What’s new

It would seem that there is no simpler method than a monadic test if you intend to choose the optimal product formula, or a new packaging design. All you need is 2-3 cells with at least 100 respondents in each, and you can go ahead. Sure thing, but…. Monadic tests are characterised by very restrictive assumptions, which affects the sample selection process. Each person within a given leg should have an appropriate demographic and usage  equivalent in another leg. We have

Within the last dozen of years or so we have tested loads of weird products, which have honestly speaking been of very little use for Polish consumers. How many people clean their nose every single day,  or would like to have a hot jelly dessert from a carton box during their lunch break at work? Being so very busy seeking new products, and trying to satisfy the needs which consumers have not even been aware of, we seem to have

If any researcher has not yet heard that his or her work kills excellent creative concepts, this means that such a person has only recently started working in this sector. I do not intend to repeat all the arguments for research (hundreds of storyboards which are incomprehensible even for their authors which have not passed the disaster check), or against it (the Żubr beer campaign). One way or the other, this is an actual problem. Within the last year I have

In mono-sequential tests of food products most manufacturers rely on monadic results, and not on results for consolidated samples, because they are convinced that in real-life situations people tend to consume products from one rather than two brands  on a single occasion. Hence, during one meal consumers hardly ever compare two products from the same category. Nevertheless, in order to rely on monadic test results in each research cell we should have ‘exactly the same consumers’. This is why a lot