This chapter describes an application of consumer surveys in the litigation context. This particular application of a survey differs from the typical use of market research conducted for new product development, consumer satisfaction studies, or the assessment of consumers’ willingness-to-pay for a good or service. We describe and explain why and how a survey can be an important means for either Plaintiffs or Defendants to present evidence on the interpretation of a claim (here, a so-called All Natural claim displayed on the packaging of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream), as well as to evaluate the role that such a claim can play in the consumer’s decision-making process.
Michael P. Akemann, Rebbecca Reed-Arthurs and J. Douglas Zona
We discuss the use of consumer surveys to evaluate consumer confusion in a trademark infringement case. Because trademark owners are often unable to provide evidence of actual confusion, consumer surveys can be used to evaluate the likelihood of consumer confusion over similarity of trademarks or products. We summarize the role surveys play in trademark infringement cases and discuss their use in a trademark infringement case involving artesian bottled water from the Republic of Fiji.
Consumers often “misbehave.” They save and exercise too little; they spend, eat, and drink too much and take on too much debt; they work too hard (or too little); they smoke, take drugs, have unprotected sex, and carelessly expose their private lives on social media. These misbehaviors, often characterized as time-inconsistent choices, may entail large costs not only to the individuals concerned, but also to society as a whole. In this chapter, I discuss how policy makers can take a theory-guided experimental approach, complemented by field data, to demonstrate consumer precommitment both as a revealed preference-based criterion for evaluating the need for policy intervention and as a tool for allowing consumers to limit their misbehaviors without imposing constraints on market participants’ freedom of choice.
T. Christopher Borek and Anjali Oza
Feature valuation is an important element of the marketing analytics toolkit and one of the primary motivations behind the popularity of conjoint analysis. We call attention to an important deficiency in current, consumer-centric, approaches. Surveys used for feature valuation need to include a reasonable competitive set. We demonstrate that equilibrium calculations are both necessary and feasible.
Marc Fischer and Sönke Albers
We present an Excel-based decision-support model that allows determining near-optimal marketing budgets and represents an innovative and feasible solution to the dynamic marketing allocation budget problem for multi-product, multi-country firms. The model accounts for marketing dynamics and a product’s growth potential as well as for trade-offs with respect to marketing effectiveness and profit contribution. It was successfully implemented at Bayer, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical and chemical firms. The profit improvement potential in this company was more than 50 percent and worth nearly €500 million in incremental discounted cash flows.
Joel H. Steckel
Often litigation outcomes hinge on very specific questions of consumer behavior (e.g., how consumers interpret a specific advertisement). Randomized experiments are instrumental in these contexts. Courts use the same criteria as academics to judge these experiments: construct, internal, and external validity. However, they place different emphases on them. For example, external validity is much more crucial in a courtroom than in an academic setting. This article discusses the similarities and differences between experiments conducted in academic social science and litigation. Furthermore, it points to a potential of the courtroom to inform academic social science that has heretofore gone unexplored.
John R. Howell, Greg M. Allenby and Peter E. Rossi
This chapter discusses the use of conjoint analysis in litigation. The author summarizes key court decisions and motivates the use of conjoint analysis as a method of proof in specific litigation settings. The chapter then describes the basic elements of conjoint analysis and addresses several tactical considerations in using conjoint analysis. The specific use of conjoint analysis in a variety of litigation contexts is then summarized, including an extended summary of the use of conjoint analysis in a landmark smartphone dispute.
Noah J. Goldstein and Ashley N. Angulo
This chapter discusses the challenges and rewards of conducting field experiments by sharing the details that went into conducting several large-scale field experiments within hotels. In discussion of the studies, we document three stages of conducting field experiments with outside organizations. The first stage is devoted to advice on outreach, including communication strategies to reach potential organizations. The second stage refers to securing buy-in from key stakeholders and organization partners. Lastly, we detail methodological advice in the implementation stage by highlighting potential concerns and safeguards.
Anja Lambrecht and Catherine E. Tucker
In a digitally enabled world, experimentation is easier. This chapter explores what this means for marketing researchers, and the subtleties of designing field experiments for research. It gives guidelines for interpretation and describes the potential advantages and disadvantages of this methodology for classic areas of marketing.