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 Reporting
3
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 CRIME
A Rigorous Virtual Shopping Methodology
• n=1800 category buyers; Vision Critical Springboard America Panel
• 20-minute questionnaire online
Multiple 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
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 shop
9
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
Findability
11
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’ shop
13
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 B
14 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’ test
15
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 included
17
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 2.6
18
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 testing
19
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 process
21
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 !
