Archive for category Consumer behavior
It may pay to make your product less than perfect!
Posted by mark in Consumer behavior, Uncategorized on September 4, 2011
I once analyzed data from a designed experiment that quantified consumer distaste for flaws in chocolate-covered cherries. This was a very rewarding project – lots of free candy! It also produced a counter-intuitive result: People preferred boxes with a few upside-down morsels. I figure this is akin to a beauty mark adding to the enticement of a model or actor. This article on “When Blemishing Leads to Blossoming”, published online by the Journal of Consumer Research confirms that under specific circumstances, a flaw makes a product more attractive. For example, in one experiment (highlighted in the July 16 issue of Wall Street Journal) the researchers (Danit Ein-Gar, Baba Shiv, Zakary L. Tormala) offered either perfect or slightly flawed chocolate bars to several hundred relaxed (strolling around) or stressed (rushing to exams) college students. I searched out the results and reproduced them in this interaction graph from Design-Expert® software. It seems to me that this surprising effect, presuming it’s real, provides yet another devious opportunity for marketing mavens to make us buy stuff. One thing I might advise is that you never buy anything when you are in a hurry.
Why coaches regress to be mean
Posted by mark in Consumer behavior on June 13, 2011
In a column for Newsweek magazine, science writer Sharon Begley* discusses how ignorance about the statistical principle of regression to the mean** causes all sorts of crazy behavior. For example, sufferers of colds try a new remedy that seems to make them better, but in reality, they were already recovering. This behavior leads to over-use of antibiotics, which breeds drug-resistant bacteria. Ultimately, according to this quote passed along by Begley:
“People die at a biblical scale because of such stupidity.”
– Ben Goldacre, author of Bad, Science: Quacks, Hacks and Big Pharma Flacks.
On a lighter (?) note, this tendency by people to attribute cause-and-effect relationships to random ups-and-downs explains why some teachers, coaches and instructors hold back praise and only berate their pupils. A case in point is the flight instructor who lavishes praise on a training-pilot who makes a lucky landing. Naturally the next result is not so good. Later the pilot bounces in very badly — again purely by chance (a gust of wind). The instructor roars disapproval. That seems to do the trick — the next landing is much smoother. So now you know why coaches yell so much: It’s their regression to the mean.
* “Wanted: BS Detectors” – 11/8/10.
**First brought forward by France Galton in 1886 via this essay on “Regression towards Mediocrity in Hereditary Stature”
Self-proclaimed lottery expert advises gamblers to never pick numbers that won before
Posted by mark in Consumer behavior on February 13, 2011
Recently I heard a local talk-show host interview Richard Lustig, author of Learn How to Increase Your Chances of Winning the Lottery.* His first suggestion was to never pick a number that won a prior lottery drawing. That led to lots of discussion by callers – mostly skeptical. Evidently this belief that previously non-winning numbers become “due” is widespread, so much so that it’s become known as the gamblers fallacy.
“Lottery: A tax on people who are bad at math.”
– Ambrose Bierce
PS. Did you hear about the wannabe-winner of the lottery who prayed and prayed and prayed to hit the jackpot. Finally an exasperated God responded with this request: “Could you at least just buy one ticket?”
*This paperback book lists for $40 on Amazon, but I will not provide the link because I do not recommend it. However, you may find it amusing to read the customer reviews.
KISMIF approach hits the spot for communications specialist
Posted by mark in Consumer behavior on February 3, 2011
As all of you must know by now, I like to keep it simple and make it fun (KISMIF) when explaining how use statistical tools. That made me a natural fit for joining up with our founding principal Pat Whitcomb in 1988. After all, he named the company Stat-Ease and made its slogan “Statistics Made Easy” – leaving me the “fun” part (him having already made things easy!). 🙂
Every now and then this KISMIF approach hits the spot, such as it did with Lara Marlin Hull, a Marketing and Social Media Consultant at Red Funnel Consulting. Before becoming a communications specialist, Lara worked for a number of years as a research scientist in the pharmaceutical industry – just the sort of person that we aim to please. As you can see in her January 19 blog for How to Sell Scientists (Does Your Newsletter Grab Scientists’ Attention? Here’s One that Does ), Lara and her scientist friend really liked my latest article for our newsletter, which details a fun kitchen experiment* by my son Hank. She passes along this interesting insight: “People forget that scientists are people too.”
I am reminded of a time early in the days of Stat-Ease when I put together a survey of our software users. Wanting to incent responses, I suggested to Pat and our programmer Tryg that we consider offering a free pen. They both scoffed at the idea of a technical professional being swayed by “swag” (that is, a bribe!), going so far as to say that such a gift would create insult and cause less of a return! My reaction was that “experimenters are people too!” Putting our own tools to practice, I then split up our user list at random and sent only half the offer for the free pen. Believe it or not, these lucky ones responded at a significantly higher rate with completed surveys.
If people don’t have a good sense of humor, they are not very good scientists either.
– Nobel prize-winning physicist Andre Geim
PS. Ms. Hull followed up her initial accolade for the Stat-Ease “Statistics Made Easy” approach with further praise (The Secret Product Your Customers Want) for the way our Stat-Ease home page invites browsers needing immediate help. It is wonderful to receive unsolicited third-party endorsements like this, even though it’s not for our products and services per se, but, rather, how we go about doing our business.
*”Tumbler Rumbles with a Mugger,” December 2010 Stat-Teaser
Caltech prof puts finger on what turns on consumers
Posted by mark in Consumer behavior on October 20, 2010
The November/December issue of American Scientist provides an intriguing heads-up from Caltech neuroeconomist Antonio Rangel on impulse buying. His group randomly presented items to students in varying ways – by name, picture and with the actual object. Buyers paid 50 percent more for the real goods! However, when the item could be seen under glass but not available to be held, this difference in desirability disappeared. Expect to see even more irresistible items showing up at the checkout counters to entice you into an impulse purchase. : (
“Next time you’re stuffed and the waiter wheels around the dessert cart, know that the odds are against you. Just cross your fingers that the chocolate cakes under a glass dome, to help you resist the urge.”
– Christopher Intagliata, Scientific American reporter (from text of podcast here)
PS. While researching Rangel, I came across this article in the Caltech News on another study he did on buying behavior – in this case the propensity to confuse price with quality for wine. Here you can learn why Rangel is a “neuro” economist – he directly measures brain activity, which provides more reliable measures of consumer response than what they might admit when asked how they feel about something. See how MRI signals change in student brains confronted with money, trinkets versus snacks (can you guess which turns them on the most?) at this web-page detailing research by the Rangel Neuroeconomics Laboratory.