4.7 Article

How should retail advertisers manage multiple keywords in paid search advertising?

期刊

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 539-551

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.049

关键词

Search advertising; Multiple; Digital advertising; Consumer purchase stage; Bidding strategy; Click behavior

类别

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2018S1A5A8030699]
  2. Hanyang University [HY-2016]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2018S1A5A8030699] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Consumers' search behavior with keywords for competing brands varies between market leader and follower brands, presenting an opportunity for retailers to improve the performance of search advertising campaigns. Retailers' bid allocation across keywords may be inconsistent with consumers' click behavior, indicating a potential need for strategic adjustments.
Consumers' online searches usually involve multiple keywords about their purchases, which vary depending on the purchase stage. Similarly, retail advertisers use a set of related keywords for competing brands. Thus, understanding how consumers search using keywords for competing brands at different purchase stages is important for retailers seeking to use multiple keywords more effectively. We examine consumers' click behavior and retailers' bids across multiple keywords. We empirically show that, while consumers search in a manner generally consistent with the purchase funnel, their behavior differs between market leader and follower brands. We also find that retailers consider the different keywords to be strategic complements, but this does not hold when consumers are close to making a purchase decision. Interestingly, retailers' bid allocation across keywords may be inconsistent with consumers' click behavior, revealing a potential opportunity to improve the performance of search advertising campaigns.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据