Der Doctor Who Quoten Thread

  • Und die Hartzer.

    Genesis hatte 57-58. Androzani hatte 65. Wie kann man das vergleichen?

    Ganz einfach: das „average AI“ früher war deutlich niedriger, da es weniger Auswahl gab und die Leute mehr Sachen schauten, die ihnen nicht gefielen. In den heutigen Zeiten sind solche Gelegenheitszuschauer weniger geworden und man sucht sich gezielt das aus, was man mag - daher ist das AI eher nach oben gegangen.


    Zudem ist dies noch eine gute Ergänzung, um die damaligen Systeme zu verstehen:

    The Reaction Index

    Audience research was done differently in the past. Until 1981, the BBC performed their own internal research. It was carried out by the Audience Research Department, a fairly large branch of the BBC that had numerous field workers who actually went out into the country to personally question viewers and/or collect written surveys.

    At least initially, reactions were measured with small samples of around 1000 people. The first episode's RI was calculated from a tiny 124 sample size, because only 12% of the full sample of about 1030 — called a "Viewing Panel" in internal documents — watched Doctor Who on 23 November 1963. They gave it a mark from a five-point scale, as follows:


    This then allowed the calculation of an RI of 63, which was between the then-current averages of 62 for drama and 64 for children's programmes.

    BARB era (1981-2005)

    For the balance of the so-called "classic series", it was moved to a non-profit organisation called the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board or BARB, which was funded by all broadcasters. During this time, respondents were asked to record a number between 0 and 6 for each programme they watched, with the following meanings:

    10not at all interesting and/or enjoyable
    220not very interesting and/or enjoyable
    340neither one thing nor the other
    460fairly interesting and/or enjoyable
    580very interesting and/or enjoyable
    6100extremely interesting and/or enjoyable

    Thus, during most of the John Nathan-Turner era, an AI of 65 — a typical score — would have meant "only a little better than fairly interesting".