Same traffic source/medium/campaign gets attribute to 2 or more marketing channels

[Jakala_Luca]

I have a strange behaviour with my marketing channels: the same traffic source is classified in more than one marketing channel. Is it depending on the fact that query string parameter can be used only ONCE IN A RULE WITH "AND"?

What else?

traffic parameters are:

utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=77_br_bra_search_google_conv_52_generic_general_phrase-&utm_content=

the marketing channel conditions are (campaign contains "generic", source contains "google", medium contains "cpc"):

Unclassified has a lower priority (screenshot above)

The traffic falls under "paid search unclassified" and partially (this is correct instead) under "Paid Search Unbranded"

[Jennifer_Dungan]

Did you recently update your rules? Marketing Channels by default have a 30 day attribution... if you changed the rules inside of this retention period (and did not reset your channels after changing your rules), you could be getting the information as it was classified before the rule change still showing in the channel in which it was set originally.

For example, let's look at a simple example in a 30 day expiration period.

Visitor 1 / Visit 1 - March 1

• Page A (Campaign X)
  • Marketing Channel set to "Original X Rule"

Visitor 1 / Visit 2 - March 5

• Page B
  • Marketing Channel maintains "Original X Rule" as it's within the 30 day attribution model

March 15 - Rules Updated

Visitor 1 / Visit 3 - March 19

• Page C
  • Marketing Channel maintains "Original X Rule" as it's within the 30 day attribution model, and no new marketing channel is applied

Visitor 2 / Visit 1 - March 19

• Page A (Campaign X)
  • Marketing Channel set to "New X Rule"

Check Report on for March 19:

The two visitors above both came to the site on March 19, one still had the old attributed channel, while the second visitor came in directly with the campaign and was mapped based on the new logic.

So in the report, you see both "Original X Rule" and "New X Rule"

If you didn't change your logic, then this is strange... I would ask to see the logic of the second rule... but still, given it's lower in the execution it shouldn't get passed the first rule...