This case study demonstrates the value of capturing non-verbal responses and turning them into detailed emotion metrics to make your qualitative research richer and more decisive. Our human powered coding captures 22 emotions, all highly relevant for creative testing.
This combination of insightful verbal responses and revealing non-verbal responses allows us to do genuine in-depth research in 15 minutes. A game changer and a new paradigm - breaking free from the traditional quant or qual dilemma.
And because we capture responses to creative images, statements and complete ads literally in seconds, a large amount of material can be tested in a short time. This makes this method extremely cost-effective, enabling a larger sample at a lower cost than conventional qualitative.
Capturing emotional non-verbal responses in second gives three major advantages:
- qualitative insights combined with quantitative metrics
- extremely cost-effective short interview
2. Benefits
•Rich qualitative insights
•Decisive quantitative metrics
•Nonconscious 3 second responses
•Can be applied to video footage from any source
•Fast turnaround – results in 3 days
•Cost effective – only requires a 15-20 minute interview
3. Case Study
• Shows how non-verbal metrics are added to
verbal information to give a conclusive result on
each statement or visual tested
• Respondents asked to identify images and
statements which are most engaging
• The non-verbal data shows the range of
emotions behind the verbal responses
• Verbatim comments provide insights and
answer the why questions
• The interviews lasted 15-20 minutes
• Respondents first shown each image for 3
seconds, then shown again to gain considered
response
• The speed of non-verbal testing to complement
verbal responses creates a true in-depth
interview in a short time
4. Contents
Objectives and Methodology
Results - Overview
Meat Consumption - Five Consumer Types
Advertising Images Tested
Advertising Images - Verbal Summary
Advertising Images - Non-Verbal Summary
Advertising Statements - Summary of Scores
Recommendations
Eight Reasons for Adding Non-Verbal Metrics to
Qualitative Research
Capturing Non-Verbal Metrics
5. Objectives and Methodology
The overall aim of this study is to explore responses to a range of plant
based meat products, showing advertising images and statements:
• Which ad messages and visuals gain the greatest engagement, both
immediate and considered?
• What are the features and messages which stand out (eg perceived taste,
look, fit with eating occasions, environmental benefits, health benefits)?
• What are the attitudes in this group towards plant based meat?
• How have plant based products featured in their food consumption, both
in the home and outside?
• How are these products viewed in terms of helping to tackle climate
change?
• What is revealed about attitudes to meat eating?
• What is likely to be the most successful strategy to encourage each type
within mainstream meat eaters to reduce their consumption?
The Sample
The research was conducted by 20 Zoom
interviews lasting 20-30 minutes.
If significant reduction in meat eating is to
be achieved this meat eating majority
must be reached and influenced.
Therefore in this study we have focused
on a core section of this majority for in-
depth research: 30 middle aged, middle
income men (12) and women (18), with
school age children. It is worth noting that
this sample (BC1C2 social grade, aged
between 35 and 54) make up
approximately twelve million people in
England.
The sample was drawn randomly
reflecting the general population, so it
includes vegetarians and vegans.
6. Results - Overview
What is the potential of plant based products to replace meat and thereby reduce consumption to make a significant contribution to
tackling climate change? In this study we focus on a large socio-demographic, not immediately associated with plant based eating, but
whose buying behaviour must change if the goal of significantly reduced meat consumption is to be achieved.
Key Points
The results of this research point to three major reasons why plant based meat (PBM) is unlikely to take hold in this market.
• Taste
The majority either assumed that PBM does not taste as good as meat, or had tried a product and found it disappointing.
• Price
The assumption is that PBM is more expensive than meat.
• Attitudes towards environmental gains
The majority are sceptical about the claim that reduced meat eating will help to tackle climate change. This also holds for the reported
attitudes of the children of respondents, with little sign that they are more inclined to try plant based products.
Recommendations
The outlook for reduced meat consumption in this market is so poor that reformulation of the products is required. To close the culture
gap between meat eaters and non meat eaters, the whole PBM category would need to be repositioned in the market.
9. Advertising Images Tested
The Overall
Picture
• aim was to show the respondents a range of images
for plant based meat products
• amongst this section of middle-aged, middle income
people there is a lack of interest and little curiosity
about plant based meat
• few respondents nominated more than one ad as
engaging
• only a minority showed non-verbal engagement or
appreciation
12. Cook it at home
It is worth noting that this image gained the most likes because it doesn’t
make PBM the focus, but shows it, together with other salad ingredients,
creating an attractive dish.
“Right on a skewer with lovely burn marks, with some garnish on top and
some, I think rocket salad and tomatoes. It looks quite appetising and
really healthy. So good for good for a starter.”
Male, 52, Foodie
“I suppose, because I do like healthy food. You got a bit of colour,
you’ve got your salad there, you tomatoes, right. It looks quite juicy,
quite moist.”
Male, 51, Trad
The responses are polarised, with half of those viewing it not showing
any immediate response because the cook at home, healthy meal
message does not grab attention. For those who are looking for healthy
and tasty meal suggestions, on the other hand, It catches the eye,
creating Active Engagement in a third of the respondents.
The image has some potential in the sense of providing examples of
how to cook with PBM, a role as an ingredient for cooking or flavour
holder.
13. Impossible sausage
Similarly, the second most liked item grabbed attention simply
because it looks like very tasty fast food.
“You know, the sausage in the bread roll. And it looks like a gooey
egg.. And it’s got a lovely cheese. Right. It looks very appetising.”
Male, 45, Foodie
There is a notable difference between these respondents and those
who like the 'Cook it at home' previously discussed. This is the simple
appeal of fast food, to be likened to a McDonald’s advert featuring a
Big Mac or McMuffin. In fact it looks so much like it that a number of
respondents showed puzzlement on first viewing.
This approach is meat mimicry taken to a level which is momentarily
successful, but doesn’t lead the viewer to consider switching to PBM.
As we will discuss later, there is a strong preconception that PBM
does not taste as good as real meat. The effect of this type of image
is limited to misleading the consumer momentarily, not to challenge
existing attitudes about PBM.
14. Isn’t chicken nuggets
In a similar way to Impossible Sausage this appeals to the fast food
likers, but only picked as a favourite by 17%.
Chicken nuggets do not have a good reputation among many
consumers since they are associated with junk food, highly processed
with dubious ingredients. We can see from the non-verbal responses
that there is more displeasure than appreciation or active
engagement.
“The chicken nuggets one is the most appealing actually and definitely
makes me hungry because at lunchtime we consume a lot of different
type of chicken nuggets. I buy a ready meal because of the children,
so it’s something that we consume probably at least a couple of times
a week.”
Female, 40, Trad
“And a lot of things like this, the sausages and the nuggets, it’s easy
for the children. So instead of, like, before making up a, you know, a
bean patty or something or we’ve got something ready to go.”
Male, 40, Veggie
For many parents this is a food item which has a convenience value, a
fall back for their children, rather than a positive choice. The issue
which is raised here is that such is the neglect of PBM is a healthy
alternative in itself, few consumers see that advantage.
15. How it’s made
The response to this image partly reflects the fact that beetroot
divides people, with some positively disliking the taste.
There is a modest amount of curiosity, but on the whole the results
reflect the fact that there is little interest in looking behind the curtain
to see how PBM products are made.
The big picture is that most of our consumers have little interest in
how a product - which they have no intention of buying - is made.
Again we can reflect that if consumers had positive expectations of
what PBMs could contribute to a healthy life (as distinct from simply
swapping out meat) there would be more interest. This ad rests on the
premise that consumers will be impressed by the ingenuity of using
beetroot to mimic meat. On a basic level the ‘look how we can fool
you into thinking you’re eating meat’ is a message which doesn’t carry
weight – indeed even rather insulting.
16. Isn’t bacon
This image fails to convince in its basic aim of looking like a tasty
piece of crispy bacon, the ultimate temptation for meat eaters. Like
the sausage image it doesn’t benefit by being isolated from any other
foods such as a BLT sandwich for example.
For those who have tried PBM products it was noticeable that they
reported that bacon was the least successful.
Presenting crispy ‘bacon’ in isolation in this way only attracted one
appreciation response, but four displeasure responses, reflecting
either that it seems rather unnatural, or that the consumers find the
mimicking of bacon per se rather negative.
We are back to the fact that these consumers are not impressed by
the magic of meat mimicry, or at least find it irrelevant.
17. Isn’t pork sausages
This image is so low impact it had the highest proportion of no
response (80%) than any of the ads, and generally speaking
extremely low for any advertising image.
As with the previous image it lays bare the failure of the clever
mimicry strategy. Put bluntly these consumers simply don’t care
whether manufacturers can recreate the look of meat. Without an
inclination to try the product it is an irrelevance.
Why there is so little inclination, comes back to a complex mix of
perceptions of taste and price, placed within the wider context of
the challenge to the environmental necessity and a lack of
motivators such as healthy eating.
19. Made from plants...
This statement is an attempt to encompass the benefits of PBM and
challenge any doubts or reservations. It also provides a set of
propositions for people to disagree with, hence the most common
response, for over half the respondents, is scepticism. Some
respondents took issue with more than one of the elements,
especially perhaps the bold opener ‘for people who love meat’. We
know from the direct responses that the majority don’t believe PBM
is delicious and the proposition better for the planet is also
contested.
Over-claiming in this case may be damaging for the PBM category,
since it widens the gap in perceptions between these mainstream
consumers by what can be read as a rather evangelical tone from
PBM advocates .
“Maybe I’ve not had enough coffee today, but I just think it’s
patronising. You know, ‘people who love meat and plants and
everything.”
Female, 39 Veggie
“1. Made from plants, for people who love meat, plants
and everything in between. The best part? They’re
delicious, packed with nutrients, and better for the
planet.”
20. Our ‘chicken’ nuggets...
The response to this reflects the fact that the results of manufacturers
‘surveys’ are viewed with scepticism by many consumers. As several
respondents pointed out, there is no information about sample size, nor is
the leading restaurant supplier named.
This sceptical responses also comes from the perception that PBM
‘chicken’ nuggets simply cannot taste as good as real meat, as we saw in
the responses to the advertising image.
Those who respond positively to PBM nuggets do so because of the
convenience and as a handy food item for their children. Going head-to-
head on taste alone is an approach which is destined to fail.
At its most general meat mimicry does not impress, even when at the
highest level of visual accuracy. In the absence of other reasons to bring
PBM into the consumers’ consideration, the response from many is "so
what?"
The question remains, where are the benefits to drive attention, apart from
meat mimicry? The major ones discussed later are price and health.
“2. Our “chicken” nuggets made from plants are so
good that they were preferred 2 to 1 in a head to head
comparison with animal chicken nuggets made by a
leading restaurant supplier in the UK.”
21. High in protein...
Bringing the issue of protein to attention, to be fair, is a tactic for
a different target audience, younger fitness conscious
consumers, particularly men. Tackling any misconceptions about
meat being essential for protein is a well-rehearsed strategy,
including for example sportsmen and boxers such as David
Haye.
In the case of this section of the market this statement addresses
an issue which is irrelevant for them because they are not
considering a change to PBM. It is also evident that a lack of
protein is not an issue on consumers’ minds in any case.
The scores for active and engagement result from respondents
finding the list of food items being quite interesting, whilst not of
direct relevance to them as consumers.
“3. All of our food is high in protein, so you can win
arm-wrestles or bulge out of your jumper. THIS™
packs more protein than: lentils, tofu, seitan, tempeh,
most actual cuts of meat, pretty much all vegetables.
Leading restaurant supplier in the UK.”
22. Our new meatballs...
The responses to this statement reflect the ambivalence towards
the word ‘fat’, a word which still has lots of negative
connotations.
As in the statement about protein this is tackling a possible
barrier to switching to PBM which doesn’t exist for these
consumers. The question of plant-based fat is puzzling, with high
levels of uncertainty and scepticism.
What is evident here is a statement designed to reassure or
impress consumers who are much further down the decision
making process. If the case were won for PBM products, to the
point where consumers were looking for added benefits, or
answers to any residual misgiving they might have, the
statement might make sense. At the moment it is akin to
describing the technical specifications of ice skates to someone
who has no intention of going near an ice rink.
“4. Our new meatballs contain the first plant-based fat
on the market, is also the healthiest, as the extra
virgin olive oil base is rich in monounsaturated fats.”
23. Reduce your carbon footprint...
This statement divided opinion with half showing scepticism and just 6 showing
appreciation. It’s clear that there is a long way to go before the environmental case for
PBM products is won.
For the minority who accept the environmental case this statement resonates, in a nail-on-
the-head satisfying way.
“I agree with that whole area. It’s like if all the meat eaters stop eating meat and just think
of this carbon footprint, because the amount of processing that goes into it, you know
beef, pork, it’s amazing.”
Male, 40, Veggie
However, for other consumers it’s a challenging statement inviting disagreement.
Consumers can point to food waste, or other forms of carbon such as air travel. This
opens up the major issue of how meat is viewed in the climate change debate.
The idea of making incremental gains through diet can be attractive.
“Yeah, you know that you could be having an impact every day.”
Female, 42, Trialist
For others it can provoke a defensive response.
“I mean, it’s really annoying that they keep saying this on TV advert that it’s plant based.
Yeah it’s all something is everybody’s banging on about it’s better for the planet. it’s kind
of like annoying me a bit at the moment because I see it like I want to eat it because it’s
better for me.”
Female, 37, Trad
“5. What’s the most effective way to reduce your
environmental footprint? We’ll give you a hint: It starts
with your plate.”
24. Use beetjuice for colour...
Like the plant based fat statement this attracts some curiosity,
but in a rather disinterested way as something which has no
personal relevance. There is a slight amount of meat mimicry
recognition, on the basis that yes, if you want to persuade people
to eat burgers then it’s necessary to make them look like real
meat. But it is appreciation in the abstract, divorced from likely
personal experience.
“6. We use things like beet juice and apple extract in
our plant-based burgers & beef to give them that
meat-like colour and taste you know.”
25. Recommendations
1. Aim for meat reduction by creating Trialists: a targeted gradualist approach.
These research results suggest the message required to convert these consumers to Trialists, needs to be a combined one: ‘eat these
healthy yet tasty food items (and help the planet while you’re at it)’ It is a classic nudge, only requiring a small change of
behaviour. Our findings also pose a large question mark over whether meat mimicry is effective in a market which is questioning the
health benefits of food science wizardry.
2. Create environmental nudges, both in the home and when eating out.
Although the evidence is mixed, there is still a good chance that the right (positive) environmental messages on menus could have an
influence. Avoiding anything preachy or guilt inducing, could instil a small sense of achievement. For example; ‘choose this option and
save X Co2’.
In the home it might be useful to have an app recording meals without meat and the environmental gains, based on the type and
amount of meat substituted.
3. Reposition the product category to reduce cultural barriers.
The aim is that becoming a Reducer does not carry connotations of ‘woke’, trendy, or holier than thou. It is simply a sensible and easy
thing to do, akin to using fewer plastic shopping bags.
In order to bring plant based products into the mainstream, perhaps locating them throughout the supermarket, where they can be
encountered in the course of a normal shop.
4. Market as healthy food, not simply a substitute for meat
At present middle market consumers have little to justify buying plant base products. The environmental benefits are contested and
there is little else for a parent to point to, say if they want to make a case to their children. There will no longer be the uncomfortable
implicit message of being anti-meat.
In addition to the health benefits of a balanced diet there is growing evidence of the benefits of a diet which improves gut health,
ranging from boosting the immune system to improving mental health.
26. Eight Reasons for Adding Non-Verbal Metrics
to Your Qualitative Research
1. Detect emotions which respondents are reluctant to express verbally - eg scepticism, engagement,
appreciation, puzzlement
2. Gain an immediate three second non conscious response - will it be eye-catching out in the real world on
billboards or online ads?
3. Avoid the considered response when the respondent is aiming to appear sophisticated. Straightforward, simple
ads often don’t ‘research well’
4. Avoid positive bias by ‘helpful’ respondents
5. Generate hard data with which to compare one image/statement/ad with another, giving a decisive result
6. Provide benchmark data e.g what is a good percentage of engagement/positive emotions?
7. Cost effective, with literally dozens of pieces of content tested in minutes, as each is exposed for three seconds
8. Completely transparent - video footage of the responses for every creative item available to the client
27. A key tool in testing marketing material is Active Engagement. When shown for 2 or 3
seconds, does the image or proposition grab attention? We can very quickly test multiple
versions of taglines, or logos, in this way. Do they catch the eye, or more accurately
catch the nonconscious brain. More questions will then tell us why they were eye-
catching and engaging. In the real world where a brand must grab attention, this test is
very valuable. We can get a positive, considered response in a discussion, but will it
work out on the supermarket shelves or on the website?
Because no special setup, technology, or conditions are required, we are able to capture
responses in all situations, whether someone is looking at their smart phone, scanning
shelves in the supermarket, or watching a film in an auditorium. All that is required is
reasonably good quality footage of the face and to have a view of where their eyes are
looking. For video ads we can sync reactions second-by-second using the audio, when
testing static material we rely on a verbal cue from the interviewer when showing each
item. In many cases, video footage contains people simply talking about a brand or a
service experience. In non-verbal testing, the respondent does not have to say they don’t
enjoy using a busy department store or queuing at a pharmacy – we can literally see the
emotions as they describe what they did. We humans are accustomed to providing
narratives of what we did, but not moment-by-moment accounts of how we felt in
situations. Verbal accounts of our emotions are, of course, influenced by what is
acceptable, expected or tactful. In cases when respondents tell us they love a brand, for
example, non-verbal cues tell us whether there is real feeling behind the verbal
utterances, helping us to identify, not only preferences and negative and positive
comments, but the strength of feeling behind them. Non-verbal cues represent a precise
measure of whatever we are testing, whether it’s the ease of use of a website, how
rewarding a TV ad is to watch, how well a brand catches our attention. The metrics from
the data can be analysed and presented in a powerfully engaging way to complement
verbal data.
Development of the Method
We conducted a systematic trial over the course of a year to identify the 55 subtle and
mixed emotions. We used material designed to arouse a whole range of emotional
responses, from positive emotions, to cognitive and mind/body split. To elicit strong
negative emotions we read out a list of the most stressful life events and asked the
respondents to describe the experience of divorce, bereavement etc. The trial underlined
the importance of knowing the context when coding emotions. Knowing how the
respondent is likely to react is a key advantage in interpreting signs. Studies have shown
that an emotion out of context can be hard to identify (which is one of the weaknesses of
AI technologies).
The method has been validated through hundreds of interviews and focus groups,
generating thousands of hours of video footage
22 key emotions
Capturing Non-Verbal Metrics
