Which Ticker Format Works Best? Effects of Updating and Scrolling News Content on Viewer Memory and Program Engagement

Abstract

This study considers two news ticker formats—the update ticker and the scrolling ticker—to determine the impact of ticker format on memory for news items in the tickers as well as for news program content presented in the background. Post-viewing responses between two treatment groups were compared, revealing better recognition of both types of news content when tickers updated rather than scrolled. Also, viewers report no differences in perceived clutter or program liking, suggesting there is no downside to using an update format.

Keywords

news crawl scrolling ticker update ticker divided attention

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baddeley

(1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559. doi:10.1126/science.1736359

Bellman

Schweda

Varan

(2009). Viewing angle matters—Screen type does not. Journal of Communication, 59, 609-634. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01441.x

Bergen

Grimes

Potter

(2005). How attention partitions itself during simultaneous message presentations. Human Communication Research, 31, 311-336. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2005.tb00874.x

Blackmon

Benson

Berhow

(2004, August). A content analysis of news crawls on three 24-hour news networks. Manuscript presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Retrieved from http://list.msu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0411C&L=AEJMC&T=0&F=&S=&P=91418

Bowman

L. L.

Levine

L. E.

Waite

B. M.

Gendron

(2010). Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computers & Education, 54, 927-931. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.024

Brasel

S. A.

Gips

(2011). Media multitasking behavior: Concurrent television and computer usage. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 527-534. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0350

Carrier

L. M.

Cheever

N. A.

Rosen

L. D.

Benitez

Chang

(2009). Multitasking across generations: Multitasking choices and difficulty ratings in three generations of Americans. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 483-489. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.012

Cho

C.-H.

Cheon

H. J.

(2004). Why do people avoid advertising on the Internet? Journal of Advertising, 33(4), 89-97. doi:10.1080/00913367.2004.10639175

Coffey

A. J.

Cleary

(2008). Valuing new media spaces: Are cable network news crawls cross-promotional agents? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 85, 894-912. doi:10.1177/107769900808500411

10.

Coffey

A. J.

Cleary

(2011). Promotional practices of cable news networks: A comparative analysis of new and traditional spaces. The International Journal on Media Management, 13, 161-176. doi:10.1080/14241277.2011.568421

11.

Cooke

(2005). A visual convergence of print, television, and the Internet: Charting 40 years of design change in news presentation. New Media & Society, 7, 22-46. doi:10.1177/1461444805049141

12.

Coulter

K. S.

(1998). The effects of affective responses to media context on advertising evaluations. Journal of Advertising, 27(4), 41-51. doi:10.1080/00913367.1998.10673568

13.

The Council for Research Excellence. (2009). Video Consumer Mapping study. New York, NY. Retrieved from www.researchexcellence.com

14.

Dahlén

Rosengren

Törn

Öhman

(2008). Could placing ads wrong be right? Advertising effects of thematic incongruence. Journal of Advertising, 37(3), 57-67. doi:10.2753/joa0091-3367370305

15.

Detenber

B. J.

Reeves

(1996). A bio-informational theory of emotion: Motion and image size effects on viewers. Journal of Communication, 46, 66-84. doi:10.1111/j.1460- 2466.1996.tb01489.x

16.

The “flipper” is out, the ticker is back at CNN. (2013, February 13). NewscastStudio. Retrieved from http://www.newscaststudio.com/2013/02/18/the-flipper-is-out-the-ticker-is-back-at-cnn/

17.

Granaas

M. M.

McKay

T. D.

Laham

R. D.

Hurt

L. D.

Juola

J. F.

(1984). Reading moving text on a CRT screen. Human Factors, 26, 97-104. doi:10.1177/001872088402600109

18.

Grimes

(1990a). Audio-video correspondence and its role in attention and memory. Educational Technology Research & Development, 38(3), 15-25. doi:10.1007/bf02298178

19.

Grimes

(1990b). Encoding of TV news messages into memory. Journalism Quarterly, 67, 757-766. doi:10.1177/107769909006700430

20.

Hatch

(1998). The fine art of the ticker. Electronic Media, 17, 27-31.

21.

Hawkins

R. P.

Pingree

Hitchon

Radler

Gorham

B. W.

Kahlor

. . . Kolbeins

G. H.

(2005). What produces television attention and attention style? Genre, situation, and individual differences as predictors. Human Communication Research, 31, 162-187. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2005.tb00868.x

22.

Hembrooke

Gay

(2003). The laptop and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(1), 46-64. doi:10.1007/bf02940852

23.

Jeong

S. H.

Fishbein

(2007). Predictors of multitasking with media: Media factors and audience factors. Media Psychology, 10, 364-384. doi:10.1080/15213260701532948

24.

Jeong

S. H.

Hwang

(2012). Does multitasking increase or decrease persuasion? Effects of multitasking on comprehension and counterarguing. Journal of Communication, 62, 571-587. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01659.x

25.

Johnson

(2001, August 8). Bits parade across hyper headline news. Chicago Tribune, p. 5.1.

26.

Josephson

Holmes

M. E.

(2006). Clutter or content? How on-screen enhancements affect how TV viewers scan and what they learn. In Proceedings of Eye Tracking Research and Applications (ETRA) (pp. 155-162). New York, NY: Eye Tracking Research and Applications. doi:10.1145/1117309.1117361

27.

Kahneman

(1973). Attention and effort. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

28.

Kerschbaumer

(2002, July 8). Tick . . . tick . . . tick . . . AP. Broadcasting & Cable, 132(28), 21.

29.

Lang

(2006). Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. Journal of Communication, 56(Suppl. 1), S57-S80. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00283.x

30.

Lang

Bolls

Potter

R. F.

Kawahara

(1999). The effects of production pacing and arousing content on the information processing of television messages. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43, 451-475. doi:10.1080/08838159909364504

31.

Lang

Bradley

S. D.

Park

Shin

Chung

(2006). Parsing the resource pie: Using STRTs to measure attention to mediated messages. Media Psychology, 8, 369-394. doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0804_3

32.

Lang

Park

Sanders-Jackson

A. N.

Wilson

B. D.

Wang

(2007). Cognition and emotion in TV message processing: How valence, arousing content, structural complexity, and information density affect the availability of cognitive resources. Media Psychology, 10, 317-338. doi:10.1080/15213260701532880

33.

Lang

Potter

Grabe

M. E.

(2003). Making news memorable: Applying theory to the production of local television news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47, 113-123. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4701_7

34.

Mayer

R. E.

Moreno

(1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312-320. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.312

35.

McClellan

Kerschbaumer

(2001). Tickers and bugs: Has TV gotten way too graphic? Broadcasting & Cable, 131(50), 16-20.

36.

Ophir

Nass

Wagner

A. D.

(2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 15583-15587. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903620106

37.

Phan

(2003, October 9). Scrolling happily along. Newsday, p. D12.

38.

Pool

M. M.

Koolstra

C. M.

van der Voort

T. H. A.

(2003). Distraction effects of background soap operas on homework performance: An experimental study enriched with observational data. Educational Psychology, 23, 361-380. doi:10.1080/01443410303211

39.

Rice

W. R.

(1989). Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution, 43(1), 223-225. doi:10.2307/2409177

40.

Roberts

D. G.

Foehr

U. G.

(2008). Trends in media use. The Future of Children, 18(1), 11-37. doi:10.1353/foc.0.0000

41.

Rohm

A. J.

Sultan

Bardhi

(2009). Multitasking youth. Marketing Management, 18(6), 20-25.

42.

Sella

(2001, December 9). The year in ideas: A to Z; The crawl. The New York Times Magazine, p. 66.

43.

Shiffrin

R. M.

Schneider

(1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.127

44.

Stelter

(2008, December 21). The flipper challenges the news crawl. The New York Times, p. WK.3.

45.

Triesman

Kahneman

Burkell

(1983). Perceptual objects and the cost of filtering. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 527-532. doi:10.3758/bf03202934

46.

Wang

Tchernev

J. M.

(2012). The “myth” of media multitasking: Reciprocal dynamics of media multitasking, personal needs, and gratifications. Journal of Communication, 62, 493-513. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01641.x

47.

Woltman Elpers

J. L. C. M.

Wedel

Pieters

R. G. M

. (2003). Why do consumers stop viewing television commercials? Two experiments on the influence of moment-to-moment entertainment and information value. Journal of Marketing Research, 40, 437-453. doi:10.1509/jmkr.40.4.437.19393

48.

Zhang

Jeong

S.-H.

Fishbein

(2010). Situational factors competing for attention. Journal of Media Psychology, 22, 2-13. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000002