Virtual Shopping Mythbusters - Part Two

  • 789 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
789
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2

Actions

Shares
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. PART II: Methodological Considerations
  • 2. • The Motive: Why Did We Do This?• The Scene of the Crime: A Rigorous Virtual Testing Methodology• The Verdict: Virtual Shopping Hypotheses…and What Is Actually Real
  • 3. Global Leader in Pioneer in Immersive Community Panels Virtual Testing Intersection of Research & Technology Engaging Visual Data Visualization & Rapid Questions/ Exercises Online Reporting3
  • 4. WHY DID WE DO THIS?
  • 5. THE MOTIVE• ‘Virtual Shopping’ is over a decade old – Vision Critical a pioneer, powering the industry• Lots of new technology, lots of theories – From super computer to notebook – From flat images to 3D modeling – From central location to online – From curiosity to key tool in category management• Real world validation is well documented, but no true ‘best practices’ for wide variety of virtual methods used We Wanted to Set The Record Straight!
  • 6. TODAY’S WEBINAR: THE VIRTUAL SHOPPING HYPOTHESES► Monadic Is Superior to Sequential Monadic► ‘Dummy Shop’ Produces Better Data► Spending Increases With Repeat Category Exposures
  • 7. THE SCENE OF THE CRIMEA Rigorous Virtual Shopping Methodology• n=1800 category buyers; Vision Critical Springboard America Panel• 20-minute questionnaire onlineMultiple Types of Tests Included (~N=200 per test)• Multi-cell design, monadic and sequential monadic depending on test• Point-in-time and longitudinal depending on test• Online 2D full standard aisle/Online 3D full standard aisle
  • 8. MONADIC ISSUPERIOR TOSEQUENTIALMONADIC
  • 9. First, Second and Third Category Exposure Randomized Variety of shelf configurations tested Both monadic and sequential monadic methods Up to three shops per interview Respondent was received the same instructions before each shop9
  • 10. Monadic Is Superior to Sequential Monadic In a sequential monadic design, the number of product views decreased in the 2nd and 3rd shops; as did shop time Basket size/spend statistically consistent across shops Shop Time Purchases Views $ Spent (min) First Shop (A) 2.3 6.4 B $9.31 4.4 B Second/Third Shop (B) 2.2 3.7 $8.80 1.6 Note: 3 POGs tested in 3 positions – averages across the 3 shown on this page,10 Uppercase letters indicate the number is statistically higher than other at 95% confidence level, lower case at 90%
  • 11. Monadic Is Superior to Sequential Monadic Sequential Monadic Monadic Shorter Survey length Longer More Sample required Less Ideal when objectives Ideal for testing wide require full investigation the range of differences from shelf; Allows for greater aisle to aisle; When doing in-depth diagnostic follow- a ‘disaster check’ on major up questions/shopability; category/pricing changes Findability11
  • 12. ‘DUMMY SHOPS’PRODUCEBETTER DATA
  • 13. ‘Dummy Shop’ Example Shelfset Prior to actual shop, ‘Dummy Shop’ with one cell of respondents Both cells shopped the same ‘actual’ Shelfset Both cells had similar instructions prior to ‘actual’ shop13
  • 14. ‘Dummy Shops’ Produce Better Data ‘Dummy Shop’ respondents spend less time during the ‘actual’ shop But spending, basket size and examination behaviors are similar Satisfaction data consistent as well Shop Time Purchases Views $ Spent (min) With Dummy Shop (A) 2.3 5.9 $9.37 3.0 Without Dummy Shop (B) 2.4 5.8 $9.58 3.6 B14 Note: Uppercase letters indicate the number is statistically higher than other at 95% confidence level, lower case at 90%
  • 15. ‘Dummy Shops’ Produce Better Data Dummy Shop No Dummy Shop × Cost  × Time to set up  Longer (2 shopping Survey length Shorter exercises) From a behavioral Suitable for most projects; standpoint, no real benefit; Detailed virtual shopping Takes away valuable survey instructions are sufficient real estate; Helpful for ‘disguising’ test15
  • 16. SPENDING INCREASESWITH REPEATCATEGORY EXPOSURES
  • 17. Longitudinal First, Second and Third Category Exposures Same, full category layout in 2D Longitudinal sampling one week later and five weeks later (same respondents) Sample sizes reduced slightly each time (n=200 first; n=95 completed all three) No package changes included17
  • 18. Spending Increases With Repeat Category Exposure Shoppers become familiar with the shelf in the first exposure Basket size & spending consistent There were no significant differences in the brands purchased Shop Time Purchases Views $ Spent (min) First Exposure (A) 2.3 6.0 $9.29 2.9 Second Exposure 2.9 2.2 4.4 $8.84 (1 Week Later) (B) Third Exposure 2.2 4.9 (5 Weeks Later) (C) $9.25 2.618
  • 19. Spending Increases With Repeat Category Exposure One Exposure Repeat Exposure Shorter Timeline Longer Lower Cost Higher Suitable for most projects; Ideal for understanding Particularly in static impact on shopping over categories time; Seasonal categories & changing competitive context; Package testing19
  • 20. VIRTUAL SHOPPING HYPOTHESES► Monadic Is Superior to Sequential Monadic► ‘Dummy Shop’ Produces Better Data► Spending Increases With Repeat Category Exposures
  • 21. Conclusions Technology is never a substitute for sound research design Match the technology to the business issues (and know when to say when!) Leveraging technology effectively can bring innovation to the research process21
  • 22. Questions? Ideas for Future Waves?Will be presenting Oct 1-3 at LEAD Marketing Conference See you at Shopper Insights in Action July 18th-20th !