Whose Crystal Ball to Choose? Individual Difference in the Generalizability of Concept Testing

Abstract

The product development literature has identified several individual characteristics that could influence how subjects respond to new products in concept tests. Few of these characteristics have been thoroughly investigated. The purpose of this research is to examine whether a number of personality traits (1) do influence concept evaluation scores and (2) can be used to identify respondents who provide substantially higher-quality data in concept testing and whether the answers to these questions change for major versus minor innovations. The data quality of the concept testing data is defined using the generalizability theory, which provides a decision-specific G-coefficient. Higher quality means a G-coefficient closer to 1 for a particular managerial decision. A Web-based study to concept test 10 appliance innovations on multiple occasions was conducted among 105 panelists from the Institute for Online Consumer Studies (IOCS). During the concept testing, respondents' innovativeness, change-seeking tendency, and propensity to exert cognitive effort were also measured. The results showed that the respondent characteristics influence the mean evaluation of the concepts and the psychometric quality of the concept testing data: (1) there is a significant linear relationship between concept scores and all of the innovativeness scales and change-seeking measures; (2) the effect of innovativeness on concept testing outcomes is even more substantial for major innovations than for minor innovations; (3) the study provides evidence that the quality of concept testing data provided by respondents varies substantially with their innovativeness, whereas the differences are more modest when scaling just minor innovations; (5) there are also strong effects on data quality for the Need to Evaluate scale used to capture cognitive effort characteristics; and (6) there is little effect of segmenting on social desirability on data quality. Managerially, the current results indicate that a product manager wanting to concept test a pool of appliance concepts can benefit from screening for the respondents who will provide higher-quality concept testing data. For example, respondents who are high on domain-specific innovativeness provide the highest-quality concept testing data for both minor and major innovations. The effects of traits are stronger for major innovations, supporting the claim that subject selection is a more critical issue in concept testing of major innovations. Product managers can improve the quality of their concept testing data without an increase in cost by screening the subjects they use in concept testing.

Drivers and Consequences of Narrative Transportation: Understanding the Role of Stories and Domain‐Specific Skills in Improving Radically New Products

“…Selecting consumers with high technological reflectiveness or product expertise demands screening for concept test participants along these characteristics. Some argue that such screening can be burdensome and resource‐intensive (Belz and Baumbach, ; Peng and Finn, ), while others consider that online selection provides opportunities (Füller and Matzler, ). For the story format, a classical story told in plain language suffices to elicit transportation.…”

“…Owing to their knowledge base, consumers with high expertise of products in related categories might find it easier to process and understand the information contained in an RNP concept description and to build a visual scenario of the product in use, thus experiencing transportation. Schoormans et al () and Peng and Finn () show that consumers with product expertise provide more consistent evaluations of RNPs and more stable evaluations over time, probably through a personally induced vivid experience of the RNP. In a similar vein, Pham et al () demonstrate that consumers with product expertise are better at predicting future events within their area of expertise.…”

Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is: The Value of Low Purchase Intention Consumers to Product Pricing

“…It is and has been a problem in sensitive interview research where the respondent's identity is not anonymous—such as in topics about illicit drug use and sexual behavior (Fisher, ). However, SDB has been examined in less sensitive contexts, such as in concept testing for appliances (Peng and Finn, ). Peng and Finn () contend that those answering in less socially desirable ways for appliance concepts may provide “higher quality” data.…”

Resonance testing: an industry approach for experiential concept evaluation

“…Test user selection is also critical and not very well formalised. A study by Peng and Finn (2010) suggested that 'domain-specific innovativeness' discriminates among respondents on their capability to give feedback about concepts. This further calls for careful screening of users.…”