Online search data and page visit logs provides valuable ground for analysis. It is possible to see how frequently various terms are used by those who use a firm’s web site search feature or to see the route taken by most consumers to get to the page with the information they ultimately want. If consumers use a certain term frequently that is not used by the firm in its product descriptions, the need to include this term in online content can be seen in search logs. If consumers take a long, “torturous” route to information frequently accessed, it may be appropriate to redesign the menu structure and/or insert hyperlinks in “intermediate” pages that are found in many users’ routes. Scanner data. Many consumers are members of supermarket “clubs.” In return for signing p for a card and presenting this when making purchases, consumers are often eligible for considerable discounts on selected products. Researchers use a more elaborate version of this type of program in some communities. Here, a number of consumers receive small payments and/or other incentives to sign up to be part of a research panel. They then receive a card that they are asked to present any time they go shopping. Nearly all retailers in the area usually cooperate. It is now possible to track what the consumer bought in all stores and to have a historical record. The consumer’s shopping record is usually combined with demographic information (e.g., income, educational level of adults in the household, occupations of adults, ages of children, and whether the family owns and rents) and the family’s television watching habits. (Electronic equipment run by firms such as A. C. Nielsen will actually recognize the face of each family member when he or she sits down to watch). It is now possible to assess the relative impact of a number of factors on the consumer’s choice—e.g., What brand in a given product category was bought during the last, or a series of past, purchase occasions; Whether, and if so, how many times a consumer has seen an ad for the brand in question or a competing one; Whether the target brand (and/or a competing one) is on sale during the store visit; Whether any brand had preferential display space; The impact of income and/or family size on purchase patterns; and Whether a coupon was used for the purchase and, if so, its value. A “split cable” technology allows the researchers to randomly select half the panel members in a given community to receive one advertising treatment and the other half another. The selection is truly random since each household, as opposed to neighborhood, is selected to get one treatment or the other. Thus, observed differences should, allowing for sampling error, the be result of advertising exposure since there are no other systematic differences between groups. Interestingly, it has been found that consumers tend to be more influenced by commercials that they “zap” through while channel surfing even if they only see part of the commercial. This most likely results from the reality that one must pay greater attention while channel surfing than when watching a commercial in order to determine which program is worth watching. Scanner data is, at the present time, only available for certain grocery item product categories—e.g., food items, beverages, cleaning items, laundry detergent, paper towels, and toilet paper. It is not available for most non-grocery product items. Scanner data analysis is most useful for frequently purchased items (e.g., drinks, food items, snacks, and toilet paper) since a series of purchases in the same product category yield more information with greater precision than would a record of one purchase at one point in time. Even if scanner data were available for electronic products such as printers, computers, and MP3 players, for example, these products would be purchased quite infrequently. A single purchase, then, would not be as effective in effectively distinguishing the effects of different factors—e.g., advertising, shelf space, pricing of the product and competitors, and availability of a coupon—since we have at most one purchase instance during a long period of time during which several of these factors would apply at the same time. In the case of items that are purchased frequently, the consumer has the opportunity to buy a product, buy a competing product, or buy nothing at all depending on the status of the brand of interest and competing brands. In the case of the purchase of an MP3 player, in contrast, there may be promotions associated with several brands going on at the same time, and each may advertise. It may also be that the purchase was motivated by the breakdown of an existing product or dissatisfaction or a desire to add more capabilities. Physiological measures are occasionally used to examine consumer response. For example, advertisers may want to measure a consumer’s level of arousal during various parts of an advertisement. This can be used to assess possible discomfort on the negative side and level of attention on the positive side. By attaching a tiny camera to plain eye glasses worn by the subject while watching an advertisement, it is possible to determine where on screen or other ad display the subject focuses at any one time. If the focus remains fixed throughout an ad sequence where the interesting and active part area changes, we can track whether the respondent is following the sequence intended. If he or she is not, he or she is likely either not to be paying as much attention as desired or to be confused by an overly complex sequence. In situations where the subject’s eyes do move, we can assess whether this movement is going in the intended direction. Mind-reading would clearly not be ethical and is, at the present time, not possible in any event. However, it is possible to measure brain waves by attaching electrodes. These readings will not reveal what the subject actually thinks, but it is possible to distinguish between beta waves—indicating active thought and analysis—and alpha waves, indicating lower levels of attention. An important feature of physiological measures is that we can often track performance over time. A subject may, for example, be demonstrating good characteristics—such as appropriate level of arousal and eye movement—during some of the ad sequence and not during other parts. This, then, gives some guidance as to which parts of the ad are effective and which ones need to be reworked. In a variation of direct physiological measures, a subject may be asked, at various points during an advertisement, to indicate his or her level of interest, liking, comfort, and approval by moving a lever or some instrument (much like one would adjust the volume on a radio or MP3 player). Republican strategist used this technique during the impeachment and trial of Bill Clinton in the late 1990s. By watching approval during various phases of a speech by the former President, it was found that viewers tended to respond negatively when he referred to “speaking truthfully” but favorably when the President referred to the issues in controversy as part of his “private life.” The Republican researchers were able to separate average results from Democrats, Independents, and Republicans, effectively looking at different segments to make sure that differences between each did not cancel out effects of the different segments. (For example, if at one point Democrats reacted positively and Republicans responded negatively with the same intensity, the average result of apparent indifference would have been very misleading). Research sequence. In general, if more than one type of research is to be used, the more flexible and less precise method—such as focus groups and/or individual interviews—should generally be used before the less flexible but more precise methods (e.g., surveys and scanner data) are used. Focus groups and interviews are flexible and allow the researcher to follow up on interesting issues raised by participants who can be probed. However, because the sample sizes are small and because participants in a focus group are influenced by each other, few data points are collected. If we run five focus groups with eight people each, for example, we would have a total of forty responses. Even if we assume that these are independent, a sample size of forty would give very imprecise results. We might conclude, for example, that somewhere between 5% and 40% of the target market would be interested in the product we have to offer. This is usually no more precise than what we already reasonably new. Questionnaires, in contrast, are highly inflexible. It is not possible to ask follow-up questions. Therefore, we can use our insights from focus groups and interviews to develop questionnaires that contain specific questions that can be asked to a larger number of people. There will still be some sampling error, but with a sample size of 1,000+ responses, we may be able to narrow the 95% confidence interval for the percentage of the target market that is seriously interested in our product to, say, 17-21%, a range that is much more meaningful. Cautions. Some cautions should be heeded in marketing research. First, in general, research should only be commissioned when it is worth the cost. Thus, research should normally be useful in making specific decisions (what size should the product be? Should the product be launched? Should we charge $1.75 or $2.25?) Secondly, marketing research can be, and often is, abused. Managers frequently have their own “agendas” (e.g., they either would like a product to be launched or would prefer that it not be launched so that the firm will have more resources left over to tackle their favorite products). Often, a way to get your way is to demonstrate through “objective” research that your opinions make economic sense. One example of misleading research, which was reported nationwide in the media, involved the case of “The Pentagon Declares War on Rush Limbaugh.” The Pentagon, within a year of the election of Democrat Bill Clinton, reported that only 4.2% of soldiers listening to the Armed Forces Network wanted to hear Rush Limbaugh. However, although this finding was reported without question in the media, it was later found that the conclusion was based on the question “What single thing can we do to improve programming?” If you did not write in something like “Carry Rush Limbaugh,” you were counted as not wanting to hear him.