1 hour ago, JAS0N47 said:

Forgive my ignorance, but what is an ANOVA table??

You are far from ignorant for asking a question - it stands for ANalysis Of VAriance.

The problem with published ratings is that they only report the average.  But, if you measure an effect, you need to prove the change over time exceeds chance.  For example, if during the course of a month the weekly ratings for Guiding Light go and up and down by 300 viewers each week, then any change week to week within 300 is just chance, because that is what we expect.  However, an ANOVA table calculates how much change would need to be observed to go beyond chance. 

Just like if you flip a coin twice and get tails once, that can be explained by the fact the there is a 50/50 chance of getting tails, but how many times do you have to observe getting tails in a row, before you could determine that there was something tricky about the coin.  Or, a child's height naturally grows over time, but how much height would they need to grow before you would fear that they'll be a giant.  As an analogy, the rating only report the height, they don't report the chance that the difference in height this week was expected because all children grow a few millimeters each week. 

Nielson doesn't publish the variance for the public, so you would need to calculate it yourself, because they are in the business of selling that data to the networks and ad agencies, and if they published it every week for free, nobody would pay for their ratings reports.

In this case, the change in audience numbers between June and July did not exceed the expected week-to-week change to the degree that we could determine that DAYS's New Orleans remote had an actual positive effect on the viewership.  Because they gained as many viewers as one would expect by chance.

Edited July 30, 20232 yr by j swift

1 hour ago, j swift said:

You are far from ignorant for asking a question - it stands for ANalysis Of VAriance.

The problem with published ratings is that they only report the average.  But, if you measure an effect, you need to prove the change over time exceeds chance.  For example, if during the course of a month the weekly ratings for Guiding Light go and up and down by 300 viewers each week, then any change week to week within 300 is just chance, because that is what we expect.  However, an ANOVA table calculates how much change would need to be observed to go beyond chance. 

Just like if you flip a coin twice and get tails once, that can be explained by the fact the there is a 50/50 chance of getting tails, but how many times do you have to observe getting tails in a row, before you could determine that there was something tricky about the coin.  Or, a child's height naturally grows over time, but how much height would they need to grow before you would fear that they'll be a giant.  As an analogy, the rating only report the height, they don't report the chance that the difference in height this week was expected because all children grow a few millimeters each week. 

Nielson doesn't publish the variance for the public, so you would need to calculate it yourself, because they are in the business of selling that data to the networks and ad agencies, and if they published it every week for free, nobody would pay for their ratings reports.

In this case, the change in audience numbers between June and July did not exceed the expected week-to-week change to the degree that we could determine that DAYS's New Orleans remote had an actual positive effect on the viewership.  Because they gained as many viewers as one would expect by chance.

Thank you for the explanation! Math was always my worst subject, so even though I like stats, I don't like doing calculations like that!!

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 2/9/81-2/13/81 & 2/16/81-2/20/81:

Edge of Night beating the entire NBC lineup and with only 81% clearance. 

Poor NBC in Feb. All their soaps at the bottom with half the ratings of the Top 3.

Morale must have been low at that time. Who was NBC daytime VP at that point?

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 2/23/81-2/27/81 & 3/2/81-3/6/81:

 

 

 

Edited August 1, 20232 yr by JAS0N47

21 minutes ago, JAS0N47 said:

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 2/23/81-2/27/81 & 3/2/81-3/6/81:

 

 

A glitch in the ratings. ATWT had a higher number rating wise yet ranked below GL.

ATWT a steady #4 in the ratings in early 81.

12 hours ago, Soapsuds said:

A glitch in the ratings. ATWT had a higher number rating wise yet ranked below GL.

ATWT a steady #4 in the ratings in early 81.

A human glitch!  I guess I forgot to sort that week's ratings. I've replaced the chart above and posted the correct one now. I'm sure that will happen again when dealing with a decade of ratings, so if anyone notices I forget to sort a week, let me know.

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 3/9/81-3/13/81 & 3/16/81-3/20/81:

 

Edited August 1, 20232 yr by JAS0N47

GH destroying every thing in sight, marching towards Luke and Laura's wedding. 

On 7/30/2023 at 6:27 PM, Paul Raven said:

Poor NBC in Feb. All their soaps at the bottom with half the ratings of the Top 3.

Morale must have been low at that time. Who was NBC daytime VP at that point?

Fred Silverman Prez, Earl Greenburg VP

Boy, that is dreadful. 

Edited August 1, 20232 yr by Donna L. Bridges

General Hospital was a juggernaut - those ratings are insane.. Genie Francis was the reason. 

1 hour ago, Chrissy81730 said:

General Hospital was a juggernaut - those ratings are insane.. Genie Francis was the reason. 

Well, Doug Marland's writing was the set-up. ABC Daytime Head asked Agnes who to get to write GH & she recommended Doug, with good reason. Then she promoted Gloria Monty as everyone knows. But, she made many many changes in production, shorter scenes, more edits, cross-cutting, going out of the studio, etc. Then there was the actors with golden chemistry & yes absolutely teen Genie! So right place, right time, the spirit of desperation driving them, voila, magic. 

@Donna L. Bridges

Definitely!!!! I worship Gloria Monty!!! 

1 hour ago, Chrissy81730 said:

@Donna L. Bridges

Definitely!!!! I worship Gloria Monty!!! 

Sorry if I got carried away. My nickname for her is "GloriaMontyWhoSavedGH" !!All one word, all one breath, all one thought. It should really be MarlandMontyEtc. but it doesn't scan right. 

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 3/23/81-3/27/81 & 3/30/81-4/3/81: