International Journal of Market Research

William 'Bill' Schlackman played a major role in the development of qualitative research in the UK. His experience in psychotherapy, clinical psychology and motivational research, as well as his relationship with Ernest Dichter, helped form what we know as qualitative research today. He ran various workshops on the use of projective techniques, for which he is widely remembered, as well as presenting a number of papers at MRS Conferences between 1961 and 1986. Schlackman's passion and enthusiasm for experimental research design, and the use of projective and motivational techniques in market research, helped propel qualitative research to achieve a deeper understanding of consumer motivations. His early work on packaging research can be equated with the modern practice of semiotics, and his development of sensitivity panels can be compared with online communities.

Ratings-based conjoint analysis suffers two problems: the distortion raised by consumer perceptions of brand equity, and the lack of efficiency of probabilistic models for estimating preference shares. This article proposes two new approaches to scale customer-based brand equity using repeated measures and structural equation modeling and to estimate the share of preferences on the basis of a randomized first choice. The outcome is a new tool to predict accurate preference shares, taking into account product utilities (estimated by rating-based conjoint analysis) and the brand equity related to product attributes (estimated as a latent variable with structural equation modeling). An example with three products illustrates this new approach.

The purpose of this paper is to expand the domain of brand positioning measurement by demonstrating how network analysis techniques are used in brand positioning research. Using 12 sample brands in the electronic industry, this paper proposes a four-step process as a practical guide in analysing the effects of brand positioning on differentiation. Through the techniques of core-periphery structure, the paper creates four clusters to reveal differentiation of brand positioning. It provides clear arguments for using network analysis as the preferred method to capture the structure of brand positioning. The results have significant theoretical and practical implications for academic researchers and practitioners in the field of brand management.

Double jeopardy is one of the most important empirical patterns of consumer brand purchase behaviour. It asserts that large brands benefit from having more consumers who are also generally more loyal. Traditional methods for detecting double jeopardy patterns in consumer purchasing behaviour rely heavily on the availability of panel data. Although alternative methods have been proposed, these too require large quantities of data, making them costly to implement for many managers and researchers. This study proposes a new method for detecting double jeopardy patterns that requires only small samples of data. Using the instant coffee market in the US to test this new method, it is shown that repeated discrete choice experiments can produce proximate measures to those used as inputs to double jeopardy calculations. This approach gives researchers an economical and easy method to test whether a market conforms to double jeopardy, allowing them to keep managers informed about the properties of consumer purchase behaviour in their markets.

It has often been observed that changing an item's position in a list can substantially affect the probability that it is chosen. This paper assesses the magnitude of these so-called order effects in brand-attribute association tasks, and examines the confounding roles played by brand usage and question framing. While our main order effect is roughly the same as that observed for similar response formats, we find substantially larger order effects among users of a brand than non-users; and question frames that first ask respondents to create an attribute shortlist before making associations on this reduced set eliminate or greatly reduce the magnitude of the order effect and its interaction with brand usage. These simple modifications to question framings may be useful where randomisation is not feasible.

We develop a new measurement scale to assess consumers' brand likeability in firm-level brands. We present brand likeability as a multidimensional construct. In the context of service experience purchases, we find that increased likeability in brands results in: (1) greater amount of positive association; (2) increased interaction interest; (3) more personified quality; and (4) increased brand contentment. The four-dimensional multiple-item scale demonstrates good psychometric properties, showing strong evidence of reliability as well as convergent, discriminant and nomological validity. Our findings reveal that brand likeability is positively associated with satisfaction and positive word of mouth. The scale extends existing branding research, providing brand managers with a metric so that likeability can be managed strategically. It addresses the need for firms to act more likeably in an interaction-dominated economy. Focusing on likeability acts as a differentiator and encourages likeable brand personality traits. We present theoretical implications and future research directions on the holistic brand likeability concept.