Modeling the appeal of movie features to demographic segments of theatrical demand
Various studies have built models, using aggregate box-office data, to predict the contribution of a motion picture’s features to its theatrical demand. But such an approach fails to represent the heterogeneous influence of movie features on demographic groups and is unable to assist market-segmentation decisions. We propose and illustrate a new approach for modeling the appeal of movie features to market segments via the use of appropriate individual-specific data and canonical correlation analysis. Specifically, through demographically detailed movie-attendance data available in Spain, we build a model of how movie features influence the demographic composition of audiences. Via a canonical correlation analysis, we identify four dimensions underlying the relationships between several movie features (country of origin, genre, objectionable content, stars, promotional effort, and critical evaluations) and audience demographics (gender, age range, presence of children, education, social class, and size of municipality). These dimensions represent the strong pairings between four moviegoer demographic profiles and four movie-feature profiles. Our approach can potentially aid in segmentation and green-lighting decisions by matching movie features with the most relevant segment-specific preferences.
JEL ClassificationL82 (entertainment Media) Z11 (economics of the arts and literature)
KeywordsMotion-picture management Theatrical demand modeling Canonical correlation analysis Audience demographics
The authors wish to thank the Asociación para la Investigación de Medios de Comunicación (AIMC)—Association for Media Research—for making available the EGM data used in this study.
- AIMC. (2009). Marco general de los medios en España 2008. Madrid: Asociación para la Investigación de Medios de Comunicación.Google Scholar
- Austin, B. A. (1993). Film audience research. In B. Dervin & U. Hariharan (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences (Vol. 11, pp. 1–43). Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
- De Silva, I. (1998). Consumer selection of motion pictures. In B. Litman (Ed.), The motion picture mega-industry (pp. 144–171). Needham Heights: Allyn Bacon.Google Scholar
- Eastman, S. T., & Bolls, P. D. (2000). Structure and content in promotion research. In S. T. Eastman (Ed.), Research in media promotion (pp. 55–100). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Faber, R. J., & O’Guinn, T. C. (1984). Effect of media advertising and other sources on movie selection. Journalism Quarterly, 61(2), 371–377.Google Scholar
- Fischoff, S., Antonio, J., & Lewis, D. (1998). Favorite films and film genres as a function of race, age, and gender. Journal of Media Psychology, 3(1). http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/media3.html. Accessed 25 Sep 2009.
- Goldstein, J. (1998). Why we watch. In J. Goldstein (Ed.), Why we watch: The attractions of violent entertainment (pp. 212–226). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Harbord, J. (2002). Film cultures. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Johnson, R. A., & Wichern, D. W. (2007). Applied multivariate statistical analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Lee, S.-W., & Waterman, D. (2007). Theatrical feature film trade in the United States, Europe, and Japan since the 1950s: An empirical study of the home market effect. Journal of Media Economics, 20(3), 167–188.Google Scholar
- Levin, A. M., Levin, I. P., & Heath, C. E. (1997). Movie stars and authors as brand names: Measuring brand equity in experiential products. Advances in Consumer Research, 24, 175–181.Google Scholar
- Levine, M. S. (1977). Canonical analysis and factor comparison. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- McCauley, C. (1998). When screen violence is not attractive. In J. Goldstein (Ed.), Why we watch: The attractions of violent entertainment (pp. 144–162). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Medved, M. (1992). Hollywood vs. America: Popular culture and the war on traditional values. New York: HarperCollins Publishers/Zondervan.Google Scholar
- Meers, P. (2004). ‘It’s the Language of Film!’: Young film audiences on Hollywood and Europe. In R. Maltby & M. Stokes (Eds.), Hollywood abroad: Audiences and cultural exchange (pp. 158–175). London: British Film Institute.Google Scholar
- Oliver, M. B. (2000). The respondent gender gap. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal (pp. 215–234). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Palmgreen, P., Cook, P. L., Harvill, J. G., & Helm, D. M. (1988). The motivational framework of moviegoing: Uses and avoidances of theatrical films. In B. A. Austin (Ed.), Current research in film: Audiences, economics, and law, 4 (pp. 1–23). Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
- Pennington, J. W. (2007). The history of sex in American film. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
- Sandler, K. S. (2007). The naked truth: Why Hollywood doesn’t make X-rated movies?. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- Thompson, B. (1984). Canonical correlation analysis: Uses and interpretation. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- UK Film Council (2009). Statistical yearbook 09. http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/yearbook. Accessed 25 Sep 2009.
- Williams, G. A. (1989). Enticing viewers: Sex and violence in TV guide program advertisements. Journalism Quarterly, 66(4), 970–973.Google Scholar
- Zillmann, D. (1998). The psychology of the appeal of portrayals of violence. In J. Goldstein (Ed.), Why we watch: The attractions of violent entertainment (pp. 179–211). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar