Question 1

How do we relate memory encoding or arousal data to sales outcomes?

Accepted Answer

To relate memory encoding or arousal data from consumer research to sales outcomes, you need to correlate those lab metrics with real-world performance. In practice, researchers often conduct validation studies: for example, they'll test a set of ads or concepts using neuroscience measures (like EEG-based memory encoding scores or biometric arousal levels), then track how each performs in-market in terms of sales lift or conversions. If the ads that scored high on memory encoding consistently drive stronger sales upticks, it confirms those neuro metrics have predictive power for commercial success. Another approach is to include neural engagement scores in a marketing mix model or predictive analysis, linking higher consumer attention signals to higher subsequent purchase rates. The key is having both the neuroscience data and actual sales data on the same campaigns or products. By analyzing them together, you can draw a line from a physiological response (e.g., people really remembered or were excited by X) to a business result (X saw greater revenue), which validates the neuro data's relevance.

Question 2

What are best practices for translating fiduciary terms across jurisdictions?

Accepted Answer

Translating fiduciary terms across jurisdictions is best done by combining subject-matter expertise with careful localization. Start with a clear definition of the term in its original context (for example, what exactly 'fiduciary duty' entails in the source country's legal framework). Then work with professional translators or legal advisors in the target jurisdiction to find an equivalent concept or phrase - often a direct word-for-word translation can miss the mark if the legal systems differ. Maintain a glossary of such terms to ensure consistency and document how each was handled. It's also wise to add a brief explanation in parentheses or footnotes when the concept has no perfect local match, so nothing is lost on the reader. In short, treat these translations as interpretations of meaning, not just language, to avoid misunderstandings or legal confusion.

Question 3

When should implicit precede qual to uncover hidden associations?

Accepted Answer

It makes sense to conduct an implicit test before qualitative research when you suspect people have hidden biases or gut-level associations that they can't or won't articulate directly. By using implicit methods (like reaction time tasks or implicit association tests) first, you can surface subconscious attitudes — say, a consumer's unspoken negative feeling about a brand element — that might not come up in a standard interview. Those results then guide the follow-up qualitative phase: researchers know what sensitive or subtle topics to probe in depth. In practice, topics involving deep-seated preferences, brand imagery, or socially sensitive attitudes are prime candidates for this sequence — implicit measures reveal the underlying pattern, and one-on-one interviews or focus groups afterward help explain the 'why' behind those hidden associations.

Question 4

What guardrails prevent idea theft when co-creating with customers?

Accepted Answer

When co-creating with customers, set up guardrails like confidentiality agreements and clear ownership terms to ensure ideas aren't stolen or misused. Right from the start, have participants sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) and agree that any ideas developed in the session will be used for the project (and not taken elsewhere without permission). This sets the legal expectation of trust. Process-wise, keep the co-creation transparent and fair: use a neutral facilitator and document contributions (who suggested what) during workshops or on the platform so there's a record. Seeing their input acknowledged makes participants less worried that it will be secretly swiped. Some companies also reward or publicly credit contributors for winning ideas, which further signals good faith. Altogether, these practices create a safe environment - everyone knows the rules, and people feel comfortable sharing their creative ideas without fear that someone (company or fellow participant) will appropriate them unfairly.

Question 5

Do high SUS scores always predict strong long-term retention?

Accepted Answer

High System Usability Scale (SUS) scores are a positive sign of an easy-to-use product, but they don't guarantee long-term user retention. A highly usable app could still struggle to retain users if it lacks compelling content or ongoing value beyond the initial ease of use. Retention often hinges on factors like the product's relevance to user needs, fresh features, and engagement strategies; an interface might score well on usability surveys, yet if users don't find long-term benefit or interest, they will drift away. For example, many novelty apps launch with great usability and receive high SUS ratings initially, but months later usage drops because the core offering wasn't strong enough. In short, usability is crucial, but sustaining user loyalty also requires continuous value delivery, evolving features, and understanding deeper user motivations.

Blueberry Marketing & Sensory Research

Why choose Us

What is Blueberry Marketing & Sensory Research?

Services and Expertise

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

How do we relate memory encoding or arousal data to sales outcomes?

What are best practices for translating fiduciary terms across jurisdictions?

When should implicit precede qual to uncover hidden associations?

What guardrails prevent idea theft when co-creating with customers?

Do high SUS scores always predict strong long-term retention?