Spread the Word . . .
-
Category Archives: Methods
Embracing Multicollinearity in Key Drivers Analysis
Contributed By Robert Mills
One of the most common goals of survey research is to identify those aspects of your brand/product that most strongly relate to overall consumer satisfaction with your brand/product. Sounds simple, right? The fact that there are almost as many opinions about how to perform this analysis as there are people who perform it suggests not. One of the key issues surrounding this type of analysis, often referred to as “key drivers analysis,” is the fact that many of the attributes on which respondents rate your brand are highly interrelated (ormulticollinear) – meaning that a change in one item produces a change in other items.
Dr. David Forbes Presents at PMRG
On October 18, 2011 at the PMRG Institute David Forbes, Ph.D., presented “Accessing the Emotional Brain: Non-Verbal Motivational Mapping.” In a well-attended session, Dr. Forbes discussed MindSight®, Forbes Consulting’s revolutionary technique for accessing and explaining authentic respondent emotions in qualitative or quantitative research. The talk included a case study showing MindSight® in action in a physician research study where MindSight® uncovered important emotional areas that traditional research techniques – including projective techniques – had not. MindSight® then helped identify the positioning statement that best spoke to these dominant emotions. The session concluded with a live interactive demo involving members of the audience utilizing MindSight® , allowing audience members to witness the technique in action.
It was an honor to be part of the PMRG Conference and we look forward to working with the organization in the future.
Dr. Forbes discussing the MindSight Discovery Window.
Detail of The MindSight Discovery Window.
Tuning Up Sales Interactions
The Old Way
It’s an old truism in sales: customers evaluate rationally, but they buy products and services emotionally. Traditional market research, however, typically only analyzes the rational aspects of sales interactions. Win-loss interviews, a standard market research approach, rely upon respondents’ recall of the sales interaction and a discussion of what they thought and felt. Although useful, this approach unavoidably leads respondents to deliver rationalized versions of the story of their decision to purchase/not purchase a product or service. Of course, the story they tell emerges through the filters of their rational recall of the event and desire to present themselves in a particular way. The emotional element in the sale – the piece that drives purchase – is less deeply explored and often obscured in the process.
Validity in Assessing Ad Communication & Impact
Under The Radar
by David Forbes, Ph.D. & Judith Retensky
Typically, good advertising has to come in “under the radar” – that is, be persuasive in ways that are subtle – appealing to emotions and deep-rooted psychological motivations. One type of research that attempts to measure these reactions is the communication check.
Communication check research typically takes place when advertisers have reached a fairly specific vision about an upcoming ad campaign. The “check” is used to gain a preliminary look at how the ad will “work” – what messages it will convey and how those messages will be received.
However, respondents are often unable to give accurate reports about their reactions to advertising since the important communications usually take place below the conscious intellectual level, and the kinds of impact good advertising can create are precisely those that respondents don’t want to acknowledge. Given these constraints, how should researchers proceed? Following the 6 steps in the communication check process can help to accurately measure reactions and optimize the campaign.
Step 1: Use Developed Stimuli
Stimuli for advertising communication research should be as fully developed as possible. Although showing the ad at any stage (sketch, storyboard, etc.) works, well-developed executions will deliver the underlying strategy in a way that can come in “under the radar,” just like a real ad.
The more stimuli look and feel like finished advertising, the greater validity in the findings.
Research ON Research: The BIG Challenges of International Research
The global economy has afforded US based companies an unparalleled opportunity to expand into new markets. However, with this opportunity comes many challenges. Due to the complexities of international research, an experienced “guide” is required. Differences in language, culture, politics and style are but a few of the many potential pitfalls. Here are a few of the most important insights:
TO ONLINE OR NOT TO ONLINE
- Select the Right Survey Methodology: Different countries require different methodologies based on research topic, Internet penetration, and computer literacy.
- When interviewing consumers, use the 65% rule of thumb. If the country’s Internet penetration rate is 65%+, it’s ok to conduct interviews online via email recruit; if Internet penetration is below 65%, using central location data collection is recommended – here respondents are recruited via telephone and/or street intercepts to the location itself. The interview is then conducted on a computer at the site for accurate data collection and local “proctors” assist respondents with computer literacy. Of course, door-to-door recruiting is another viable option, especially in emerging markets.
Research ON Research: To Catch a Cheat
High quality data is the backbone of a successful and actionable marketing research project. Online data collection continues to be a popular way to collect data due to its cost effectiveness and ability to collect large sample sizes in a relatively short period of time. While online data collection is a highly effective means for collecting data, a concern over data quality has emerged over the years with respondents who cheat while filling out surveys. Thus, it is important for marketing research professionals to stay on top of solutions in order to preserve data integrity.A survey cheater can be identified in many ways. The most common types of cheating are as follows:
The Pretenders – gives false information in order to qualify for a project for which they would normally not qualify.
The Roadrunners – speeds through surveys without giving proper thought or attention to the questions being asked.
At Forbes Consulting, we have identified three ways to catch and remove survey cheaters:
- Speed traps: This involves taking the average survey length and disqualifying respondents who have completed the survey in half the time. For example, if we have a 20-minute survey and respondents complete the survey in 10 minutes or less, they would be classified as invalid completes.
- Attention traps: This involves inserting a statement within a battery of attributes/statements that literally asks respondents to check a “3” on a scale. If respondents fail to follow this directive, they would be classified as invalid completes.
- Consistency traps: Here we ask similar questions at the beginning and at the end of the survey. For example, in the screener, we ask respondents their age and in the demographic section their year of birth. If there are discrepancies, they would be classified as invalid completes.
Moving forward, it is important for research firms and panel houses to continue to work together to eliminate cheaters. Panel houses need to stay innovative and diligent by working together with their clients to identify and purge dishonest respondents from their panel. Authors of surveys need to be mindful of the impact of survey length and complexity, and work to maximize respondent engagement by creating a positive survey experience. With a team approach, we can continue to capitalize on the positive benefits of online research.
Research ON Research: Importance of Brand Photos
The Effects of Brand Photos on Attitudes & Usage Measures
BACKGROUND: Including digital images of branded products or brand logos has become a common practice in web-based questionnaires on the implicit theory that these images will improve the accuracy of aided recall measures of awareness and usage. One hypothesis is that these images serve to jog respondent memories of brands seen or used that might otherwise have been forgotten, and thus raise levels of stated awareness and usage. A competing hypothesis is that these images lower levels of stated awareness and usage by deflating the incidence of “phantom awareness” (false positive claims of awareness and usage) by providing cross-validating information.
RESEARCH METHOD: A total of 1,250 surveys (625 with brand pictures, 625 without) were conducted about sports drinks, using a demographically representative online panel, with a standard security screening and a requirement that respondents be partly responsible for household shopping decisions. Each option shown to the respondent was selected at random and chosen to ensure an equal distribution of each option.
FINDINGS: The study showed that reported usage for several brands used in past 6 months was significantly higher when NO picture was shown, and significantly lower when a picture was shown.
CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence suggests that the use of brand images helps to reduce the prevalence of “phantom usage,” i.e., overstated usage, presumably because brand images provide additional cues that improve respondent recall. Although further research is needed, it appears that brand images improve the accuracy of usage recall and should be incorporated when possible.
Get Below the Surface & Uncover Core Emotions
The Emotional Mind
By David Forbes, Ph.D.
Why do consumers “really” think and act as they do? We have long known that the deep seated emotional centers of the human mind generate the most powerful motivational forces driving consumer behavior. Traditional market research, however, has historically only accessed the conscious intellectual layers of the consumer mind. The desire to learn about the emotions that “really” control behavior are largely unfulfilled.
Two barriers confront the market researchers in this quest. First, consumers are often unaware consciously of these deep-seated emotional forces. As St. Augustine wrote in the thirteenth century, “I cannot grasp all that I am.” His insight remains true of consumers today. Consumers today are no more able to grasp the motivations that arise from emotional centers of the brain that work below the level of consciousness than St. Augustine was; in the language of pop psychology, consumers are “out of touch” with their feelings on the issues important to marketers. Second, consumers are often unwilling to share their emotions with market research professionals, even when they are able to consciously access and articulate their emotions. Rare is the respondent who is willing to share reasons for behavior that might make them seem frivolous or irrational.
Time Out of Mind: Using Breathing Space to Maximize Inspiration
By Ric Dube, Ph.D.
It’s true that top-of-mind ideas can be important ideas. Focus group interviews and team ideation sessions are extremely useful tools that capitalize on teamwork and quick thinking to generate lists of ideas. These approaches use high energy and cooperation to cast a wide net to catch as many different ideas as possible.
Focus groups and ideations are very effective toward generating a breadth of ideas, however, these approaches are less effective in producing the depth needed for breakthrough insights. Despite the virtues of cooperation, there are often richer rewards in rumination, i.e., letting the mind wander and daydream, which permits the brain to create new connections and associations. According to legend, the Greek scholar Archimedes was obsessed with the problem of how to calculate volume until one day he stepped into his bath and saw the water rise. As the story goes, he cried “Eureka! I’ve got it!” as he ran naked through the streets of Sicily.
Cognitive neuroscientists studying the brain with fMRI have recently recorded electrical activity in the right hemisphere that signals impending “Eureka moments.” These scientists have discovered that certain conditions promote these kinds of insights: positive mood, absence of stress, and quiet, unfocused time spent alone, much like Archimedes’ bath.
Research ON Research: Rating 2 Brands at Once
A Time Saver or A Waste of Data?
Background:
There may be time saved by asking a respondent to move through an attribute battery in an online survey j
ust once and rate two brands – rather than rate a single brand, item-by-item, only to go through the battery again to rate a second brand. However, could this slightly more time consuming method yield richer data?
Research Method:
Using standard security screening and a demographically representative online panel, 1,250 respondents, at least partly responsible for household shopping decisions, answered questions about sports drinks. About equal numbers of respondents rated a pair of brands one at a time (n=580) or both at
once (n=586) on 28 attributes. For each attribute, the average gap between ratings when brands were rated one at a time was tested for a significant difference against when brands were rated both at once.
