IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2607.09608.html

Media Measurement and the Assisted Own Goal: Attribution, Marketing-Mix Models, and Individual-Level Incrementality

Author

Listed:
  • Tobias Konitzer

    (GrowthLoop)

Abstract

We use the assisted own goal hypothesis as a lens into media measurement. A demand-generating (upper-funnel) advertising platform such as a short-video social network can cause an incremental purchase, yet see that purchase booked on -- and credited to -- a downstream trusted marketplace, because consumers who discover a product on the platform complete the transaction elsewhere, for example because of distrust of the generating platform as a psychological mechanism. Under attribution-based return-on-ad-spend (ROAS) measurement, the diverted conversions are invisible to the originating platform. Marketing-mix models (MMMs) do not know which channel to credit with the outcome, and channel-by-week aggregation denies the audience-level granularity that budget decisions require. We develop an incrementality-based measurement model with two ingredients: ambient audience-level randomization -- each activated audience carries its own intent-to-treat (ITT) experiment -- and an individual-level extension of Predicted Incrementality by Experimentation (PIE), which learns a mapping from individual features to experiment-identified incremental outcomes. Because ITT contrasts are computed on channel-complete outcomes, the estimator is unbiased and the own goal disappears

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias Konitzer, 2026. "Media Measurement and the Assisted Own Goal: Attribution, Marketing-Mix Models, and Individual-Level Incrementality," Papers 2607.09608, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.09608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.09608
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Blake & Chris Nosko & Steven Tadelis, 2015. "Consumer Heterogeneity and Paid Search Effectiveness: A Large‐Scale Field Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 155-174, January.
    2. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    3. Ron Berman, 2018. "Beyond the Last Touch: Attribution in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(5), pages 771-792, September.
    4. Brett R. Gordon & Florian Zettelmeyer & Neha Bhargava & Dan Chapsky, 2019. "A Comparison of Approaches to Advertising Measurement: Evidence from Big Field Experiments at Facebook," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 193-225, March.
    5. Steven Tadelis, 2016. "Reputation and Feedback Systems in Online Platform Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 321-340, October.
    6. Randall A. Lewis & Justin M. Rao, 2015. "The Unfavorable Economics of Measuring the Returns to Advertising," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(4), pages 1941-1973.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brett R Gordon & Kinshuk Jerath & Zsolt Katona & Sridhar Narayanan & Jiwoong Shin & Kenneth C Wilbur, 2019. "Inefficiencies in Digital Advertising Markets," Papers 1912.09012, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2020.
    2. Berman, Ron & Heller, Yuval, 2025. "Naive analytics: The strategic advantage of algorithmic heuristics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 62-78.
    3. Ron Berman & Yuval Heller, 2020. "Naive analytics equilibrium," Papers 2010.15810, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2021.
    4. Thomas W. Frick & Rodrigo Belo & Rahul Telang, 2023. "Incentive Misalignments in Programmatic Advertising: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1665-1686, March.
    5. Julian Runge & Koen Pauwels, 2026. "Open-Source Media and Marketing Mix Modeling: Practice-Oriented Overview, Challenges, Opportunities," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    6. George Z. Gui, 2024. "Combining Observational and Experimental Data to Improve Efficiency Using Imperfect Instruments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 378-391, March.
    7. Michael Thomas & Marcel Goic & Kirthi Kalyanam, 2025. "Long Lags and Large Returns: Experimental Evidence from Advertising to Businesses," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(10), pages 8750-8766, October.
    8. Susan Athey & Kristen Grabarz & Michael Luca & Nils Wernerfelt, 2023. "Digital public health interventions at scale: The impact of social media advertising on beliefs and outcomes related to COVID vaccines," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 120(5), pages 2208110120-, January.
    9. Garrett Johnson & Julian Runge & Eric Seufert, 2022. "Privacy-Centric Digital Advertising: Implications for Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 9(1), pages 49-54, June.
    10. Weijia Dai & Hyunjin Kim & Michael Luca, 2023. "Frontiers: Which Firms Gain from Digital Advertising? Evidence from a Field Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(3), pages 429-439, May.
    11. Brett R. Gordon & Robert Moakler & Florian Zettelmeyer, 2023. "Close Enough? A Large-Scale Exploration of Non-Experimental Approaches to Advertising Measurement," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 768-793, July.
    12. Ron Berman & Christophe Van den Bulte, 2022. "False Discovery in A/B Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6762-6782, September.
    13. Ron Berman & Elea McDonnell Feit, 2024. "Latent Stratification for Incrementality Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 903-917, July.
    14. George Z. Gui, 2020. "Combining Observational and Experimental Data to Improve Efficiency Using Imperfect Instruments," Papers 2010.05117, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    15. Martin Bompaire & Antoine Désir & Benjamin Heymann, 2024. "Fixed Point Label Attribution for Real-Time Bidding," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 1043-1061, May.
    16. Susan Athey & Kristen Grabarz & Michael Luca & Nils Wernerfelt, 2022. "The Effectiveness of Digital Interventions on COVID-19 Attitudes and Beliefs," Papers 2206.10214, arXiv.org.
    17. Paul B. Ellickson & Wreetabrata Kar & James C. Reeder, 2023. "Estimating Marketing Component Effects: Double Machine Learning from Targeted Digital Promotions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 704-728, July.
    18. Thi Phuong Lan Nguyen, 2026. "The AIMx framework: integrating marketing mix modeling, attribution, and AI-driven analytics for adaptive decision systems," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.
    19. Bradley T. Shapiro, 2020. "Advertising in Health Insurance Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 587-611, May.
    20. Randall Lewis & Dan Nguyen, 2015. "Display advertising’s competitive spillovers to consumer search," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 93-115, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.09608. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.