Search results

Dynamic advertising, including television and online video ads, demands new theory and tools developed to understand attention to moving stimuli. The purpose of this study is to empirically test the predictions of a new dynamic attention theory, Dynamic Human-Centred Communication Systems Theory, versus the predictions of salience theory.

An eye-tracking study used a sample of consumers to measure visual attention to potential areas of interest (AOIs) in a random selection of unfamiliar video ads. An eye-tracking software feature called intelligent bounding boxes (IBBs) was used to track attention to moving AOIs. AOIs were coded for the presence of static salience variables (size, brightness, colour and clutter) and dynamic attention theory dimensions (imminence, motivational relevance, task relevance and stability).

Static salience variables contributed 90% of explained variance in fixation and 57% in fixation duration. However, the data further supported the three-way interaction uniquely predicted by dynamic attention theory: between imminence (central vs peripheral), relevance (motivational or task relevant vs not) and stability (fleeting vs stable). The findings of this study indicate that viewers treat dynamic stimuli like real life, paying less attention to central, relevant and stable AOIs, which are available across time and space in the environment and so do not need to be memorised.

Despite the limitations of small samples of consumers and video ads, the results of this study demonstrate the potential of two relatively recent innovations, which have received limited emphasis in the marketing literature: dynamic attention theory and IBBs.

This study documents what does and does not attract attention to video advertising. What gets attention according to salience theory (e.g. central location) may not always get attention in dynamic advertising because of the effects of relevance and stability. To better understand how to execute video advertising to direct and retain attention to important AOIs, advertisers and advertising researchers are encouraged to use IBBs.

This study makes two original contributions: to marketing theory, by showing how dynamic attention theory can predict attention to video advertising better than salience theory, and to marketing research, showing the utility of tracking visual attention to moving objects in video advertising with IBBs, which appear underutilised in advertising research.

Discusses the transfer of undertakings in the UK, referring to the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations of 1981, the Employment Rights Act 1996, and the Acquired Rights Directive 1977. Provides the raison d’etre of the Acquired Rights Directive and outlines how it was implemented in the UK. Talks about the confusing jurisprudence of the European and British courts, mentioning the European Court of Justice’s challenges to the directive, the 1994 proposals, amended 1997 proposals, the Commission’s memorandum of 1997 and the UK government’s consultation papers. Describes how the European Directive is applied and interpreted in relation to the Acquired Rights Directive and transfer of undertakings. Outlines the regulations controlling compulsory competitive tendering. Points out the obligation to inform and consult on the transfer of an undertaking and how the directive is enforced if this fails to occur. Notes the effect a relevant transfer has on existing collective agreements and the legal implications of dismissing employees by reason of the relevant transfer. Looks at the European Commission’s proposal for a directive on safeguarding employees’ rights in the event of transfer and the implications that would have on UK business. Concludes that a new directive is needed, building on the 1977 Directive but ironing out its inconsistencies.

Privacy considerations have become a topic with increasing interest from academics, industry leaders and regulators. In response to consumers’ privacy concerns, Google announced in 2020 that Chrome would stop supporting third-party cookies in the near future. At the same time, advertising technology companies are developing alternative solutions for online targeting and consumer privacy controls. This paper aims to explore privacy considerations related to online tracking and targeting methods used for programmatic advertising (i.e. third-party cookies, Privacy Sandbox, Unified ID 2.0) for a variety of stakeholders: consumers, AdTech platforms, advertisers and publishers.

This study analyzes the topic of internet user privacy concerns, through a multi-pronged approach: industry conversations to collect information, a comprehensive review of trade publications and extensive empirical analysis. This study uses two methods to collect data on consumer preferences for privacy controls: a survey of a representative sample of US consumers and field data from conversations on web-forums created by tech professionals.

The results suggest that there are four main segments in the US internet user population. The first segment, consisting of 26% of internet users, is driven by a strong preference for relevant ads and includes consumers who accept the premises of both Privacy Sandbox and Unified ID (UID) 2.0. The second segment (26%) includes consumers who are ambivalent about both sets of premises. The third segment (34%) is driven by a need for relevant ads and a strong desire to prevent advertisers from aggressively collecting data, with consumers who accept the premises of Privacy Sandbox but reject the premises of UID 2.0. The fourth segment (15% of consumers) rejected both sets of premises about privacy control. Text analysis results suggest that the conversation around UID 2.0 is still nascent. Google Sandbox associations seem nominally positive, with sarcasm being an important factor in the sentiment analysis results.

The value of this paper lies in its multi-method examination of online privacy concerns in light of the recent regulatory legislation (i.e. General Data Protection Regulation and California Consumer Privacy Act) and changes for third-party cookies in browsers such as Firefox, Safari and Chrome. Two alternatives proposed to replace third-party cookies (Privacy Sandbox and Unified ID 2.0) are in the proposal and prototype stage. The elimination of third-party cookies will affect stakeholders, including different types of players in the AdTech industry and internet users. This paper analyzes how two alternative proposals for privacy control align with the interests of several stakeholders.

WHEN delivering his Elbourne lecture Sir Geoffrey Vickers related the following incident. ‘As a very inexperienced subaltern in the old war, my company commander once said to me: “Vickers, the company will bathe this afternoon. Arrange.” In the Flemish hamlet where we were billeted the only bath of any kind was in the local nunnery. The nuns were charity itself but I couldn't ask them to bathe a hundred men. I reviewed other fluid‐containing objects which might be potential baths—cattle drinking troughs, empty beer barrels—and found practical or ethical objections to them all. At that point I had the misfortune to meet my company commander again and was forced to confess that I had not yet solved my problem. He was annoyed. “Whatever have you been doing all this time?” he said. Then, turning his own mind to the problem, apparently for the first time, he added: “Take the company limbers off their wheels, put the tilts inside and the cookers beside them for the hot water; four baths each four feet square, four men to a bath, do the whole job in an hour. Why don't you use your brains?”’

A new triage method, MBCE (Medical Bio Social Ethics), is presented with social justice, bio, and medical ethics for critical resource distribution during a pandemic. Ethical triage is a complex and challenging process that requires careful consideration of medical, social, cultural, and ethical factors to guide the decision-making process and ensure fair and transparent allocation of resources. When assigning priorities to patients, a clinician would evaluate each patient’s medical condition, age, comorbidities, and prognosis, as well as their cultural and social background and ethical factors.

A statistical analysis shows no interactions among the ethical triage factors. It implies the ethical components have no moderation effect; hence, each is independent. The result also points out that medical and bioethics may have an affinity for interactions. In such cases, there seem to be some ethical factors related to bio and medical ethics that are correlated. Therefore, the triage team should be careful in evaluating patient cases. The algorithm is explained with case histories of the selected patient. A group of triage nurses and general medical practitioners assists with the triage.

The MBCE triage algorithm aims to allocate scarce resources fairly and equitably. Another ethical principle in this triage algorithm is the principle of utility. In a pandemic, the principle of utility may require prioritizing patients with a higher likelihood of survival or requiring less medical care. The research presents a sensitivity analysis of a patient’s triage score to show the algorithm’s robustness. A weighted score of ethical factors combined with an assessment of triage factors combines multiple objectives to assign a fair triage score. These distinctive features of the algorithm are reasonably easy to implement and a new direction for the unbiased triage principle.

The idea is to make decisions about distributing and using scarce medical resources. Triage algorithms raise ethical issues, such as discrimination and justice, guiding medical ethics in treating patients with terminal diseases or comorbidity. One of the main ethical principles in triage algorithms is the principle of distributive justice.