nach oben

Erschienen in:

2022 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Experiments in Market Research

verfasst von : Torsten Bornemann, Stefan Hattula

Erschienen in: Handbook of Market Research

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The question of how a certain activity (e.g., the intensity of communication activities during the launch of a new product) influences important outcomes (e.g., sales, preferences) is one of the key questions in applied (as well as academic) research in marketing. While such questions may be answered based on observed values of activities and the respective outcomes using survey and/or archival data, it is often not possible to claim that the particular activity has actually caused the observed changes in the outcomes. To demonstrate cause-effect relationships, experiments take a different route. Instead of observing activities, experimentation involves the systematic variation of an independent variable (factor) and the observation of the outcome only. The goal of this chapter is to discuss the parameters relevant to the proper execution of experimental studies. Among others, this involves decisions regarding the number of factors to be manipulated, the measurement of the outcome variable, the environment in which to conduct the experiment, and the recruitment of participants.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nächstes Kapitel Field Experiments

Aaker, D. A., Kumar, V., Day, G. S., & Leone, R. P. (2011). Marketing research. Hoboken: Wiley.

Albrecht, C.-M., Hattula, S., Bornemann, T., & Hoyer, W. D. (2016). Customer response to interactional service experience: The role of interaction environment. Journal of Service Management, 27(5), 704–729.CrossRef

Albrecht, C.-M., Hattula, S., & Lehmann, D. R. (2017). The relationship between consumer shopping stress and purchase abandonment in task-oriented and recreation-oriented consumers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(5), 720–740.CrossRef

Anderson, E. T., & Simester, D. (2011). A step-by-step guide to smart business experiments. Harvard Business Review, 89(3), 98–105.

APA. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57(12), 1060–1073.CrossRef

Arnold, V. (2008). Advances in accounting behavioral research. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing.CrossRef

Baum, D., & Spann, M. (2011). Experimentelle Forschung im Marketing: Entwicklung und zukünftige Chancen. Marketing – Zeitschrift für Forschung und Praxis, 33(3), 179–191.

Bearden, W. O., & Etzel, M. (1982). Reference group influence on product and brand decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(April), 183–194.CrossRef

Benz, M., & Meier, S. (2008). Do people behave in experiments as in the field?—Evidence from donations. Experimental Economics, 11(3), 268–281.CrossRef

Berkowitz, L., & Donnerstein, E. (1982). External validity is more than skin deep: Some answers to criticisms of laboratory experiments. American Psychologist, 37(3), 245–257.CrossRef

Bornemann, T., & Homburg, C. (2011). Psychological distance and the dual role of price. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(3), 490–504.CrossRef

Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.CrossRef

Bullock, J. G., Green, D. P., & Ha, S. E. (2010). Yes, but what’s the mechanism? (don’t expect an easy answer). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(4), 550–558.CrossRef

Camerer, C. F. (2011). The promise and success of lab-field generalizability in experimental economics: A critical reply to levitt and list. Available at SSRN 1977749.

Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1), 7–42.CrossRef

Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81(1), 1–8.CrossRef

Christian, B. (2012). The a/b test: Inside the technology that’s changing the rules of business. http://www.wired.com/business/2012/04/ff_abtesting. Accessed 15 Mar 2018.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Collins, L. M., Dziak, J. J., & Li, R. (2009). Design of experiments with multiple independent variables: A resource management perspective on complete and reduced factorial designs. Psychological Methods, 14(3), 202–224.CrossRef

Cox, D. R. (1992). Planning of experiments. Hoboken: Wiley.

Dean, A., Voss, D., & Draguljić, D. (2017). Design and analysis of experiments. Cham: Springer.CrossRef

Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15(1), 21–36.CrossRef

Ellis, P. D. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Eriksson, L., Johansson, E., Kettaneh-Wold, N., Wikström, C., & Wold, S. (2008). Design of experiments: Principles and applications. Stockholm: Umetrics AB, Umeå Learnways AB.

Evans, A. N., & Rooney, B. J. (2013). Methods in psychological research. Los Angeles: Sage.

Falk, A., & Heckman, J. J. (2009). Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences. Science, 326(5952), 535–538.CrossRef

Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G., Jr. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421–435.CrossRef

Festinger, L. A. (1957). Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRef

Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., & Richler, J. J. (2012). Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 2–18.CrossRef

Glasman, L. R., & Albarracín, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 778–822.CrossRef

Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of mechanical turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(3), 213–224.CrossRef

Greenwald, A. G. (1976). Within-subjects designs: To use or not to use? Psychological Bulletin, 83(2), 314–320.CrossRef

Hakel, M. D., Ohnesorge, J. P., & Dunnette, M. D. (1970). Interviewer evaluations of job applicants’ resumes as a function of the qualifications of the immediately preceding applicants: An examination of contrast effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(1, Pt.1), 27–30.CrossRef

Hansen, R. A. (1980). A self-perception interpretation of the effect of monetary and nonmonetary incentives on mail survey respondent behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(1), 77–83.CrossRef

Harris, A. D., McGregor, J. C., Perencevich, E. N., Furuno, J. P., Zhu, J., Peterson, D. E., & Finkelstein, J. (2006). The use and interpretation of quasi-experimental studies in medical informatics. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 13(1), 16–23.CrossRef

Harrison, G. W., & List, J. A. (2003). What constitutes a field experiment in economics? Working paper. Columbia: Department of Economics, University of South Carolina http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/hoteck/PAPERS/field.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2018.

Harrison, G. W., & List, J. A. (2004). Field experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(4), 1009–1055.CrossRef

Hattula, J. D., Herzog, W., Dahl, D. W., & Reinecke, S. (2015). Managerial empathy facilitates egocentric predictions of consumer preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(2), 235–252.CrossRef

Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Attentive turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods, 48(1), 400–407.CrossRef

Hegtvedt, K. A. (2014). Ethics and experiments. In M. Webster Jr. & J. Sell (Eds.), Laboratory experiments in the social sciences (pp. 23–51). Amsterdam/Heidelberg: Elsevier.CrossRef

Hertwig, R., & Ortmann, A. (2008). Deception in experiments: Revisiting the arguments in its defense. Ethics and Behavior, 18(1), 59–92.CrossRef

Hibbeln, M., Jenkins, J. L., Schneider, C., Valacich, J. S., & Weinmann, M. (2017). Inferring negative emotion from mouse cursor movements. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 1–21.CrossRef

Horswill, M. S., & Coster, M. E. (2001). User-controlled photographic animations, photograph-based questions, and questionnaires: Three internet-based instruments for measuring drivers’ risk-taking behavior. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 33(1), 46–58.CrossRef

Kalkoff, W., Youngreen, R., Nath, L., & Lovaglia, M. J. (2014). Human participants in laboratory experiments in the social sciences. In M. Webster Jr. & J. Sell (Eds.), Laboratory experiments in the social sciences (pp. 127–144). Amsterdam/Heidelberg: Elsevier.

Koschate-Fischer, N., & Schandelmeier, S. (2014). A guideline for designing experimental studies in marketing research and a critical discussion of selected problem areas. Journal of Business Economics, 84(6), 793–826.CrossRef

Kuipers, K. J., & Hysom, S. J. (2014). Common problems and solutions in experiments. In M. Webster Jr. & J. Sell (Eds.), Laboratory experiments in the social sciences (pp. 127–144). Amsterdam/Heidelberg: Elsevier.

Larsen, R. J., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1999). Measurement issues in emotion research. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: Foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 40–60). New York: Russell Sage.

Laugwitz, B. (2001). A web-experiment on colour harmony principles applied to computer user interface design. Lengerich: Pabst Science.

Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2007). Viewpoint: On the generalizability of lab behaviour to the field. Canadian Journal of Economics, 40(2), 347–370.CrossRef

Li, J. Q., Rusmevichientong, P., Simester, D., Tsitsiklis, J. N., & Zoumpoulis, S. I. (2015). The value of field experiments. Management Science, 61(7), 1722–1740.CrossRef

List, J. A. (2011). Why economists should conduct field experiments and 14 tips for pulling one off. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(3), 3–15.CrossRef

Lynch, J. G. (1982). On the external validity of experiments in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 225–239.CrossRef

Lynch, J. G., Marmorstein, H., & Weigold, M. F. (1988). Choices from sets including remembered brands: Use of recalled attributes and prior overall evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 169–184.CrossRef

Madzharov, A. V., Block, L. G., & Morrin, M. (2015). The cool scent of power: Effects of ambient scent on consumer preferences and choice behavior. Journal of Marketing, 79(1), 83–96.CrossRef

Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (2004). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison perspective. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Meyvis, T., & Van Osselaer, S. M. J. (2018). Increasing the power of your study by increasing the effect size. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(5), 1157–1173.CrossRef

Mitra, A., & Lynch, J. G. (1995). Toward a reconciliation of market power and information theories of advertising effects on price elasticity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(4), 644–659.CrossRef

Montgomery, D. C. (2009). Design and analysis of experiments. New York: Wiley.

Morales, A. C., Amir, O., & Lee, L. (2017). Keeping it real in experimental research—Understanding when, where, and how to enhance realism and measure consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 465–476.CrossRef

Morton, R. B., & Williams, K. C. (2010). Experimental political science and the study of causality: From nature to the lab. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Myers, H., & Lumbers, M. (2008). Understanding older shoppers: A phenomenological investigation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(5), 294–301.CrossRef

Nielsen, J. (2000). Why you only need to test with 5 users. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users. Accessed 15 Mar 2018.

Nielsen, J. (2012). How many test users in a usability study. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-many-test-users. Accessed 15 Mar 2018.

Nisbett, R. E. (2015). Mindware: Tools for smart thinking. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Nordhielm, C. L. (2002). The influence of level of processing on advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 371–382.CrossRef

Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 867–872.CrossRef

Pascual-Leone, A., Singh, T., & Scoboria, A. (2010). Using deception ethically: Practical research guidelines for researchers and reviewers. Canadian Psychology, 51(4), 241–248.CrossRef

Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S., & Acquisti, A. (2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153–163.CrossRef

Perdue, B. C., & Summers, J. O. (1986). Checking the success of manipulations in marketing experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 317–326.CrossRef

Pirlott, A. G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2016). Design approaches to experimental mediation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66(September), 29–38.CrossRef

Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. (2001). Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 918–930.CrossRef

Rashotte, L. S., Webster, M., & Whitmeyer, J. M. (2005). Pretesting experimental instructions. Sociological Methodology, 35(1), 151–175.

Reips, U.-D. (2002). Standards for internet-based experimenting. Experimental Psychology, 49(4), 243–256.

Remler, D. K., & Van Ryzin, G. G. (2010). Research methods in practice: Strategies for description and causation. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Reynolds, N., Diamantopoulos, A., & Schlegelmilch, B. (1993). Pretesting in questionnaire design: A review of the literature and suggestions for further research. Journal of the Market Research Society, 35(2), 171–183.CrossRef

Robertson, D. H., & Bellenger, D. N. (1978). A new method of increasing mail survey responses: Contributions to charity. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(4), 632–633.CrossRef

Sawyer, A. G., & Ball, A. D. (1981). Statistical power and effect size in marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 275–290.CrossRef

Sawyer, A. G., Lynch, J. G., & Brinberg, D. L. (1995). A bayesian analysis of the information value of manipulation and confounding checks in theory tests. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(4), 581–595.CrossRef

Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 515–530.CrossRef

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Sieber, J. E. (1992). Planning ethically responsible research: A guide for students and internal review boards. Newbury Park: Sage.CrossRef

Simester, D. (2017). Field experiments in marketing. In E. Duflo & A. Banerjee (Eds.), Handbook of economic field experiments Amsterdam: North-Holland (pp. 465–497).

Singer, E., & Couper, M. P. (2008). Do incentives exert undue influence on survey participation? Experimental evidence. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 3(3), 49–56.CrossRef

Singer, E., Van Hoewyk, J., Gebler, N., & McGonagle, K. (1999). The effect of incentives on response rates in interviewer-mediated surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 15(2), 217–230.

Smith, V. L., & Walker, J. M. (1993). Rewards, experience and decision cost in first price auctions. Economic Inquiry, 31(2), 237–244.CrossRef

Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851.CrossRef

Stuart, E. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2007). Best practices in quasi-experimental designs: Matching methods for causal inference. In J. Osborne (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods (pp. 155–176). New York. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Thye, S. R. (2014). Logical and philosophical foundations of experimental research in the social sciences. In M. Webster Jr. & J. Sell (Eds.), Laboratory experiments in the social sciences (pp. 53–82). Amsterdam/Heidelberg: Elsevier.CrossRef

Trafimow, D., Leonhardt, J. M., Niculescu, M., & Payne, C. (2016). A method for evaluating and selecting field experiment locations. Marketing Letters, 7(3), 437–447.CrossRef

Trafimow, D., & Rice, S. (2009). What if social scientists had reviewed great scientific works of the past? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(1), 65–78.CrossRef

Verlegh, P. W. J., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Wittink, D. R. (2002). Range and number-of-levels effects in derived and stated measures of attribute importance. Marketing Letters, 13(1), 41–52.CrossRef

Völckner, F., & Hofmann, J. (2007). The price-perceived quality relationship: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its determinants. Marketing Letters, 18(3), 181–196.CrossRef

Wetzel, C. G. (1977). Manipulation checks: A reply to kidd. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 8(2), 88–93.

Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering baron and kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.CrossRef

Zikmund, W., & Babin, B. (2006). Exploring marketing research. Mason: Thomson South-Western.

Titel: Experiments in Market Research
verfasst von: Torsten Bornemann
Stefan Hattula
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Handbook of Market Research
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57411-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-57413-4

Copyright-Jahr: 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_2