Description

This second edition of Advertising to Life Scientists is based on a 32-question survey of more than 1,450 life scientists. Through unbiased readership profiles and side-by-side comparisons, the 2003 report re-examines the preferences of life scientists as they relate to fifteen widely read scientific journals, magazines and newspapers, and the advertisements that are contained within their pages. By viewing this medium through the eyes of the scientific customer and by understanding what they consider to be most useful, life science executives will be better able to sort through the ever-present salesmanship and marketing efforts put forth by publishers and make more effective use of print advertising. Traditionally, the best place to advertise is in those publications most widely read by life scientists. Today, life science advertisers have more choices than ever before. Dozens of scientific publishers are launching new titles, adapting their content and changing their format to attract a body of well-defined, loyal readers in an effort to attract advertising dollars. Not all scientific publications, however, are created equal. Even a cursory examination of the most popular scientific journals, magazines and newspapers vying for the scientific community's attention reveals differences in focus, quality, depth and relevance to individual areas of research. Thus, the challenge for marketers is to produce memorable advertisements and place them in publications where they will have the greatest impact. Despite the fact that advertising is as expensive as it is important, conventional wisdom suggests that it is difficult to quantify a company's return-on-investment (ROI) as a result of advertising. The costs of launching an ill-conceived campaign, however, can be higher than not advertising at all. Indeed, if a company cannot demonstrate that the money it spends on advertising generates revenue by informing customers and influencing their purchases, the company should consider abandoning advertising all together. On the other hand, if clear objectives are set, progress toward meeting those objectives can be measured, and the same company may well find they are not spending enough on advertising or that those dollars being spent are not being put toward the right kind of advertising. Setting clear objectives for the ad becomes easier and measuring the success of the ad becomes possible when segmentation is used to support advertising. Once a life science supplier targets a well-defined market segment, this report can be used to help identify the targeted customer's reading preferences, develop ads that address the segment's unique needs and place them in the appropriate publications. Companies that implement an accountable advertising campaign will gain competitive advantage not only through more effective ads, but also through an improved and greater understanding of their customers. Such targeted advertising requires on-going market research, which can provide executives with an indispensable tool for setting advertising budgets, monitoring advertising effectiveness and clarifying the relationship between advertising costs and a company's (or product's) market performance. Advertising to Life Scientists can be the first step toward tracking changing perceptions and continuously measuring the impact of a company's ads through more in-depth custom studies. Report Highlights Advertising to Life Scientists contains over 100 charts and/or tables and multiple cross-tabulations for the 32 survey questions. Below is a glimpse of the key findings derived from just a few of the survey questions: • Of the time scientists devote to reading scientific publications, two-thirds is spent on professional scientific information. (Question 1) • 71% of respondents receive four or more scientific journals at their home, office or lab each month. (Question 6) • Researchers cite Science (77%) and Nature (71%) most often as journals they regularly read. (Question 7) • Almost two-thirds of readers of free scientific publications have personal subscriptions. (Question 11) • "Content simply does not match my interests" is the most common reason scientists do NOT read certain publications. (Question 19) • 62% of researchers say they do NOT have time to stay abreast of new products and services designed to support their area of research. (Question 20) • Overall, Invitrogen and Amersham Biosciences publish print ads that are most successful in capturing the attention of scientists. (Question 25) (electronic copy also includes 1 print copy)

Table of Contents

Section 1 Analysis and Interpretation of Survey Results 1-1 Overview 1-2 Preferences 1-5 Behavior 1-9 Advertising Effectiveness 1-14 Conclusion Section 2 Study Methodology and Demographics 2-1 Objectives 2-1 Comments 2-3 Assumptions 2-3 Definition of Terms 2-5 Market Segment 2-5 Geographic Region 2-5 Job Position 2-5 Areas of Research 2-6 Questionnaire Section 3 Presentation of Survey Data Professional Reading Preferences 3-2 Percent of time spent looking at various forms of content 3-3 Types of scientific information found most valuable 3-4 Types of company/product information found most valuable 3-5 Types of news content found most valuable 3-6 Types of professional resources found most valuable 3-7 Number of scientific publications received each month 3-8 Scientific publications read regularly 3-10 Scientific publications most likely to contain the information needed to select a new product/instrument for the lab 3-11 Scientific publications most useful in daily work 3-15 Personal subscriptions 3-16 Time spent reading publication 3-17 Action taken once publication is received 3-18 Additional readers per copy 3-19 Time spent reading online version 3-20 Retention of past issues 3-21 Attention to advertising content 3-22 Content mix 3-23 Reasons certain publications are not read Sources of Product Information 3-24 Adequacy of time to stay abreast of new products/services 3-25 Availability of impartial, non-industry sources of information about new products/services 3-26 Sources from which an individual learns about new products/techniques 3-27 Factors that would draw attention to an ad 3-28 Reactions when seeing an interesting ad 3-29 Life science supplier that most often publishes ads that capture attention Perceptions of Advertising 3-30 Ease of distinguishing between "scientific" vs. "promotional" information 3-31 Influence of increasing availability of product information 3-32 Feelings toward the practice of traditional scientific publishers now publishing substantial information on commercial products/services 3-33 Opinion of scientific publications accepting advertising 3-34 Credibility of ads appearing in peer-reviewed vs. non-peer reviewed publications 3-35 Level of agreement with six different statements regarding ads Publication Profiles for each of the following leading scientific publications based on the number of respondents indicated below:* 3-46 American Biotechnology Laboratory 3-48 American Clinical Laboratory 3-50 Bioscience Technology 3-52 BioTechniques 3-54 Cell 3-56 Drug Discovery & Development 3-58 Drug Discovery Today 3-60 Genetic Engineering News 3-62 Genome Technology 3-64 Genomics & Proteomics 3-66 Modern Drug Discovery 3-68 Nature 3-70 Nature Biotechnology 3-72 Science 3-74 The Scientist Publication Comparison 3-77 Personal subscriptions 3-78 Time spent reading publication 3-79 Action taken once publication is received 3-80 Additional readers per copy 3-81 Time spent reading online version 3-82 Retention of past issues 3-83 Attention to advertising content 3-84 Content mix Section 4 Appendices 4-1 Insights & Perspectives 4-12 Cross-Tabulations of Survey Data 4-24 Reclassification of Verbatim Responses 4-26 Other Recent Publications 4-33 About BioInformatics 4-34 Our Valued Clients