The advertising ecosystem has long been rife with fraud, and this is one thing preoccupying Guldimann right now. Although he participated in the ARF research and believes that transparency is paramount, he also warns marketers of the risk that supply-side partners start to game the system. If they learn too much about what UX experiences produce “good” advertising outcomes, they might start to design their sites with results, rather than actual impact, in mind. 

“A metric that says it needs to be 100% on screen for two seconds sets very clear incentives for publishers [that are] not in the best interest of advertisers or users,” Guldimann said. 

One example of this is Google telling website owners which factors contribute to high search rankings. Websites (broadly speaking) began pushing out digital content that ranked higher and ultimately made them more money, never mind whether it was good content or clickbait.

“With attention metrics, it’s really important we don’t allow for that gaming,” Guldimann said. “At Adelaide, we want our metrics to be durable in the long run,” he added.

Marketers may find the new research gives them an advantage. Because the space is as convoluted as it is, more transparency could very well breed the next set of attention-tracking challenges.

McDonald is wrapping up Phase 1 now, with research publication slated for later this month.

This story is part of The New Dynamics of Marketing Innovation special feature.