Primacy Effects – Not (or even) By the Experts!
As part of Cogent’s Market Research Insight Series, in this episode, we explored the problems related to the positioning of the item on the list.
There is ample evidence that positioning of the item on the list might lead to different results depending on the position of the item on the list with items located on top of the list scored 5 – 15% better than items on the bottom of the list.
Such evidence stems mostly from the consumer environment. However, we operate in a highly specialized pharmaceutical arena, dealing with medical experts and talk about treatment decisions, prescription of medications, etc., positioning effects should play less of a role.
Word Choice - an essential part of MR Design
In our last episode of Market Research Insights, we showed that the order of the responses plays a critical role, even when conducting @market research in an expert environment, such as the medical field.
During the conception phase of a survey, we debated heavily on how we should phrase the question. We were interested in a follow-on product, that will make it to the market sometime after a competitor product. We were undecided as to how we should phase the question so not to bias the respondents by the term used. Is it a:
· “2nd generation product” – which might convey a sense of new and improved?
· “Follower product” – which might be seen as a me-too copy of the first?
· “Product A vs. Product B” – rather neutral and concealing the market entry sequence of the two products?
What do you think? Which term will lead respondents to allocate the highest market share for the product?
Be Aware of Speed-Limits!
Sure, some people are faster than others … - agreed. However, in market research is has been shown that speeders are often “professional” respondents who actively seek out surveys as a means of earning supplemental income.
Applying stringent screening criteria when conducting market research with medical experts therefore should protect you from those unwanted participants – right! We took a closer look at a past research to prove or rebut the case for our thorough Quality Control process following each quant survey.
Watch out for Speeders and Cheaters
In a recent Market Research Insights report, we reported that even surveys that recruit only pre-selected, highly specialized medical experts are not immune to participants speeding through the survey and providing implausible results.
Knowing about this potential negative impact, we analyzed a recent survey conducted with expert medical professionals on current and expected medical practice by looking for suspicious patterns in the survey responses, to prove the case for our ridged quality controls, which are complex and time consuming – but worth the effort… Read below!