White Paper:
Monadic Price Testing vs. Price Laddering
by TRC
Compares two popular pricing methods to understand the difference in take rate information.
Which should I use, a Monadic design or a Price Laddering technique?
It’s a practical question that comes up often in pricing research. With Monadic price testing respondents are shown (or read) a single concept, with a single price, and asked about their intentions to purchase or some similar attitude. When more prices need to be measured, more cells are added.
The Price Laddering technique is different. Respondents are initially exposed to a single concept with a single price and intention to purchase is measured, as in a Monadic design approach. From there the two techniques diverge. Those who express lower than desired purchase intent are asked to reconsider their view at successively lower prices. The number of levels tested can be in theory unlimited, but typically the process does not extend beyond three price points.
Monadic designs are generally accepted as the purest means of measuring price sensitivity, as each respondent sees only one price and is not given the opportunity to reevaluate his or her purchase interest. When more prices need to be measured, however, more sample cells must be added. Each new cell must be of sufficient size so that price-demand curves are not muddied by margin of error concerns. Practically, then, it can be difficult to fund and execute Monadic studies when several price points are in play.
Price Laddering offers an obvious practical advantage over Monadic with its smaller sample size requirements, but what about the quality of responses? Are we getting biased answers since the respondent has already been exposed to a price before the second price is displayed? If there were a bias, in which direction would it be (i.e.) would respondents to a laddering task exhibit a higher or a lower take rate?
A test to examine differences between the two techniques
Research on reference prices indicates that people who are shown a higher (reference) price are more likely to pick a lower price than those who are just shown the lower price. For example when a toaster is displayed by itself, the number of people who would buy it is lower than when it is displayed next to a more expensive toaster. If a similar phenomenon is operating in the Price Laddering scenario, then a similar overestimation effect may be expected.
To test this idea we conducted two experiments.
The product used in the first experiment was a cell phone concept description and in the second case was a credit card concept description. The cell phone example used three price levels ($139.99, $119.99, $99.99). The credit card example used three levels of annual fee ($50, $25, $0).
In both cases, four distinct sample cells were used – three for a Monadic test (with exposure to one price per cell) and one for a Laddering test, with exposure to up to three prices. Intention to purchase was measured on a 10-point scale anchored by “Very Likely” and “Not at all Likely.” Respondents in the Laddering cell who gave a score below an “8” were shown a lower price and this exercise was repeated one more time. The data were collected online using TRC’s proprietary web panel, USA Panel.
Note that results must be measured with percentages rather than means because of the way “take rate” is typically captured in Price Laddering studies. Consider the following example.
If 20% (out of 100 respondents) provide an answer of 9 or 10, then the remaining 80% are shown the next lower price. If 10% of that group provides an answer of 9 or 10 then the take rate for the first price is 20% and that for the second price is (28/100) 28%.
This is because we can assume that those who would take the product at a higher price would surely take it a lower price. Similarly, if 20% of the 72 people who are shown the third price give a score of 9 or 10, the take rate for the third price is (42/100) 42%.
Expressing this with means would be difficult because we would have to make assumptions about the exact score a respondent would give to a lower price. Now let’s take a look at the actual results of the two experiments to see how Monadic and Price Laddering approaches compared.
In both examples the initial Monadic and Price Laddering cells ought to have provided quite similar results, since they were essentially the same. That took place, as shown above. As regards the remaining four comparisons, Laddering take rates were directionally higher than Monadic take rates in each instance. Only the last difference, however, was statistically significant (Cell Phone example: 19% vs. 25%).
Interpreting the results, and deciding on the most appropriate technique
More examples with additional statistically significant results would further strengthen the case, but there is evidence that a reference price effect is taking place in the Laddering exercise, and this is likely to lead to inflated take rates. A Monadic design, then, is preferable so long as it is practical to put in place a split-sample (i.e., larger case count) study.
Quite often, though, a Monadic approach won’t be practical, and so it is important to understand the implications of these results beyond which is “better” and which is “worse.” While Price Laddering is likely to yield elevated purchase interest estimates, the findings above – as compared to Monadic results – are not so far off as to be discredited.
Rather, they suggest the need for an extra correction (and with it some increased uncertainty) when attempting to pinpoint take rate. The first is necessary for any “intent to purchase” question, and is done to account for the reality that not everyone who strongly intends to buy something actually will. The second correction should adjust results downward for the rise in interest likely attributable to Price Laddering.
This article was provided by TRC, a full-service market research provider located in Fort Washington, PA.
Other content shared by TRC
Better Questions For Segmentation: Use of MAX-DIFF
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Using Maximum Difference Scaling as a method in designing surveys may ensure more useful results in your market research. It is a comparative method based on importance that sidesteps the problems associated with traditional importance scales. TRC explains the mechanics behind this method through a detailed example in this white paper. Read Article »
Database Scoring with Object Based Segmentation
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Segmentation created from company databases are often lacking the rich segmentation schemes formed by attitudinal surveys. A new approach is Object based segmentation that uses database variables at the basis for forming attitudinal segments, leaving both markets classifiable with clear demographic segments. TRC compares traditional segmentation analysis with Object based. Read Article »
Asymmetry in Product Features: Use of the Kano Method
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
The presence or absence of product features strongly affect consumer satisfaction with the design. Comparing these features using asymmetry analysis can help identify satisfiers and dissatisfiers from among the features of a product. The Kano method is similar but results in categorizing each respondent's answers. TRC presents this essential method of deciding new product features in detail. Read Article »
Conjoint Analysis versus Self-Explicated Method: A Comparison
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Determining feature importance in a product can be divided into two techniques - top-down methods where a customer evaluates the whole product at once, and bottum-up methods where features are evaluated individually or in sets. The former method, Conjoint Analysis, is more common while the latter method, Self-Explicated Method, is not widely used but has practical advantages. TRC compares the two methods in this white paper. Read Article »
Product Configurator
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
To help customers purchase the right product, companies often use product configurators - tools that let customers design their purchase before ordering. This method is employed as a market research technique, similar to conjoint analysis but without some of the constrictions. This white paper from TRC explains an appropriate use of the product configurator method. Read Article »
Market Segmentation: One Method, Four Examples
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Effective market segmentation requires an understanding of the market and the skilled art of finding the appropriate segments. TRC gives four examples of this method's application with results. Read Article »
How to Measure the Value of a Brand
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Brand name evokes an inherent value; finding a way to reliably measure that value is crucial in determining product development. A technique called discrete choice conjoint analysis is described in this paper by TRC. Read Article »
Deriving Value from Research: the Use of Conjoint Analysis for Product Development
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Marketing research has been used by firms over the last several decades to provide information for decision making. Over time, increasingly sophisticated statistical methods have been developed and deployed in the service of this goal. This article focuses on one such method - conjoint analysis - and its application to product development. Read Article »
Cluster Analysis Gets Complicated
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Segmentation studies using cluster analysis have become commonplace. However, the data may be affected by collinearity, which can have a strong impact and affect the results of the analysis unless addressed. This article investigates what level presents a problem, why it's a problem, and how to get around it. Simulated data allows a clear demonstration of the issue without clouding it with extraneous factors. Read Article »
Identifying Feature Importance: A Comparison of Methods
by TRC
Understanding what customers want is fundamental to the new product development process as well as to the process of keeping existing products fresh and relevant. To be successful in this area we need to be able to correctly identify what features are important to consumers. Feature importance can be measured using a variety of methods of differing effectiveness. In this paper we will deal with the following methods: Importance Scales, Pick data, Pairwise Comparisons, and Max-Diff.
Read Article »
New Product Development: Stages and Methods
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
TRC identifies the best methods for each stage of the product development process, from Idea Generation through Feature Development, Product Development and Product Testing. Read Article »
Understand Choice in Banking: Use of Discrete Choice Conjoint Analysis
by TRC
Conjoint analysis provides incentive for survey respondents to determine which features must not be omitted in their final purchase. The method closely mirrors decision-making in the real world, and as shown by TRC in this white paper, is applicable to many situations including how customers choose their bank. Read Article »
Want better product ideas? Try smart incentives
by Rajan Samandam, TRC
Idea generation from survey respondents is strongly dependent on incentive. Introducing competition strengthens the quantity and quality of creative responses. TRC provides examples of smart incentives in this white paper. Read Article »
An alternative method of reporting customer satisfaction scores
by Rajan Sambandam and George Hausser of TRC
Though customer satisfaction evaluations are widely used, reporting of these scores has varied from one study to another. This is likely the result of each method’s advantages and disadvantages, as well as the personal preferences and habits of the researcher. In this article we review various reporting methods and outline our method with an example. Read Article »
Identifying the Key Drivers of Brand Image
by TRC
Measuring brand image requires looking at direct effects as well as indirect effects of a company's performance. TRC compares traditional multiple regression with SatiscanTM, a method that can review all possible path models. Read Article »
Improving Call Satisfaction: A Case Study
by TRC
TRC presents a case study of analyzing and improving a call center as an on-going data collection process. Read Article »
Improving Claim Satisfaction: A Case Study
by TRC
A case study on applying full-service market research to help an insurance company improve their client satisfaction with claim handling. Read Article »
Non-Response Bias In Survey Sampling
by TRC
Market research accounts for many scenarios to ensure high quality of data. One of the most overlooked problems is non-response bias. TRC describes ways to reduce its effects through survey design and data adjustment in this white paper. Read Article »
Segmentation Success
by Michael Sosnowski, TRC
This paper explains the basic building blocks of the segmentation process and its implementation. Read Article »
Survey of Analysis Methods Part I
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Practical marketing research deals with two major problems: identifying key drivers and developing segments. In this two-part series TRC looks at key driver analysis and segmentation. Read Article »
Survey of Analysis Methods Part II
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
This is Part II of a series looking at aspects of practical marketing research: identifying key drivers and developing segments. This content describes specific segmentation methods: cluster analysis, neural networks, self-organizing map (SOM), and mixture models. Included is a discussion on ideas for developing good segments. Read Article »
Validating Satiscan Using A Split Sample Approach
by TRC
TRC's SatiscanTM model is tested for validity using call center data and a split sample approach. This shows that SatiscanTM produces similar models when run on random halves of an energy industry dataset. Read Article »
Satiscan and Regression Analysis: A Comparison
by TRC
The comparison shows the advantages of SatiscanTM, an analytical method from TRC, over regression in identifying the correct and cost efficient action steps. Read Article »
TURF: New Methods for Implementation
by Westley Ritz, TRC
TURF is a long-established and quite useful marketing research tool, but not everyone is familiar with how it works, or with the latest developments that can make TURF even more effective. The purposes of this paper are twofold: (1) to explain the technique and (2) to describe the latest methods for implementation.
Read Article »
Product Configuration: A Research Approach for the Times
by Rajan Sambandam & Pankaj Kumar, TRC
The marketplace has shifted in the last decade with the ability of consumers to configure the product they want. This white paper explains the basics of configuration, an approach that mimics the real world of customer driven product design to obtain insight into consumer decision-making. Read Article »
Product Configuration: Evidence for Effectiveness
by Rajan Sambandam & Pankaj Kumar, TRC
This white paper looks at the examples from one product configuration study, the kinds of information that can be derived and the possibilities provided by statistical analysis. Read Article »
New Product Research: A Dynamic Approach to Feature Prioritization
by Pankaj Kumar, Westley Ritz and Rajan Sambandam of TRC
Feature prioritization is a very common new product research problem. Over the last few years, the most popular technique has been Max-Diff. However, as the number of features increases it becomes difficult to use. Bracket is a tournament-based approach that produces Max-Diff like results and can easily prioritize fifty or more features. Read Article »
Doing More with Less: Getting Greater Value from Mobile Quant
by TRC
What “more with less” means with respect to mobile MR, and examples from traditional online studies to challenge existing assumptions about what will and will not work on a mobile device. Read Article »
How to measure the value of a brand?
by TRC
Knowing how to price your product that you can optimize your ROI is key. This video explains various ways to measure the value of a brand and talks about a discrete choice conjoint technique as a perfect approach to measuring the value of a brand. Read Article »
Product Configuration with Michael Sosnowski
by TRC
Consider a person who wants to buy a personal computer. The customer can select exactly the combination desired, subject to a price constraint. Would it be possible to use such a process for research? Read Article »
How to Improve Your Market Segmentation
by TRC
Bob Hull from TRC talks about a market research technique for market segmentation and ways of improving them. Read Article »
Rich Raquet Market Research Consulting
by TRC
Rich Raquet is introducing TRC, a research & analytics firm, specializing in new product research, conjoint, segmentation, brand equity, sat & loyalty. Read Article »
