Setup
The focus of the test was how automakers should market the benefits of new electric vehicles to potential buyers. To that end, the two assets were designed to test performance across the following A/B split:
- AMessaging strategies focused on premium features
- BMessaging strategies focused on battery range
A
B
Test Results
Attention Share and Engagement Share reflect the percentage of test-wide scoring accounted for by individual variants or demographics. Read more below in the Methodology section.
Aggregate Insights
The two messages produced similar attention at the top of the funnel, but battery range messaging produced significantly more engagement deeper down the funnel.
The range message's markedly higher engagement share indicates that EV reliability and range concerns remain top of mind for potential EV purchasers.
Further testing could explore whether an affordability or price message — another top concern for EV intenders — produces more attention and/or engagement than the range message.
Gender-based attention and engagement shares reflect the relative attention or engagement per gender for each variant. Read more below in the Methodology section.
Gender Insights
The test population skewed toward male participants, who demonstrated (a) a slight attention preference for the features message and (b) a strong engagement preference for the range message.
With a smaller sample size, female participants paid significantly more attention to and engaged much more readily with the range message.
The relative preference of the female audience for the range message was materially stronger than that of the male audience.
Further testing could specifically target the female audience to determine whether this significant directional data holds true at scale.
Age-based attention and engagement shares reflect the relative attention or engagement per age bracket for each variant. Read more below in the Methodology section.
Age Insights
The range message received more engagement across every tested age cohort.
Participants aged 55+ paid moderately more attention to the features message, while also paying more attention to and engaging more with both variants relative to other age cohorts.
Further testing could specifically target participants under the age of 35 to build a larger data set and determine their attention and engagement preferences with a greater degree of statistical significance.
Methodology
This test was conducted with two message variants and a prequalified TCD audience of 4,298 likely adopters. Among those participants, 5.0% paid measurable attention to the test assets, and 1.7% registered measurable engagement.
Attention Score measures the likelihood that a message will capture eyeballs in the wild. It’s calculated using the rate at which test participants respond to a CTA to learn more about the subject.
Engagement Score measures the likelihood that a message will elicit a meaningful response from the audience. It’s calculated using a proprietary algorithm that weights measurable metrics — shares, saves, likes, etc. — in a way that has proven to be meaningfully correlated (r > .5) to real-world conversion behavior.
Attention Share and Engagement Share reflect the percentage of test-wide scoring accounted for by individual variants or demographics. For example, an engagement share of 25% means the variant or demographic in question accounted for 25% of the cumulative engagement score produced by all segments in the test.
