Question 1

When are projective techniques the best choice in research decisions?

Accepted Answer

Projective techniques are the best choice when you need to uncover emotions or motivations that people can't articulate through direct questioning. They shine in situations where respondents might be unwilling or unable to share their true opinions — for instance, unspoken anxieties in financial decisions or aspirational feelings toward a luxury brand. By having participants project feelings onto metaphors, imagery, or hypothetical scenarios (like describing a brand as an animal or color), these methods reveal subconscious attitudes that traditional surveys might miss. The trade-off is that results are interpretive and require skilled analysis, but when the goal is rich insight into the "why" behind consumer behavior, projective exercises offer a uniquely powerful window into consumer psychology and decision drivers.

Question 2

When should mobile diaries supplement ethnography or surveys?

Accepted Answer

Mobile diaries should supplement surveys or in-home ethnography when you need ongoing, in-the-moment insights that one-time studies can't capture. They are especially useful for studying behaviors or experiences that unfold over time or vary by context. For example, if you want to understand how people use a product throughout a week, a mobile diary lets participants log their usage and reactions in real time. This fills gaps left by a one-off survey (which relies on after-the-fact recall) or a brief ethnography visit (which offers depth but only at a single point in time). Whenever recall bias might be a concern or continuous observation isn't feasible, diary studies ensure you catch day-to-day variations. Participants can note small frustrations, successes, or routine details immediately, providing rich detail that periodic surveys might miss. In short, if a static survey or a one-day in-home study might not tell the whole story, adding a mobile diary helps capture the evolving context and nuances of participants' experiences over time, leading to a more complete understanding.

Question 3

How do I balance naturalistic observation with genuine informed consent?

Accepted Answer

Balancing naturalistic observation with genuine informed consent means disclosing enough about the study to respect participants' rights without revealing so much that they alter their behavior. In practice, researchers often obtain broad consent about the context of the observation (for example, letting people know you'll be observing their workday or shopping trip for research) but not the specific behaviors or hypotheses of interest, allowing participants to acclimate to being observed and then naturally revert to their usual habits. Ethically, participants should always know they're part of a study and agree to it, but this approach minimizes the observer effect. Many researchers also include a post-observation debrief, fully explaining the study's purpose and findings afterward to maintain transparency and respect once the natural behavior has been recorded.

Question 4

What challenges arise when deploying one model across multiple countries?

Accepted Answer

Deploying one AI model across multiple countries often runs into problems with language, culture, and data regulations. A model trained on one country's data may misinterpret inputs elsewhere--for example, it might not understand the local language or slang, or it could make predictions based on consumer behavior patterns that don't hold true in another market. Cultural differences can trip it up: something seen as a positive trend or friendly tone in one region might have a different meaning (or no meaning) in another. Additionally, each country has its own data environment and rules; you might face strict privacy laws in one region (like GDPR in Europe) that limit the data you can use or share, complicating a one-model-fits-all approach. Because of these challenges, companies often retrain or fine-tune models with local data and adjust them for each market's language and norms. In practice, a model that works perfectly at home will usually need some localization and re-testing to perform reliably in other countries.

Question 5

How can emerging quant tools become more accessible to smaller insights teams?

Accepted Answer

Emerging quantitative research tools are becoming more accessible to small insights teams through user-friendly design and flexible pricing. Many new platforms now offer drag-and-drop interfaces and automated analytics for advanced methods like conjoint or text analysis, so you don't need a full data science team to run sophisticated studies_x000D_. Vendors are also introducing tiered subscriptions or pay-per-project plans, allowing smaller teams to afford capabilities once limited to big-budget firms. In addition, open-source tools and online learning resources have lowered the skill barrier - a small team can train up on using R or Python for analytics at minimal cost. The key is combining these democratized tools with some training and templates. This way, even a lean team can confidently leverage high-end techniques (predictive modeling, dashboard visualizations, etc.) without getting bogged down in technical complexity.

Criba Research LATAM & España

Why choose Us

What is Criba Research LATAM & España?

Recognition

Research Facility

Research Facility Details

Facility Rooms

Services and Expertise

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

When are projective techniques the best choice in research decisions?

When should mobile diaries supplement ethnography or surveys?

How do I balance naturalistic observation with genuine informed consent?

What challenges arise when deploying one model across multiple countries?

How can emerging quant tools become more accessible to smaller insights teams?