visual attention:

Built-in opt-in advertisement

40 seconds of brand time – 19 seconds of contextual time /

21 seconds total fixation time


9 seconds brand time – 2 seconds contextual time /

7 seconds total fixation time

The time spent on understanding ads (reading the sentence, recognizing the logo, searching for the “close” button, etc.) was deducted from the total time spent on true understanding of the time given to the brand.

The built-in opt-in advertisement took in 4.6 times more time with advertising, in 9.5 times more time understanding advertising, in 3.0 times more spent with the brand of time

The key conclusion: 9.5 times more time was spent on understanding advertising for embedded opt-in Advertising, which led to an increase in the time spent with the brand 3 times.

Mindful involvement and evaluation:

The built-in opt-in advertisement causes 8 times more cognitive involvement for advertising experience than the intermediate

The key conclusion: Constant and high cognitive involvement leads to active evaluation and mental interpretation (for better memorization).


Is it integrated or not?

  • Advertising and game are interconnected – 9x
  • Advertising makes me keep playing – 8,3x
  • Advertising looked like part of the game – 4x

The key conclusion: The built-in advertising with native elements from the publisher, offering an exchange for a certain value, caused people more confidence, interest, involvement and desire to react.


Search for the sign “x”

The analysis of heat maps confirmed that when viewing intermediate advertising the user paid most attention to three of the four corners of the banner in search of the “close” button

  • High concentration on the search for the “x” button.
  • High concentration on contextual and native elements of the built-in opt-in advertisement.

Beat or run?

The brain center “hit or run” determines the power of a positive or negative emotional reaction.

Intermediate advertising in 2 times was more likely to cause a negative emotional reaction.

The key conclusion: Methods of delivery of advertising using native and contextual elements enhances the perception of the user and reduces the level of confusion and irritation in the interaction process.

Motivation or ignoring?

Measured by the brain reaction of “desire.”

Users were 4 times more motivated by built-in opt-in advertising and reward for interaction experience.

The key conclusion : High motivation leads to the accomplishment of actions, the intention to attempt and memorize.

Create high-quality advertising that will not annoy, increase trust and interest in your brand.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *