The “Lead-in” Strategy for Prime-Time Tv: Does It Increase the Audience?

Abstract

An examination of all network prime-time television series aired from 1963 through 1985 shows that a strong lead-in does increase the audience share, especially when the program is neu: or of the same type as the preceding one, or tohen there are fewer viewing alternatives. Of the 963 new prime-time series aired during the 1963-1984 TV seasons b y the three major U.S. commercial television networks, 635 (66 percent) were caricellecl prior to the second season.' In recent years, both the number of new series offered and the rate of cancellation have been even higher. Since the beginning of the 1975 season, the networks have f d e d to renew 75 percent of the 506 new series offered. Given the large financial risks involved in developing a prime-time series, network programmers naturally wish to schedule such programs in a way that will maximize both the size ofthe audience and the flow of the audience from program to program. How does one of the most commonly discussed ' A :yc:irly brcakdown of the number and perwntagcs of cancelled new and already esta1)lislied series since 1963, along with average ratings and shares, is available from the authors. Jiniies 1'. Tiedge and Kcnneth J. Ksohiech are Associate Professors in the Department of I3roarlc;ist Commnnication at Marqnettc University. 51

Audience Flow Past and Present: Television Inheritance Effects Reconsidered

“…Earlier studies of inheritance consistently found that the number of program choices-that is, the number of opportunities to "jump ship" for a newly beginning program-was a better predictor of inheritance than similarity of program type (Davis & Walker, 1990;Tiedge & Ksobiech, 1986;Walker, 1988;Webster, 1985). That seems to have changed.…”

“…There is simply no evidence that higher correlations are associated with higher levels of duplication. Studies of share maintenance or lead-in effects that feature this approach (e.g., Davis & Walker, 1990;McDowell & Dick, 2003;Tiedge & Ksobiech, 1986) certainly drive home the point that lead-in ratings are a powerful determinant of lead-out ratings. In addition, it appears that relationship is enhanced by factors known to affect inheritance (i.e., number of choices and program type).…”

“…If they were of different types, the pair was coded zero. There are good grounds, both theoretically and empirically, to expect people to have consistent program type preferences (e.g., Adams, 1997;Eastman et al, 1997;Tiedge & Ksobiech, 1986;Webster & Phalen, 1997). Therefore, program pairs of the same type should enjoy higher levels of inheritance.…”

“…For example, if those correlations are higher when back-to-back programs are of the same type, then stronger inheritance effects are typically inferred. Tiedge and Ksobiech (1986) conducted the most sweeping such analysis by correlating the audience shares of adjacent prime-time network programs broadcast between 1963 and 1985. Although the overall correlation was .49, correlations were higher when paired programs were of the same type and when viewers had fewer options on competing networks, thus confirming the relationships reported by Webster (1985).…”

Effects of television network affiliation changes: A Miami case study

“…The weekly Nielsen Station Indices were consulted in order to track viewing changes for the month immediately before and after the January 1, 1989 affiliation switches. Share data for each day were combined and a mean audience size was calculated (Tiedge & Ksobiech, 1986). Chi-square was used to test the significance of changes in household shares for the month immediately preceding the affiliation switches (December, 1988) and the month immediately following the changes (January, 1989)."…”