We are nearing the end of another great year for the marketing research industry! Are you interested in reading a few of Quirk's articles but aren’t sure where to start? We went back to our archive and compiled a few of the most-viewed e-newsletter articles of 2018.
Most-viewed articles of 2018
(listed in no particular order)
Using max-diff to understand the “why”
Maximum difference scaling (max-diff) is usually used in marketing research for two purposes. One purpose is to measure the relative importance (to the respondent) of the attributes of a product. The other is measurement of the relative preference for products or product concepts. Particularly in the latter case, after the max-diff analysis has been completed, the analyst is left with the question, “Why?” As in, why did respondents prefer a given product or product concept over another? Read more.
What marketing researchers need to know about blockchain
The marketing research industry is no stranger to buzzwords. Big data. IoT. Artificial intelligence. While some are short-lived, others stick around long after the first big splash. So when I began bumping into mentions of “blockchain and MR” last year, I made a mental note to pay close attention.
While many people still only associate blockchain with cryptocurrency, it’s proving to have a much wider reach. Read more.
Say goodbye to generation bashing
What's the difference between a Millennial and a young adult?
Ponder that for a moment. To set the scene, let's reflect on what was happening in the realm of marketing research in the 1990s and early 2000s. Millennials were growing up, becoming tech-savvy and eagerly participating in all the new social media networks. At the same time, researchers were discovering a wealth of data online, especially through social media and the availability of sample for online surveys. Shortly thereafter began the Great Recession, the economic event that shaped the Millennials' prospects just as they were ready to enter the job market. Read more.
5 tips for adapting to the future of marketing research
Standing as a century-old industry, marketing research has a proud history of building rock-solid methodologies. Generally speaking, market researchers have had a tendency to cling to the established way of doing things – often for good reason and occasionally for less-good reasons. Over the years, as new technology and innovations evolved, many viewed them with suspicion, fearing that their established practices would be challenged and usurped. Today, the landscape continues changing and the challenge in establishing how market researchers can adapt to be successful in the future world of marketing research remains. The best approach is to be proactive, not reactive. By embracing a few tips and best practices for the future, market researchers can become agents of change in an insight-driven world. Read more.
Legal cannabis and MR: Part 1: Industries and opportunities
In early 2017 I predicted that your next market research project might involve the cannabis industry. The boom in new product development, job creation, investment and marketplace disruption boosts the odds you’ll soon need to know the difference between indica and sativa; vaping and dabbing; and medical and recreational marijuana. You’ll need to know the impact of cannabis culture on product purchase and the influencers and influences that power today’s green rush. Read more.
Implicit vs. explicit testing: Identifying what consumers really believe
As market researchers, we ask consumers how they perceive brands and products, and we accept their responses as a reflection of how they think and feel. But how do we know that consumers are expressing their honest feelings about a brand? Is there a way to test whether consumers’ expressed attitudes represent their true thoughts and feelings?
Psychologists have been grappling with this question for decades and have tried to measure implicit thinking (responses made automatically) to see if that differs from explicit thinking (responses made based on critical thinking that may be conditioned by social norms, personal ideals or expectations). Read more.
Psychology’s reminder to MR: Part 1: Questionable practices
During the early 2000s the field of psychology saw a rise in the number of cases of scientific misconduct. In fact, in a 2009 paper on scientific misconduct, 34 percent of researchers admitted to partaking in some form of misconduct. The number of reported misconducts jumped to 72 percent when they were asked about their colleagues’ questionable research practices. The ugly problem of fabricating research and data has been and continues to be a very real threat to the validity of science.
While these instances of fraud were primarily found in academic psychology, those of us practicing in applied settings are also at risk. Read more.
Gen Z and qual: 5 tips for your next study
Just when brands started to understand Millennial consumers, a new challenge arrived – Generation Z. These young consumers (born after 1998) account for $44 billion in spending power. The first fully digital generation, Gen Z represents a huge slice of revenue for most brands and market researchers are shifting their focus toward gleaning insights from these young, savvy consumers.
One stumbling block that market researchers are running into is how to effectively communicate with this demographic in order to gain actionable qualitative insights. Read more.
Trying to understand respondent behavior? Take your research back to the ’90s
Qualitative insight is often given only so much attention during the research development, collection and analysis process due to its sometimes perceived lack of objectivity or statistical validity. However, qualitative often has a sweet spot when it comes to providing a richness to existing research by adding color and life to other quantitative or categorical measures, as it can help a researcher in three ways: identifying underlying reasons, recognizing unasked (but worthwhile) research questions and conceptualizing hard to articulate concepts.
There are several ways to get to each of the three objectives. In this article we will discuss two techniques developed in the 1990s that could be helpful in meeting these objectives through qualitative efforts. Read more.
Improving your max-diff data
Most studies using maximum difference scaling (max-diff) contain too many questions for any one respondent to answer. This is often dealt with by randomly drawing a subset of questions for each respondent. At first thought, this seems like a reasonable solution; in many other areas of research we select or assign things randomly to avoid bias. But it is not appropriate here. It yields interviews in which, at the respondent level, some attributes are seen much more frequently than others, and some are not seen at all. This occurs even when the attributes are perfectly balanced at the total sample level. This negatively affects the outcome of the analysis. Read more.