Question 1

Do I have to trade off distinctiveness and comprehension in ad claims?

Accepted Answer

You don't have to trade off distinctiveness for comprehension in ad claims--great campaigns often manage to achieve both with clever wording and thorough testing. A highly creative slogan can grab attention, but if consumers don't fully "get it," it fails completely; early copy testing can flag problems if a novel tagline is too confusing. The goal is to strike a balance: an ad claim can be unique yet still clearly convey the product benefit or message. For example, a twist on a familiar phrase might stand out and remain understandable, and small tweaks in wording can often preserve originality while improving clarity. Ultimately, validating different versions with a target audience reveals whether a distinctive claim communicates effectively or needs simplification.

Question 2

When is ethnographic research essential for understanding device use?

Accepted Answer

Ethnographic research is essential when you need to see how people use a device in their real-world context and uncover behaviors they can't easily self-report. Directly observing users in their natural environment reveals subtleties like workarounds, environmental influences, and unspoken frustrations that surveys or lab tests might miss. For instance, watching how family members share a smart home device or how a professional uses a tablet on the go can surface practical issues and cultural nuances that wouldn't emerge from questionnaires alone. Ethnography is especially critical for complex or novel devices where context drives usage patterns, ensuring the research captures genuine interactions and not just intended use cases. When exploring mobile or IoT (Internet of Things) device adoption, this approach often exposes how convenience, social setting, or physical environment shape usageâ€"insights key for user-centric design and marketing.

Question 3

When should we add qual to explain borderline concept screening scores?

Accepted Answer

Any time a concept's quantitative test scores come back inconclusive or borderline, it's wise to add qualitative research to learn the reasons behind the lukewarm reception. Borderline scoresâ€"ideas that test in the gray area between clearly good or clearly poorâ€"often mean some people saw potential while others had reservations. Follow-up interviews or focus groups with participants can reveal exactly what was confusing, unappealing, or missing in the concept. Maybe the value proposition wasn't clear, or a particular feature excited some users but turned off others; qualitative discussions help pinpoint those issues. Bringing in qual at this stage allows the team to decide whether the concept can be tweaked and improved or if the lukewarm score is a sign of a deeper flaw. In short, whenever numbers alone leave you on the fence about a concept, qualitative context will illuminate the path forward.

Question 4

Can push-to-web ABS replace phone for hard-to-reach groups?

Accepted Answer

Push-to-web using Address-Based Sampling (ABS) is emerging as a strong alternative to phone surveys for hard-to-reach groups, though it often works best in a mixed approach. By sending mail invitations with unique survey URLs, researchers can reach households that phone polls missâ€"including those without landlines or who ignore unknown callsâ€"and encourage them to respond online at their convenience. This method has improved response from demographics like rural residents and younger adults who rarely pick up the phone. However, it may not completely replace phone outreach: some people still won't go online even when mailed a link, so researchers often follow up with a paper questionnaire or phone call for non-responders. In practice, a hybrid strategy is common: ABS push-to-web for broad coverage, complemented by phone (or mail) follow-ups to ensure no important segment is left out.

Question 5

When should facial coding complement survey-reported emotion or verbatims?

Accepted Answer

Use facial coding in addition to surveys when you need to capture genuine emotional reactions that people might not fully express in words or might even be unaware of. Survey-reported emotion (or what someone writes in an open-ended verbatim) can be limited by self-awareness and honesty--people may not articulate everything they feel, or they may downplay negative reactions. Facial coding technology analyzes micro-expressions and subtle cues on a respondent's face (often via video) to gauge their real-time emotional response to stimuli like an ad, a product, or messaging. For example, if you're testing a new commercial, participants might say they found it interesting, but facial coding could reveal moments of confusion or surprise that the survey feedback didn't mention. It's especially useful in situations where gut reactions matter, such as entertainment, packaging design, or any experience meant to evoke emotion. The facial data can validate or enrich what people report by showing whether their expressions align with their stated feelings. In short, bring in facial coding when understanding subconscious or split-second emotional responses would improve your insights--often as a complement to verbatim comments and rating scales to give a fuller picture of how your audience truly reacts.

Sago London

Why choose Us

What is Sago London?

Research Facility

Research Facility Details

Facility Rooms

Services and Expertise

Research Resources

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

Do I have to trade off distinctiveness and comprehension in ad claims?

When is ethnographic research essential for understanding device use?

When should we add qual to explain borderline concept screening scores?

Can push-to-web ABS replace phone for hard-to-reach groups?

When should facial coding complement survey-reported emotion or verbatims?