Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.



Published on

marketing research

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment


  2. 2. Attitude Attitude is defined as an overall evaluation that enables one to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner with respect to a given object or alternative. Attitudes depend on the information consumers have about a product.
  3. 3. RATING SCALES <ul><li>Rating scales can focus on : </li></ul><ul><li>(1) overall attitude toward an object, such as Pepsi Free ; </li></ul><ul><li>(2) the degree to which an object contains a particular attribute, such as sweetness; </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>(3) one's feelings toward an attribute, as in . liking the taste , </li></ul><ul><li>(4) the importance attached to an attribute, such as the absence of caffeine. </li></ul>
  5. 5. Ratings Scale
  6. 6. <ul><li>Since individuals' evaluations of specific product attributes are influenced by the band's reputation, measures of specific functional attributes, such as taste, are generally performed with the brand name removed. Such tests or comparisons are referred to as blind tests. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Limitations of Scaling Procedures <ul><li>It is difficult to measure multidimensional stimuli. </li></ul><ul><li>Inability to test individual buyer behavior in terms of empirical findings from psychological and sociological studies. </li></ul><ul><li>Predictions from attitude scales still need to be transformed into measures of more direct interest to the marketer. </li></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>Accuracy of Altitude Measurement </li></ul><ul><li>Sensitivity: Extent to which ratings provided by a scale are </li></ul><ul><li>able to discriminate between the respondents who </li></ul><ul><li>differ with respect to the construct being measured </li></ul><ul><li>Relevancy: Relevance = reliability * validity </li></ul>
  9. 9. Comparative Scaling
  10. 10. Some Key Concepts <ul><li>Measurement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Assigning numbers or other symbols to characteristics of objects being measured, according to predetermined rules. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Concept (or Construct) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A generalized idea about a class of objects, attributes, occurrences, or processes. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Relatively concrete constructs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Age, gender, number of children, education, income </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Relatively abstract constructs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Brand loyalty, personality, channel power, satisfaction </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>Scaling </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The generation of a continuum upon which measured objects are located. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Scale </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A quantifying measure – a combination of items that is progressively arranged according to value or magnitude. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Purpose is to quantitatively represent an item’s, person’s, or event’s place in the scaling continuum. </li></ul></ul>Some Key Concepts
  12. 12. Figure 9.3 Primary Scales of Measurement Primary Scales Nominal Scale Ordinal Scale Ratio Scale Interval Scale Primary Scales of Measurement
  13. 13. <ul><li>Nominal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A scale in which the numbers or letters assigned to objects serve as labels for identification or classification. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ordinal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A scale that arranges objects or alternatives according to their magnitude in an ordered relationship. </li></ul></ul>Primary Scales of Measurement
  14. 14. <ul><li>Interval </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A scale that both arranges objects according to their magnitudes and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distinguishes the ordered arrangement in units of equal intervals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I.e., indicate order and measure order (or distance) in units of equal intervals </li></ul></ul>Primary Scales of Measurement
  15. 15. <ul><li>Ratio </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A scale that has absolute rather than relative quantities and an absolute zero where a given attribute is absent. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Money & weight are good examples of attributes that possess absolute zeros and interval properties. </li></ul></ul>Primary Scales of Measurement
  16. 16. Figure 9.4 Primary Scales of Measurement Scale Nominal Numbers Assigned 1 31 8 to Drivers/Cars Ordinal Rank Order Third Second First of race finishers Place Place Place Interval Championship Points earned 170 175 185 Ratio Time to Finish, behind winner 5.1 2.3 0.0 Primary Scales of Measurement
  17. 17. <ul><li>Comparative Scales </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Involve the direct comparison of two or more objects </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Noncomparative Scales </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Objects or stimuli are scaled independently of each other. </li></ul></ul>Classifying Scaling Techniques
  18. 18. Figure 9.5 A Classification of Scaling Techniques Scaling Techniques Comparative Scales Paired Comparison Constant Sum Rank Order Noncomparative Scales Itemized Rating Scales Continuous Rating Scales Likert Semantic Differential Stapel Classifying Scaling Techniques
  19. 19. <ul><li>Respondent is presented with two objects at a time </li></ul><ul><li>Then asked to select one object in the pair according to some criterion </li></ul><ul><li>Data obtained are ordinal in nature </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arranged or ranked in order of magnitude </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Easy to do if only a few items are compared. </li></ul><ul><li>If number of comparisons is too large, respondents may become fatigued and no longer carefully discriminate among them. </li></ul>Paired Comparison Scaling
  20. 20. Paired Comparison Scaling: Example For each pair of professors, please indicate the professor from whom you prefer to take classes with a 1. 0 2 1 3 # of times preferred 0 1 1 1 Thomas 0 0 1 Parker 0 1 1 Day 0 0 0 Cunningham Thomas Parker Day Cunningham
  21. 21. <ul><li>Respondents are presented with several objects simultaneously </li></ul><ul><li>Then asked to order or rank them according to some criterion. </li></ul><ul><li>Data obtained are ordinal in nature </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arranged or ranked in order of magnitude </li></ul></ul>Rank Order Scaling
  22. 22. <ul><li>Commonly used to measure preferences among brands and brand attributes </li></ul>
  23. 23. Rank Order Scaling Please rank the instructors listed below in order of preference. For the instructor you prefer the most, assign a “1”, assign a “2” to the instructor you prefer the 2 nd most, assign a “3” to the instructor that you prefer 3 rd most, and assign a “4” to the instructor that you prefer the least. 4 Thomas 2 Parker 3 Day 1 Cunningham Ranking Instructor
  24. 24. <ul><li>Respondents are asked to allocate a constant sum of units among a set of stimulus objects with respect to some criterion </li></ul><ul><li>Units allocated represent the importance attached to the objects. </li></ul><ul><li>Data obtained are interval in nature </li></ul><ul><li>Allows for fine discrimination among alternatives </li></ul>Constant Sum Scaling
  25. 25. Constant Sum Scaling Listed below are 4 marketing professors, as well as 3 aspects that students typically find important. For each aspect, please assign a number that reflects how well you believe each instructor performs on the aspect. Higher numbers represent higher scores. The total of all the instructors’ scores on an aspect should equal 100. 25 15 15 Thomas 100 100 100 Sum Total 25 25 25 Parker 25 25 30 Day 25 35 30 Cunningham Easy Tests Fairness Availability Instructor
  26. 26. Consistent Preference Discrimination test <ul><li>Another approach to measuring dis- crimination and preference simultaneously is known as consistent preference discrimination testing. </li></ul><ul><li>This technique requires the subject to repeat the paired comparison task several (generally 4 to 8) times. </li></ul>
  27. 27. <ul><li>If a person cannot discriminate between the two, a series of 8 paired comparisons will generally result in each brand &quot;winning&quot; approximately half the time. </li></ul><ul><li>A person who can discriminate between the brands should consistently prefer one over the other. </li></ul>
  28. 28. Triangle Discrimination and Triangle Preference Tests <ul><li>The triangle discrimination test and the triangle preference test are conducted in the same manner as the paired-comparison test except that the respondent has two samples of one product and one of the other. </li></ul>
  29. 29. Response Latency <ul><li>Response latency, the time delay before a respondent answers a question, indicates the respondent's certainty or confidence in the answer. </li></ul>
  30. 30. <ul><li>It has been found to be a useful indicator of &quot;guessing&quot; responses to factual questions. </li></ul><ul><li>When used in conjunction with a paired-comparison preference test, the faster the choice is made, the stronger is the preference for the chosen brand . </li></ul>
  31. 31. <ul><li>Response latency preference measures are particularly useful in telephone surveys since </li></ul><ul><li>(1) they are unobtrusive, </li></ul><ul><li>(2) automated equipment can make the measurements, </li></ul>
  32. 32. <ul><li>3) more complex scales such as rank order and constant sum are difficult to administer via telephone. </li></ul>
  33. 33. <ul><li>These advantages led duPont's marketing research department to use response latency in a major corporate image telephone survey. </li></ul>
  34. 34. <ul><li>Response latency times and brand selections can be converted into a scale known as the affective value distance (AVD) scale. </li></ul><ul><li>This indicates the degree to which one brand or product version is preferred over another. </li></ul>
  35. 35. Simulated-Purchase Chip Testing <ul><li>Simulated-purchase chip testing is a version of the constant sum used by Coca-Cola Company and other firms in international markets where respondents are not comfortable with more sophisticated methods. </li></ul>
  36. 37. Non-Comparative Scaling
  37. 38. Figure 10. 3 A Classification of Non Comparative Rating Scales Noncomparative Rating Scales Continuous Rating Scales Itemized Rating Scales Semantic Differential Stapel Likert Classifying Noncomparative Scaling Techniques
  38. 39. Continuous Rating Scale Example Very Poor Very Good 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 X
  39. 40. Method of Summated Ratings: The Likert Scale <ul><li>Extremely popular means for measuring attitudes. </li></ul><ul><li>Respondents indicate their own attitudes by checking how strongly they agree/disagree with statements. </li></ul><ul><li>Response alternatives: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ strongly agree”, “agree”, “uncertain”, “disagree”, and “strongly disagree”. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Generally use either a 5- or 7-point scale </li></ul>
  40. 41. Semantic Differential Scales <ul><li>A series of numbered (usually seven-point) bipolar rating scales. </li></ul><ul><li>Bipolar adjectives (for example, “good” and “bad”), anchor both ends (or poles) of the scale. </li></ul><ul><li>A weight is assigned to each position on the rating scale. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Traditionally, scores are 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, or +3, +2, +1, 0, -1, -2, -3. </li></ul></ul>
  41. 42. Semantic Differential Scales for Measuring Attitudes Toward Tennis <ul><li>Exciting ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : Calm </li></ul><ul><li>Interesting ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : Dull </li></ul><ul><li>Simple ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ Complex </li></ul><ul><li>Passive ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ Active </li></ul>
  42. 43. Stapel Scales <ul><li>Modern versions of the Stapel scale place a single adjective as a substitute for the semantic differential when it is difficult to create pairs of bipolar adjectives. </li></ul><ul><li>The advantage and disadvantages of a Stapel scale, as well as the results, are very similar to those for a semantic differential. </li></ul>
  43. 44. <ul><li>However, the Stapel scale tends to be easier to conduct and administer. </li></ul>
  44. 45. A Stapel Scale for Measuring a Store’s Image <ul><li>Department </li></ul><ul><li>Store Name </li></ul><ul><li>+3 </li></ul><ul><li>+2 </li></ul><ul><li>+1 </li></ul><ul><li>Wide Selection </li></ul><ul><li>-1 </li></ul><ul><li>-2 </li></ul><ul><li>-3 </li></ul>
  45. 46. Graphic Rating Scales <ul><li>A graphic rating scale presents respondents with a graphic continuum. </li></ul>
  46. 47. Graphic Rating Scales A Ladder Scale <ul><li>A measure of attitude that allows respondents to rate an object by choosing any point along a graphic continuum. </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Advantage: flexibility to choose any interval desired for scoring purposes. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Disadvantage: there are no standard answers. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  47. 48. Graphic Rating Scale Stressing Pictorial Visual Communications 3 2 1 Very Very Good Poor
  48. 49. Figure 10.4 Balanced and Unbalanced Scales Surfing the Internet is ____ Extremely Good ____ Very Good ____ Good ____ Bad ____ Very Bad ____ Extremely Bad Surfing the Internet is ____ Extremely Good ____ Very Good ____ Good ____ Somewhat Good ____ Bad ____ Very Bad Balanced Scale Unbalanced Scale Balanced and Unbalanced Scales
  49. 50. Basic Noncomparative Scales Confusing difficult to apply Easy to construct, can administer over telephone Measurement of attitudes & images Unipolar numbered scale, no neutral point Stapel Scale Difficult to construct appropriate bipolar adjectives Versatile Brand, product, & company images Numbered scale with bipolar labels Semantic Differential More time consuming Easy to construct, administer, & understand Measurement of attitudes, perceptions Degree of agreement on a numbered scale Likert Scale Itemized Rating Scales Cumbersome scoring unless computerized Easy to construct Reaction to TV commercials Place a mark on a continuous line Continuous Rating Scale Disadvantages Advantages Examples Basic Characteristics Scale
  50. 51. Table 10.2 Summary of Itemized Scale Decisions
  51. 52. Table 10.2 Summary of Itemized Scale Decisions (Cont.)
  52. 53. Figure 10.6 Scale Evaluation Scale Evaluation Scale Evaluation Reliability Validity Test-Retest Internal Consistency Alternative Forms Construct Criterion Content Convergent Validity Discriminant Validity Nomological Validity
  53. 54. Reliability <ul><li>Extent to which a scale produces consistent results </li></ul><ul><li>Test-retest Reliability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respondents are administered scales at 2 different times under nearly equivalent conditions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Alternative-form Reliability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>2 equivalent forms of a scale are constructed, then tested with the same respondents at 2 different times </li></ul></ul>
  54. 55. Reliability <ul><li>Internal Consistency Reliability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The consistency with which each item represents the construct of interest </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Used to assess the reliability of a summated scale </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Split-half Reliability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Items constituting the scale divided into 2 halves, and resulting half scores are correlated </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Coefficient alpha (most common test of reliability) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Average of all possible split-half coefficients resulting from different splittings of the scale items </li></ul></ul></ul>
  55. 56. Validity <ul><li>Extent to which true differences among the objects are reflected on the characteristic being measured </li></ul><ul><li>Content Validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A.k.a., face validity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subjective, but systematic evaluation of the representativeness of the content of a scale for the measuring task at hand </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Criterion Validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Examines whether measurement scale performs as expected in relation to other variables selected as meaningful criteria </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I.e., predicted and actual behavior should be similar </li></ul></ul>
  56. 57. Construct Validity <ul><li>Addresses the question of what construct or characteristic the scale is actually measuring </li></ul><ul><li>Convergent Validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Extent to which scale correlates positively with other measures of the same construct </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Discriminant Validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Extent to which a measure does not correlate with other constructs from which it is supposed to differ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Nomological Validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Extent to which scale correlates in theoretically predicted ways with measures of different but related constructs </li></ul></ul>
  57. 58. Relationship Between Reliability and Validity <ul><li>A scale can be reliable, but not valid </li></ul><ul><li>In order for a scale to valid, it must also be reliable. </li></ul><ul><li>In other words, </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reliability is a necessary but insufficient condition for Validity. </li></ul></ul>
  58. 59. Reliability and Validity on Target Old Rifle New Rifle New Rifle Sunglare Low Reliability High Reliability Reliable but Not Valid (Target A) (Target B) (Target C)
  59. 60. Measuring Behavioral Intention(s) <ul><li>Behavioral Differential </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Measures the behavioral intentions of subjects towards any object or category of objects. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A description of the object to be judged is placed on the top of a sheet, and the subjects indicate their behavioral intentions toward this object on a series of scales. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Example: A 25 year-old woman sales representative Would ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : Would Not ask this person for advice. </li></ul>
  60. 61. MEASURING EMOTIONS <ul><li>Marketers have always been interested in the affective, like-dislike, component of attitudes. </li></ul><ul><li>Emotions are strong, relatively uncontrolled feelings that affect our behavior . </li></ul>
  61. 62. <ul><li>Emotions are generally triggered by environmental events, are accompanied by physiological changes, often cause cognitive thoughts, have associated behaviors, and, most importantly, involve subjective feelings . </li></ul>
  62. 63. <ul><li>Marketers need to measure emotions, particularly the subjective feelings aspect, as emotional arousal or reduction is often an important product benefit and advertisements that arouse appropriate emotions are often more effective than those that do not. </li></ul>
  63. 64. <ul><li>Semantic differentials, Stapel scales, and Likert scales are commonly used to measure emotions. </li></ul>
  64. 65. <ul><li>BBDO, a major ad agency, has a list of 26 emotions they believe can be triggered by advertising . </li></ul><ul><li>To measure the emotions triggered by an ad, they developed the Emotional Measurement System. </li></ul>
  65. 66. <ul><li>Starting with 1,800 pictures of six actors portraying various emotions, the firm used extensive research to narrow the list to 53 that reflect the 26 emotions of interest. </li></ul>
  66. 67. Pictures used in BBDO's Emotional Measurement System
  67. 68. <ul><li>The percent of respondents selecting particular pictures provides a profile of the emotional response to the commercial. </li></ul>
  68. 69. <ul><li>The system has been used for such companies as Gillette, Pepsi-Cola, Polaroid, and Wrigley. </li></ul>
  69. 70. <ul><li>The Gillette commercial-(The Best a Man Can Get)- arouses feelings of &quot;pride&quot; and &quot;confidence&quot; among men and &quot;happiness&quot; and &quot;joyfulness&quot; among women. </li></ul>
  70. 71. <ul><li>THE END </li></ul>