
Rewarded Ads
Part of Gaming advertising experiments
Testing rewarded and non-rewarded placements
Design a rewarded versus non-rewarded game ad test around the player experience and a shared campaign outcome.
A rewarded versus non-rewarded experiment compares two complete player experiences. Hold the brand proposition and later campaign outcome consistent, and report reward events separately. A higher rewarded completion rate alone does not show stronger interest in the advertiser.
Specify the experiences
For each arm, name the game or app, device, format and point in play. Ask for the player view before, during and after the ad. Record what choice the player has, what earns any reward, whether a destination action is available and how play resumes.
Opt-in and disclosure requirements differ between ad formats and providers. Check the current rules that apply to each format you test instead of assuming a rewarded unit and an interstitial unit behave in the same way.
Google describes conventional interstitials as full-screen ads suited to natural pauses, such as between levels. These product rules do not establish how a particular publisher's game works. Keep rewarded interstitials separate unless they are deliberately part of a defined test arm.
What to record for each test arm
- Game or app, device, ad format and point in play
- Player view before the ad
- Player view during the ad
- Player view after the ad
- What choice the player has
- What earns any reward
- Whether a destination action is available
- How play resumes
- Current opt-in and disclosure rules for that format
Select a shared outcome
Use the same brand idea, essential qualification and destination where both units support them. Adapt the creative if necessary, and record material differences. Choose a later outcome both arms can measure, such as a defined qualified visit or a comparable recall response. Apply the same Australian eligibility rule and outcome window.
Diagnostic events may differ. A rewarded arm may expose offer, opt-in, start and reward-earned events; a conventional interstitial may expose impression, dismissal and destination events. Ask which fields the seller's actual report provides. Reward-earned events and dismissals do not represent the same behaviour.
Diagnostic events differ by arm, the outcome does not
- Rewarded arm events
- Offer, opt-in, start, reward earned
- Interstitial arm events
- Impression, dismissal, destination
- Not equivalent
- Reward earned versus dismissal
- Hold constant — brand idea
- Same proposition in both arms
- Hold constant — qualification and destination
- Same essential qualification, same destination
- Hold constant — eligibility and window
- Same Australian eligibility rule, same outcome window
- Confirm with the seller
- Which fields the actual report provides
Compare assigned groups
Where feasible, assign comparable eligible units before delivery and check for crossover. Report the shared outcome for each assigned group, then show opportunities, impressions, opt-ins, completions and missing measurement as context. A rewarded offer can be declined, so comparing only reward completers with everyone shown an interstitial selects groups after assignment.
State any difference in games, targeting, creative or ad timing beside the result. If these cannot be held comparable, the finding concerns the delivered packages, not the reward alone. Use it for a next buy only when that buy can reproduce the relevant conditions.
Reporting order for assigned groups
- Assign comparable eligible units before delivery and check for crossover
- Report the shared outcome for each assigned group
- Add opportunities as context
- Add impressions as context
- Add opt-ins as context
- Add completions as context
- Add missing measurement as context
- State differences in games, targeting, creative or ad timing beside the result


