Research finds split in perception of similarity that could double Web advertising

Sep 24, 2008

A study by psychology researchers at the University of Warwick has found a radical 50/50 split in how people decide "What makes two things seem similar?". This research could mean that some advertisers and marketers could be failing to reach up to half of their potential audience and it could double the number of opportunities available in key web advertising methods such as Google AdWords.

The University of Warwick research, is published this month in the journal Cognition and was led by Dr Zachary Estes, found that people differ radically in their perceptions of similarity. Whereas some people base their similarity judgments on physical features that looked alike, others based their judgments on more theme based relations. For instance, some people thought a bee is more similar to a butterfly, whereas others thought a bee is more similar to honey.

Dr Zachary Estes said: "Similarity underlies many of our behaviours, such as where we look for coffee in a supermarket and what social groups we belong to."

The phenomenon we have studied has many potential applications - a clever supermarket might, for instance, sell up to twice as much of one type of coffee by placing it both with other coffees and also with biscuits. However this could have even more impact on some forms of web based advertising such as Google AdWords. Some advertisers may for instance have selected words with physical similarities to their product such as cake and cookie but ignored large sections of their audience who would make a strong connection between cake and birthday".

Dr Estes and his team were surprised at how stark the split was between a theme based and physical based choice and even more surprised that the split was so even.

His first experiment using the word "similar" found that 31% of the people chose a physical feature based similarity (for instance cake and cookie) whereas 46% went for a theme based similarity (such as cake and birthday). The researchers tried changing the word "similar" to "like" to try and rule out any strange semantic effect but this time 31 % still selected a physical based likeness (such as fur and hair) whereas this time 57% selected a themed likeness (such as fur and coat).

A further experiment asked the participants to consider both similarities and differences at the same time. This changed the balance somewhat with 62% selecting a physical feature based similarity and 25% a theme based similarity.

This later experiment gave Dr Estes a possible insight into why and how there was such a radical split in these similarity judgments. The third experiment pushed people into thinking a little more about both similarly and difference. Could it therefore be that those people who were quick to make to a decision plumped for "easy" themed linkages (such as crown and Queen) whereas those who took more time to think about things chose a more considered physical link (such as crown and hat)?

Further experiments indeed showed that there was a group of people who rushed into a decision and tended to chose a theme based similarity and that there was a second group of people that thought about things a little more chose a physical feature based similarity.

However what was most surprising was that the Warwick researchers found a third group of people that also thought about things a little more and yet still always chose a theme based similarity. That left an overall split in the population of around 50% who were more thoughtful and chose a physical feature based similarity (such as net and rope) and another 50% for who always went for the thematic option (net and fish) whether they used instinct or deeper thought.

Source: University of Warwick

Explore further: Mothers don't speak so clearly to their babies

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Solving the Hox Specificity Paradox

Jan 22, 2015

The remarkable diversity of anatomical features along the body axis of animals—the differences between the head, the thorax and the abdomen, for example—is determined by proteins in the Hox family. But ...

Recommended for you

Mothers don't speak so clearly to their babies

Jan 23, 2015

People have a distinctive way of talking to babies and small children: We speak more slowly, using a sing-song voice, and tend to use cutesy words like "tummy". While we might be inclined to think that we ...

Explainer: What is sexual fluidity?

Jan 23, 2015

Sexual preferences are not set in stone and can change over time, often depending on the immediate situation the individual is in. This has been described as sexual fluidity. For example, if someone identifies as heterosexual but th ...

Lucky charms: When are superstitions used most?

Jan 23, 2015

It might be a lucky pair of socks, or a piece of jewelry; whatever the item, many people turn to a superstition or lucky charm to help achieve a goal. For instance, you used a specific avatar to win a game and now you see ...

Low-income boys fare worse in wealth's shadow

Jan 22, 2015

Low-income boys fare worse, not better, when they grow up alongside more affluent neighbors, according to new findings from Duke University. In fact, the greater the economic gap between the boys and their neighbors, the ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

mattytheory
not rated yet Sep 24, 2008
I think this fits in with the same body of research that suggests some people associate words with pictures as opposed to associating words with what they look like when they are spelled; aka: Themes vs. Physical characteristics. Just has to do with the way that person's brain learned to store information efficiently.

Very interesting nonetheless!
superhuman
not rated yet Sep 26, 2008
Well people who think honey is similar to bee are wrong. They need to get the meaning of the word straight, honey is *associated* with bee but is NOT similar to bee.

The phenomenon we have studied has many potential applications - a clever supermarket might, for instance, sell up to twice as much of one type of coffee by placing it both with other coffees and also with biscuits.

Seriously, how naive can you get? Up to twice as much cause it is located next to something that some people mix up for being similar to it?? Why not up to ten times as much?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.