Advertising Effectiveness on Facebook: A Study on Advertisement Impact

“ADVERTISING IN SOCIAL MEDIA: A STUDY ON
EFFECTIVENESS OF ADVERTISEMENT ON FACEBOOK.”
Submitted By
SAGAR RANJAN DAS
University Reg. No – 1806260051
MBA: 2018 – 2020
Under the guidance of
Dr. SANTOSH KUMAR BISWAL
Faculty (I/C), RIMS
ROURKELA INSITUTES OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES
Institutional Area, Gopabandhu Nagar, Chhend, Rourkela- 769015, Odisha

• To know the Customer/Audience/Viewers in Facebook and their
potentials.
• To know the taste and preference of the users in Facebook.
• To find out the effectiveness of an advertisement in Social Media
Platform (Facebook).
• To find out which type of social media advertisement are suitable
for the which type of customer segment.
Objective of the Study

Research Methodology
Population: For this research the responded Population is the
responded in Odisha.
Sample: 84 numbers of sample collected randomly through
online survey using Google Form.
Use of Statistical Techniques :
• Chi-square Test
• Binary Logistic Regression

Data Collection: Both Primary data and secondary data are
collected for the research purpose. Primary data are being
collected from the Facebook user though online survey using
Google Form. And the secondary data are collected from the
difference sources of data points like Books, Journals and research
Papers as well as taken the help of Reliable web sources.

After going through the different journal, books and online sources
different variables are identified and structured Questionnaires are
prepared for the survey. Than the question was distributed through
online platform using Whatsaap, Facebook, and Instagram to the
responded located differently all over India. Then, the data are
exported to MS-Excel and analyzed through different statistical tools
using IBM-SPSS-25 and finally based on the facts and analysis report
is been prepared and suggestion given.
Research Design

Managerial Usefulness
• To know the effectiveness of the Ad published by the
company even if company does not afford an expensive
analytical tool.
• Identifying the loop holes or gaps between the conversion
and non conversion.
• Which type of Ad is suitable and what factor influence the
conversion.

Data Analysis
A. Demographic Data
Inference:
Here in this research the total no of sample collected
are 86 in numbers, out of which 51 responded are
Male (59%) and 35 responded are Female (41%).
The research sample contains different age group
that are 11 - 20 years 8 responded (9%), 21 - 30
years 66 responded (77%), 31 - 40 years 4
responded (5%), 41 - 50 years 3 responded (3%) &
51 - above years 5 responded (6%). It also contains
different occupations that are Home Maker 1
responded (1%), Salaried 33 responded (38%),
Business Person 1 responded (1%), No retired and
51 responded are Student (59%). The monthly
average incomes of the sample group are less than
5000/- 45 responded (52%), 5001 – 25000/- 14
responded (16%), 25001 – 50000/- 15 responded
(17%), 50001 – 100000/- 7 responded (8%) and
100000 & above are 5 responded (6%).
Q2. Gender
Male 51 59%
Female 35 41%
Total Count 86 100%
Q3. Age
11 -20 years 8 9%
21 -30 years 66 77%
31- 40 years 4 5%
41 -50 years 3 3%
51 & Above 5 6%
Total 86 100%
Q4. Occupation
Home Maker 1 1%
Salaried 33 38%
Business Person 1 1%
Retired 0 0%
Student 51 59%
Total 86 100%
Q5. Monthly Income in Rupees
Less than 5000 45 52%
5001 - 25000 14 16%
25001 -50000 15 17%
50001 - 100000 7 8%
100001 & above 5 6%
Total 86 100%

Q6. Do you have a Facebook Account
(a Social Media Platform)?
Yes 78 91%
No 8 9%
Total 86 100%
Inference:
Here in this research above question asked to the responded to know the
active Facebook account available across the responded and found that out
of 86 responded 78 responded agreed to the active Facebook account
(91%) and the rest denied having the active Facebook Account (9%).
B.

Q.N. Question SA A N D S DA T
Mea
n
SD
Q7
Do you think Positive Comments on a
Facebook Ad tempt you to visit the
Linked Page?
23 47 4 2 2 78 4.12 0.81
Q8
Do you think more and more numbers of
Likes on a Facebook Ad tempt you to visit
the Linked Page?
32 34 7 4 1 78 4.18 0.89
Q9
Do you think high number of share on a
Linked Page?
36 37 2 1 2 78 4.33 0.84
Q10
Do you think tempting Brand theme on a
Linked Page?
30 32 8 4 4 78 4.03 1.11
Q11
Do you think Need for the advertised
products on Facebook Ad tempt you to
visit the Linked Page?
28 39 7 3 1 78 4.15 0.86
C.
Inference:
From the above table listed questions from
Q7 to Q11 which are asked to the 86
responded and out of them 78 responded
have answered these answer about the
Facebook Advertisement effectiveness and
from the data analysis the answered mean
of all the five questions are between the
range of 4 to 5 which denotes that
responded are thinking that the
advertisements are effective or we can say
agreed to the said statements.

Inference:
From the above table question asked to the
responded that in which device they used to browse
Facebook and allowed to answer multiple options. And the
result shows that only 3% responded use Desktop, 1%
responded use Laptop and 62% responded use Mobile. As
well as 1% of responded use Mobile and Desktop, 9% of
Responded use Mobile, desktop and laptop, 14% of
responded use Mobile & Laptop, 4% of responded use
Mobile & tablet, 1% responded use Mobile, tablet &
desktop, 3% of responded use Mobile, Tablet, Desktop &
Laptop and 3% of responded use Mobile, Tablet, & Laptop.
ed to
Desktop 2 3%
Laptop 1 1%
Mobile 48 62%
Mobile; Desktop 1 1%
Mobile; Desktop; Laptop 7 9%
Mobile; Laptop 11 14%
Mobile; Tablet 3 4%
Mobile; Tablet; Desktop 1 1%
Mobile; Tablet; Desktop; Laptop 2 3%
Mobile; Tablet; Laptop 2 3%
Total 78 100%
Q12. Which are the devices you used to
browse Facebook Page?
Desktop 2 3%
Laptop 1 1%
Mobile 48 62%
Mobile; Desktop 1 1%
Mobile; Desktop; Laptop 7 9%
Mobile; Laptop 11 14%
Mobile; Tablet 3 4%
Mobile; Tablet; Desktop 1 1%
Mobile; Tablet; Desktop; Laptop 2 3%
Mobile; Tablet; Laptop 2 3%
Total 78 100%
D.

Q13. How often do you use/check your
Facebook?
Hourly or more 19 24%
Daily 45 58%
Weekly 12 15%
Monthly 2 3%
Total 78 100%
Inference:
From the above table question asked to the responded that how
often they use Facebook and the results are like 24% of responded use
hourly or more, 58% of responded use Facebook Daily, 15% of responded
use Facebook Weekly and the rest of the responded that is only 3% use
Facebook monthly.
E.

Q14. What per cent of time you spent on Facebook
Advertisement when you browse Facebook?
0 - 20% 40 51%
21 - 40% 25 32%
41 - 60% 12 15%
61 - 80% 1 1%
81 - 100% - 0%
Total 78 100%
Inference:
From the above table question asked to the responded that what percentage of time they use
spending on Facebook advertisement and the results are like 51% of responded use 0-20% of their total time
spent on Facebook, 32% of responded use 21-40% of their total time spent on Facebook, 15% of responded
use Facebook 41-60% of their total time spent on Facebook and only 1% of responded use 61-80% of their
total time spent on Facebook to engage with Facebook Advertisement.
F.

Q. NO Question Yes No Maybe Total Mean
Q. 15
Are you getting aware of new
Products/Brands through Facebook
advertisement?
48
22 8 78
1.49
Q. 16
Did you ever Like, Comment or Share any
Facebook ads (Brand Video, GIF or Picture)
form the Facebook page?
48 24 6 78
1.46
Q. 17
Did Facebook's Advertisement motivate you
to follow or visit the link page? 55 23 - 78
1.29
Q. 18
Did Facebook's Advertisement motivate you
to buy the products? 49 24 5 78
1.44
Q. 19
Do you find Facebook advertisements useful,
in terms of keep up to date with new
trends?
60 12 6 78
1.31
Q. 20
Do you think the number of like for specific
brands represent their quality and
popularity?
50 25 3 78
1.40
Q. 21
Do Facebook brands pages and their
information improve your awareness in
order to buying decisions?
63 11 4 78
1.24
Q. 22
Did you ever find that any Facebook ad
follows you in different Internet platform
(Amazon, Instagram, twitter...) after you saw
it on Facebook?
63 12 3 78
1.23
Inference:
From the above table different
questions asked to the responded in order
to know the Advertisement Engagement
Effectiveness and the result drawn that
the Mean value of each question is
between 1to 2; where 1 denotes “Yes”, 2
denotes “No” and 3 denotes “Maybe”. So
the result shows that the Engagement in
Facebook ad is effective.
G.

Q23. Which type of Facebook Ads you usually like to
watch?
Video Based Ads 46 59%
Image Based Ads 26 33%
Text Based Ads 4 5%
GIF Based Ads 2 3%
Total 78 100%
Inference:
From the above table different questions asked to the responded to
know the type of Advertisement they usually like to watch and the results are
59% of responded like to watch Video based Ads, 33% of responded like to
watch Image based Ads, 5% of responded like to watch Text based Ads and
only 3% of responded like to watch GIF based Ads.
H.

Objective:
To find out the significant relationship between the Facebook user according to their frequency of use
and the time duration spent on watching Facebook Advertisement.
Test: Chi-Square Test
From Question no. 13 & 14 the sample data are collected and firstly cross tabulated and then using
the IBM SPSS 25 to Calculated Pearson Chi-Square, Phi & Camer’s V with their P Value.
Hypothesis:
H0: There are significant relationship between the Facebook usage frequency and the
time spent on Facebook Advertisement.
H1: There are no significant relationship between the Facebook usage frequency and the
time spent on Facebook Advertisement.
I.

Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
FREQUENCY *
DURATION
84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
FREQUENCY * DURATION Cross tabulation
Count
DURATION
Total0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80%
FREQUENCY Hourly & More 8 6 4 1 19
Daily 24 17 5 0 46
Weekly 6 3 3 1 13
Monthly 6 0 0 0 6
Total 44 26 12 2 84
Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymptotic
Significance
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 11.719a 9 .230
Likelihood Ratio 14.242 9 .114
Linear-by-Linear
Association
2.213 1 .137
N of Valid Cases 84
a. 10 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The
minimum expected count is .14.
Symmetric Measures
Value
Asymptotic
Standard
Errora
Approximate
Tb
Approximate
Significance
Nominal by Nominal Phi .374 .230
Cramer's V .216 .230
Contingency Coefficient .350 .230
Interval by Interval Pearson's R -.163 .110 -1.499 .138c
Ordinal by Ordinal Spearman Correlation -.152 .114 -1.388 .169c
N of Valid Cases 84
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Based on normal approximation.

Inference:
The chi square statistic appears in the Value column of the Chi-Square Tests table
immediately to the right of “Pearson Chi-Square”. The value of the chi square statistic is 11.719.
The p-value appears in the same row in the “Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)” column (.230).
The result is significant if this value is equal to or less than the designated alpha level (normally
.05).
In this case, the p-value is greater than the standard alpha value, so we’d rejected the
null hypothesis that asserts the two variables are independent of each other. To put it simply, the
result is insignificant – the data suggests that the variables Frequency and Duration are not
associated with each other.
And the Phi and Cramer's V are both tests of the strength of association. We can see
that the strength of association between the variables is very weak as the Phi Value is (.374)
respective P Value is (.230) and Cramer’s V Value is (.216) respective P Value is (.230).

Inference:
The above graph shows
that the Daily frequented users are
more prone to engage with the
Facebook Advertisement comparing
to other three frequented data but
the population data says that it has
no significant relationship between
the two variables and the relationship
found out in this graph are only for
the particular sample only.

J.
Objective:
To know if there is any significant relationship between types of preference of
Advertisement in Facebook and the Devices used for the browsing of Facebook.
From Question no. 23 & 12 the sample data are collected and firstly cross
tabulated and then using the IBM SPSS 25 to Calculated Pearson Chi-Square, Phi &
Camer’s V with their P Value.
Hypothesis:
H0: There are significant relationship between types of preference of
H1: There are no significant relationship between types of preference of

Cases
Valid Missing Total
N
Percen
t N
Percen
t N
Percen
t
Type of Ads * Type
of Device
78 90.7% 8 9.3% 86 100.0
%
Type of Ads * Type of Device Crosstabulation
Count
Type of Device
TotalMobile Tablet Desktop Laptop
Type of Ads Video Based 26 5 4 11 46
Image Based 18 0 1 7 26
Text Based 2 1 0 1 4
GIF Based 2 0 0 0 2
Total 48 6 5 19 78
Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymptotic
Significance
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.909a 9 .647
Likelihood Ratio 9.209 9 .418
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.628 1 .428
N of Valid Cases 78
a. 12 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The
minimum expected count is .13.
Symmetric Measures
Value
Asymptotic
Standard
Errora
Approximate
Tb
Approximate
Significance
Nominal by Nominal Phi .298 .647
Cramer's V .172 .647
Contingency
Coefficient
.285 .647
Interval by Interval Pearson's R -.090 .100 -.790 .432c
Ordinal by Ordinal Spearman Correlation -.090 .111 -.789 .433c
N of Valid Cases 78
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Based on normal approximation.

Inference:
The chi square statistic appears in the Value column of the Chi-Square Tests table
immediately to the right of “Pearson Chi-Square”. The value of the chi square statistic is 6.909.
The p-value appears in the same row in the “Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)” column (..647). The
result is significant if this value is equal to or less than the designated alpha level (normally .05).
In this case, the p-value is greater than the standard alpha value, so we’d rejected the
null hypothesis that asserts the two variables are independent of each other. To put it simply, the
result is insignificant – the data suggests that the variables types of preferred advertise and types of
devices are not associated with each other.
And the Phi and Cramer's V are both tests of the strength of association. We can see that
the strength of association between the variables is very weak as the Phi Value is (.298)
respective P Value is (.647) and Cramer’s V Value is (.172) respective P Value is (.647).

Inference:
The above graph shows that the Mobile users
are more prone to engage with the Facebook
Advertisement comparing to other three
frequented Devices but the population data says
that it has no significant relationship between
the two variables and the relationship found out
in this graph are only for the particular sample
only.

K.
Objective:
To know if there is any significant relationship between types of preference of Advertisement in
Facebook with the Demographic Data of users like Gender, Age, Occupation and average monthly
income.
From Question no. 23 & all demographic data (Q2, Q3, Q4, & Q5) the sample data are collected and
firstly cross tabulated and then using the IBM SPSS 25 to Calculated Pearson Chi-Square, Phi &
Camer’s V with their P Value.
Hypothesis:
H0: There are significant relationships between the type of Ads and Demographic Variables.
H1: There are no significant relationships between the type of Ads and Demographic Variables.

Consolidated
Data Table
Pearson Chi-
Squre
Phi Cramer's V
Remarks
Chi-
Square
Value
P
Value
Phi
Value
P
Value
Cramer's
V Value
P
Value
Gender 5.107 0.164 0.256 0.164 0.256 0.164 Insignificant
Age 18.87 0.092 0.256 0.164 0.256 0.164 Insignificant
Occupation 12.567 0.183 0.401 0.183 0.232 0.183 Insignificant
Monthly
Income in
Rupees
18.988 0.089 0.493 0.089 0.285 0.089 Insignificant
Inference:
From the above table it is found that the P value in all the tests are more than Alpha
value i.e. 0.05 so reject the null hypothesis. This denotes that there is no significant
relationship between the preferred types of advertisement with the Demographic profile
of the user.

Inference:
The above graph shows that the Video Based & Image based Advertisement
a significant impact but the population data says that it has no significant relationship
between the two variables and the relationship found out in this graph are only for
the particular sample only.

Inference:
The above graph shows that Video Based & Image based Advertisement a
significant impact comparing to the other category and it has a choice/ Preference
dependency on the young aged responded i.e. 21-30 years-respond but the
population data says that it has no significant relationship between the two variables
and the relationship found out in this graph are only for the particular sample only.

Inference:
The above graph shows that Video Based & Image based Advertisement a significant
impact comparing to the other category and it has a choice/ Preference dependency
on the Student and somehow with salaried person but the population data says that it
has no significant relationship between the two variables and the relationship found
out in this graph are only for the particular sample only.

Inference:
The above graph shows that Video Based & Image based Advertisement a
significant impact comparing to the other category and it has a choice/ Preference
dependency on the Low income responded but the population data says that it has no
significant relationship between the two variables and the relationship found out in
this graph are only for the particular sample only.

L.
Objective:
To know the Probability of Effective Brand Awareness of Facebook Ads based upon
the Like, Comments, shares etc.
Test: Binary Logistic Regression
From Question no. 21 & all data (Q7, Q8, Q9, Q10 & Q11) the sample data are
collected and then using the IBM SPSS 25 to Calculated t-test first and then Binary
Logistic Regression.
Hypothesis:
H0: There are significant relationships between the two allocated variables.
H1: There are no significant relationships between the two allocated
variables.

T-Test
Group Statistics
Brand awareness N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Positive Comments YES 63 4.08 .867 .109
0 11 4.18 .603 .182
More & More Likes YES 63 4.25 .822 .104
0 11 3.82 1.250 .377
Shares YES 63 4.25 .861 .108
0 11 4.73 .467 .141
Brand Theme YES 63 4.14 1.030 .130
0 11 3.45 1.293 .390
Need for the Product YES 63 4.17 .834 .105
0 11 4.18 .982 .296
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Positive Comments Equal variances assumed .140 .709 -.375 72 .709
Equal variances not assumed -.483 18.140 .635
More & More Likes Equal variances assumed 8.071 .006 1.491 72 .140
Equal variances not assumed 1.115 11.557 .288
Shares Equal variances assumed 1.438 .234 -1.772 72 .081
Equal variances not assumed -2.663 24.013 .014
Inference:
From the above t-test the p value is in some cases are insignificant as it is
more than the alpha value (0.05). so reject the Null hypothesis
0 11 4.73 .467 .141
Brand Theme YES 63 4.14 1.030 .130
0 11 3.45 1.293 .390
Need for the Product YES 63 4.17 .834 .105
0 11 4.18 .982 .296
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Positive Comments Equal variances assumed .140 .709 -.375 72 .709
More & More Likes Equal variances assumed 8.071 .006 1.491 72 .140
Shares Equal variances assumed 1.438 .234 -1.772 72 .081
Equal variances not assumed -2.663 24.013 .014
Brand Theme Equal variances assumed 1.949 .167 1.968 72 .053
Need for the Product Equal variances assumed .566 .454 -.026 72 .979

Logistic Regression
Unweighted Casesa N Percent
Selected Cases Included in Analysis 74 94.9
Missing Cases 4 5.1
Total 78 100.0
Unselected Cases 0 .0
Total 78 100.0
a. If weight is in effect, see classification table for the total number of cases.
Dependent Variable Encoding
Original Value Internal Value
0 0
YES 1

Block 0: Beginning Block
Iteration Historya,b,c
Iteration
-2 Log
likelihood
Coefficients
Constant
Step 0 1 63.383 1.405
2 62.224 1.711
3 62.213 1.745
4 62.213 1.745
a. Constant is included in the model.
b. Initial -2 Log Likelihood: 62.213
c. Estimation terminated at iteration number 4 because
parameter estimates changed by less than .001.
Classification Tablea,b
Observed
Predicted
Brand awareness Percentage
Correct0 YES
Step 0 Brand awareness 0 0 11 .0
YES 0 63 100.0
Overall Percentage 85.1
a. Constant is included in the model.
b. The cut value is .500
Variables in the Equation
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)
Step 0 Constant 1.745 .327 28.524 1 .000 5.727
Variables not in the Equation
Score df Sig.
Step 0 Variables Positive Comments .145 1 .704
More & More Likes 2.217 1 .136
Shares 3.092 1 .079
Brand Theme 3.779 1 .052
Need for the Product .001 1 .979
Overall Statistics 9.843 5 .080

Block 1: Method = Enter
Iteration Historya,b,c,d
Iteration
-2 Log
likelihood
Coefficients
Constant
Positive
Comments
More & More
Likes Shares
Brand
Theme
Need
for the
Produc
t
Step 1 1 56.628 1.072 -.128 .302 -.396 .291 .031
2 51.818 2.451 -.326 .571 -.905 .420 .148
3 50.892 4.017 -.473 .727 -1.356 .458 .263
4 50.842 4.521 -.502 .761 -1.496 .468 .295
5 50.842 4.554 -.503 .762 -1.506 .469 .297
6 50.842 4.554 -.503 .762 -1.506 .469 .297
a. Method: Enter
b. Constant is included in the model.
c. Initial -2 Log Likelihood: 62.213
d. Estimation terminated at iteration number 6 because parameter estimates changed by less than .001.Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients
Chi-square df Sig.
Step 1 Step 11.371 5 .044
Block 11.371 5 .044
Model 11.371 5 .044
Model Summary
Step -2 Log likelihood Cox & Snell R Square Nagelkerke R Square
1 50.842a .142 .251
a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 6 because parameter estimates changed by less than .001.

Classification Tablea
Observed
Predicted
Brand awareness Percentage
Correct0 YES
Step 1 Brand awareness 0 2 9 18.2
YES 2 61 96.8
Overall Percentage 85.1
a. The cut value is .500
Variables in the Equation
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)
Step 1a Positive Comments -.503 .503 1.003 1 .317 .605
More & More Likes .762 .421 3.276 1 .070 2.143
Shares -1.506 .772 3.803 1 .051 .222
Brand Theme .469 .273 2.936 1 .087 1.598
Need for the Product .297 .447 .442 1 .506 1.346
Constant 4.554 4.254 1.146 1 .284 95.016
a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: Positive Comments, More & More Likes, Shares, Brand Theme, Need for the Product.

Inference:
Here from the above table Block -0: Beginning Block the Initial -2 Log Likelihood is (62.213) which means
the error term which mean the lower the value the model is much better. In the classification table step- 0 the total
predicted that it is brand awareness is improved with null model but initially it will show the model in next table. In the
next table the Exp(B) Value is (5.727) that means the both variables are correlated.
In the Block 1: the -2 log likelihood reduced to (50.842) which means the less value is preferable.
Cox&snell R Square and Nagelkerek R Square value are .142 and .251 respectively which means the model is weak as its
value is not close to 1. In the classification table the data shows that 85% of data are correctly classified. From the next
and the last table the
Model: Logit = {4.554 + (-0.503 positive comments) + (0.762 likes) + (-1.506 shares) + (0.469
brand theme) + (0.297 need of the product)}
Odds = eLogit
P(Y) = Odds/1+Odds
So, from the Probability it can be predicted that the independent variables it has the high dependency of brand
Awareness. As the maximum responded cases are resulting more than (0.5). Near about 89% of data of this sample
says that the responded feel that the independent variables are helpful for the Brand Awareness of the Product in a
Facebook Advertises.

Major Findings
1. From the demographic analysis of the sample collected it is found that the users in this platform
are not gender biased. Mostly the young generation people spent most of their time in this
platform and the most users are in this group are associated with the student life or early job
holders whose income level is comparatively very low.
2. All most all now a days having an active Facebook account with them and the percentage is
91%. Which means it can be said from the research that out of 100 people almost 90 people
have a Facebook Account.
3. In this research it is been asked to responded to react that the Facebook advertisement are
effective or not and the result of their mean is between 4 to 5 in a range of 5 scale which
denotes that they are agree to this logic that the Advertisements are effective.
4. From this research it is also cleared that the most used device for browsing the Facebook is a
Mobile Phone and it is very common also in each demographic situation.

5. From this research it is also found that a very less time or we can say most of the users gave 1/5th
of their total browsing time to the Facebook advertisement browsing/ engagement.
6. In this research in order to test the level of engagement some structured questions are asked and
the results drawn that the Mean value of each question is between 1to 2; where 1 denotes “Yes”, 2
denotes “No” and 3 denotes “Maybe”. So the result shows that the Engagement in Facebook ad is
effective.
7. From this research it is also found that most of the users prefer to watch a Video Based
Advertisement in Facebook Platform.
8. From this research it is found that there is no significant relationship between the frequency of
using Facebook and the time spent on an Advertisement Page.
9. From this research it is found that there is no significant relationship between the Device used and
the preference of advertisement.

10. From this research it is found that there is no significant relationship between the type of
preferred advertisement with the demographic variables like Gender, Age, Occupation and
Income etc.
11. Factors like Likes, Comments, Shares, Brand theme and need for the product are the major
attributes for evaluating the effectiveness of a Facebook Post/Advertisement.
12. From this research after using the technique of Binary Logistic Regression using the Like,
Positive Comments, Shares, brand theme and the need for that brand can be predicted the
Brand Awareness and its effectiveness.

Suggestions & Recommendations
After this research some of the points I would like to suggest which is helpful to the Advertisement
Manager or Marketing Manager in taking decision before Posting an Advertisement in Facebook.
1. This is a platform where a marketer can easily target young generation people aged between 21 to
30 years and who are mostly depended or low income group.
2. While giving the advertisement manager should post the Ad relating the emotion of young mass,
mobile version, short and video based advertisement so that the impact will be high and target to
the right Viewers.
3. Facebook is a very good Social media platform with a huge customer base and very effective
Advertisement results and it interactive also so the marketer can also know the customer very well in
real time and with very low cost which is very much important for a marketer. It can be tracked
though the Likes, Comments and Shares.
4. In this Platform the engagement level is above the satisfaction level.

5. Marketer should take care of both device oriented as well as the preferred style/ type of
Advertisement in order to engage the customer to lead to the landing page.
6. Video based and Image Based advertisements are more effective than others so, marketers
should try to invest in that type od Ads.
7. The effectiveness and the Ad engagement clears that it has a positive impact on the consumer
buying decisions.
In order to predict the effectiveness of Brand awareness here is the model suggested
Where the P(Y) value is less than 0.5 denotes the effectiveness and the closes to the value 1 is very
high effectiveness.
Model: Logit = {4.554 + (-0.503 positive comments) + (0.762 likes) + (-1.506 shares) + (0.469
brand theme) + (0.297 need of the product)}
Odds = eLogit
P(Y) = Odds/1+Odds

• The responded may be biased while giving response to the
questionnaires.
• The sample lack of proportionate for each segmented
responded.
• Sample size is small in number.
• Data collected from a particular geographical area and the
result may differ from place to place.
Limitations

Bibliography
Articles:
• Afendi Hamat, Mohamed Amin Embi, Haslinda Abu Hassan (2012), “The Use of Social Networking Sites among
Malaysian university students”, International Education Studies, Canadian Centre of Science and Education, p 56,
Vol. 5, Issue no. 3.
• Áine Dunne, Margaret-Anne Lawlor, Jennifer Rowley (2010), “Young people’s use of online social networking sites-a
uses and gratifications perspective”.
• Ambrose Jagongo, Catherine Kinyua (2013), “The Social Media and Entrepreneurship Growth”, International Journal
of Humanities and Social Science, 3(10), 213-227.
• Andreas Kaplan and Michael Heinlein (May-June 2011), Two hearts in three quarter time : How to waltz the social
media/viral marketing dance, Business Horizons, Elsevier Inc., pp. 253-263, Vol. 54, Issue 3.
• Andreas Kaplan and Michael Heinlein (Nov. - Dec.2009), “The fairyland of Second Life : Virtual social worlds and how
to use them”, Business Horizons, Elsevier Inc., pp 563-572, Volume 52, Issue 6.
• Andreas M. Kaplan and Michael Haenlein (2010), “Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunites of
Social Media”, Business Horizons, Kelley School of Business, Vol.53, 59-68.
• Anil Bhat (May 2012), “Blog Popularity And Activity On Social Media : An Exploratory Research”, Indian Journal of
Marketing, Pg 10-18.
• Ayarkar S. (2015), “Impact and effectiveness of social media advertising on young working women’s buying
behaviour with reference to consumer electronics - a study of selected cities in Maharashtra and Gujarat.” Theses,
DY Patil University.

• Boris Bartikowski, Gianfranco Walsh (4 February2014), “ Attitude contagion in consumer opinion platforms : posters and
lurkers”, Electron Markets, Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen.
• Botha, E., Farshid, M., Pitt, L. (2011), “How Sociable? An exploratory study of university brand visibility in social media”, South
African Journal of Business Management, SA ePublications, 43-51, Vol. 42, Issue 2.
• Dehghani M., (2013), “The Role of Social Media on Advertising: A Research on Effectiveness of Facebook Advertising on
Enhancing Brand Image”, Eastern Mediterranean University, January 2013.
• Efthymios Constantinides, Carlota Lorenzo Romero and Miguel A. Gomez Boria (2009), “Social Media : A New Frontier for
Retailers?”, European Retail Research, Gabler Verlag, pp 1-28, Vol. 22.
• Erkan Akar & Birol Topcu (March 2011) ,“An examination of the factors influencing consumer’s attitudes towards social media
marketing”, Journal of Internet Commerce, Routledge Informa Ltd, pp. 35-67, Volume 10, Issue 1.
• Fue Zeng, Ran Tao, Yanwu Yang and Tingting Xie, (Aug – 2017), “How Social Communications Influence Advertising
Perception and Response in Online Communities?”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol- 08, Article – 1349.
• Guang Tian, Luis Borges (2012),“The effectiveness of social marketing mix strategy : Towards an Anthropological Approach”,
International Journal of Business Anthropology, North American Business Press, pp. 102-113, Vol. 3, Iss. 1.
• Irene, falsePollach (Oct-Dec 2008), “Media Richness in Online Consumer Interactions : An Exploratory Study of Consumer-
Opinion Web Sites”, Information Resources Management Journal, 49-65, Vol.21, Issue No.4 .
• Kim, Stephen J. (2008), "A Framework for Advertising in the Digital Age," Journal of Advertising Research, 48 (3), 310-13
• Padival A., Lidwin K. M., Hebbar S. (2019), “Effectiveness of facebook as an advertising medium among university students”,
Master Thesis, Near East University.
Websites:
• www.ibef.org/industry/media-entertainment-india.aspx
• www.wordstream.com/social-media-marketing
• www.facebook.com/business/measurement
Thank You

Advertising Effectiveness on Facebook: A Study on Advertisement Impact

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (11)

Ähnlich wie Advertising Effectiveness on Facebook: A Study on Advertisement Impact

Ähnlich wie Advertising Effectiveness on Facebook: A Study on Advertisement Impact (20)

Mehr von Sagar Das

Mehr von Sagar Das (8)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Advertising Effectiveness on Facebook: A Study on Advertisement Impact