Fundraising 2010/Report/Draft Test 7
Banner Test - Progress Meter
editFor additional documentation on the testing methodology please see the following pages:
Banners
edit
Result
editTest Time: 2010-12-17 19:00:00 UTC - 2010-12-17 22:00:00 UTC
Sampling Interval = 2 minutes
Testing Interval = 180 minutes
Total Number of Samples per Class = 90
TEST RESULT INCONCLUSIVE
(*) The rate of donations per banner impression over a fixed time interval.
(**) The rate of amount50 per banner impression over a fixed time interval. Amount50 is the dollar amount raised from donations initiated under a given banner where all donations of more than $50 are recorded as $50 donations. This counters the skewing effect of outlier donations.
Data Analysis
editThis section analyzes and interprets the results of the tests.
Data Consistency and Cleaning
editThe plots below display the counts of the data sources over the testing period as verification of the consistency of the donation pipeline data used in testing. It should be noted that a certain amount of natural variance is expected in donation counts and is no cause for alarm. The bottom two figures depict the total views and donations with those coming from each banner. This illustrates when the campaign becomes active and is also a useful tool for determining where anomalous behaviour may be visible in the data. It is of note that there are a couple of intervals where the impressions dipped down to zero, however these were sparse enough not to effect the quality of the data significantly. It should be noted that the data is analyzed over a period at least as large as the full testing period and that the testing period was chosen based on the period of time where significant hits and donations were observed.
Analyzing the above plots the donation and impression data appear to be quite regular over the interval 2010-12-17 19:00:00 UTC - 2010-12-17 22:00:00 UTC. Therefore, two minute intervals will be used for sampling over this period as a source for the paired t-test to assess confidence in the winner.
Modelling and Hypothesis Testing
edit"Animated Progress Meter" won in each case for donations/impression and amount50/impression with increases of 5.30% and 6.22% respectively. The student's t-test was used to assess confidence over each metric and the confidence in the winner for donations/impression and amount50/impression is at least 75.0% and 95.0% respectively. This is a very slight and non-significant win for the "Animated Progress Meter". Both banners effectively performed the same however this may merit more testing as additional data could lead to a conclusive result.
TOTAL DONATIONS "Animated Progress Meter": 397 TOTAL DONATIONS "Static Progress Meter": 384 TOTAL AMOUNT50* RAISED "Animated Progress Meter": $7435.00 TOTAL AMOUNT50* RAISED "Static Progress Meter": $7096.81 * AMOUNT50 indicates the total amount raised where all donations greater than $50 are taken to be a donation of $50.
DONATIONS PER IMPRESSION: Between 75.0% and 90.0% confident about the winner. Progress Meter -- 2010-12-17 19:00:00 - 2010-12-17 22:00:00 item 1 = Animated Progress Meter item 2 = Static Progress Meter The winner "Animated Progress Meter" had a 5.30% increase. interval mean1 mean2 stddev1 stddev2 0 0.00015 0.00014 0.00004 0.00007 1 0.00014 0.00014 0.00004 0.00003 Overall Parameters: mean1 mean2 stddev1 stddev2 0.00015 0.00014 0.00004 0.00005
AMOUNT50 PER IMPRESSION: Between 95.0% and 97.5% confident about the winner. Progress Meter -- 2010-12-17 19:00:00 - 2010-12-17 22:00:00 item 1 = Animated Progress Meter item 2 = Static Progress Meter The winner "Animated Progress Meter" had a 6.22% increase. interval mean1 mean2 stddev1 stddev2 0 0.00299 0.00252 0.00190 0.00050 1 0.00251 0.00266 0.00077 0.00050 Overall Parameters: mean1 mean2 stddev1 stddev2 0.00275 0.00259 0.00145 0.00050
Endnotes
edit- Campaign = "20101217JA033"
- "Animated Progress Meter" utm_source = "20101217_JA022A_US"
- "Static Progress Meter" utm_source = "20101217_JA022B_US"