Re-searching...

Years ago, I took a mall survey where I was showed mock-ups of Coke cans. The interviewer asked me questions about which I'd buy based on design, color, size, shape. I answered what he asked. But my answers weren't true.

Don't misunderstand, I wasn't lying. I was being totally honest. But I was telling the interviewer what I thought I might do, think or feel. I have no idea what I'd really do. My answers were unconsciously skewed by the artificial lab setting.

You may have laughed at my wastebasket diving research (posted October 20, 2006). But in reality, I believe real world research like that is much more effective than interviews and focus groups. Many products that did well in lab-type tests failed in the market.

A better Coke survey might have been putting prototypes on real store shelves and watching the behavior of unsuspecting shoppers.

Why? People act differently in artificial situations. They want to sound rational or try to justify their actions. And in a focus group, one person may overpower the group or peer pressure might make someone say what the group or interviewer wants to hear, not what they really believe.

Plus when no one is looking, we often act differently than even we think we'd act.

Did you ever run out to buy something and return with things you never intended to buy? Sometimes, I return with a bunch of things -- but not the item I originally set out for. "How illogical," Mr. Spock would say. "How human" I'd say.

I'm talking mostly about researching routine and low involvement decisions, like inexpensive dry goods and consumables. But people are sometimes just as irrational when making considered decisions on long-term purchases and big ticket items

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm heading out to lunch. Something healthy like a salad I think. Or maybe not.