The document discusses adapting conjoint analysis techniques to mobile platforms, presenting the results of a study comparing different conjoint methods conducted on smartphones and PCs in India and the US. It finds that simpler conjoint techniques performed well on mobile when optimized for smaller screens, with 2-concept choice-based conjoint and partial profile predicting choices accurately while being easy for respondents to complete. The study demonstrates the viability of conducting conjoint surveys on mobile devices.

1. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential
Chicago New York London Dubai New Delhi Bangalore SingaporeSan Francisco
www.absolutdata.com
April 29, 2014
Making Conjoint Mobile
Adapting Conjoint To The Mobile Phenomenon
Chris Diener, Rajat Narang, Mohit Shant, Mukul Goyal, Hem Chander
Sawtooth Conference 2013

2. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 2
Paper and Pen
Personal Computer
Laptop Computer
Smartphones/Tablet
Change in platforms followed increased mobility
Over the years, Market Research has adapted to various survey platforms
Evolution of market research

3. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 3
 Smartphones sales went up by 33% in 2012.
 Sale of Internet enabled phones in emerging markets will reach 1.2 billion by 2015, which will add
500M new internet users.
 Both India and Africa average three mobile phones for every four people.
 Number of tablet users are growing every year, adding to more mobility to lifestyle.
Why research is going mobile
Smartphone and mobile web penetration is growing day by day

4. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 4
“65% of the researchers expect to allocate up to 10% of their budgets to mobile”
25%
18%
31%
4%
18%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
UK US Australia Canada Total
“I have run multiple research projects via mobile”
Dawn of the era of mobile research
*“Catch the Wave” paper by Steve von Bevern, Research Now
Market Research companies are adapting to this phenomenon the world over
Respondents prefer Smartphone surveys, primarily due to its “on the go” nature

5. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 5
App Based SMS Based
Web Browser Based
Widely used!
Different ways of conducting surveys on mobile platforms

6. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 6
Customer Satisfaction Studies
Ad Value Identification
Media & Message Effectiveness
Habits and Usage Studies
Customer Service Representative (CSR)
Concept Testing
Customer Attitude and Expectation
“For some projects with extensive or complex stimuli, e.g., many discrete choice studies, survey
completion on smartphone might be ill advised”
- Mobile Research Risk, Burke Inc, 2013
BUT!
Different types of surveys using mobile platforms
There is discernible skepticism for conducting conjoint on mobile platform
Researchers are utilizing mobile platforms to conduct different types of short surveys

7. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 7
Complexity
Representation on small
screen
Short attention span
Too many tasks Large number of attributes in a
survey
Smart phone penetration
difference
Challenges in conducting conjoint on mobile platform

8. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 8
Reduction of
attributes
 Simplify
– Simplification of tasks, leading to optimal use of
screen space
– Reduction of concepts on screen
– Minimum scrolling to view tasks
 Optimize
– Coding optimized to fit the tasks on mobile
screens
Reduction of
concepts on screen
Possible resolutions
Visual Transformations
 Back to Basics: Tested Pairwise Ratings and Partial
Profile, which are simpler to evaluate
 Less is more: Fewer attributes per screen
 Tailor Made Methodologies: New techniques tailor-
made for mobile platform to increase interactivity
and ease of understanding like Shortened ACBC
Adapting Techniques

9. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 9
Conducted a multi country survey
India
 Topic: Determine the preferred multimedia tablet configuration
 Number of attributes tested: 9
 8 random and 2 fixed tasks per respondent
 Platform - Desktop / Laptop (referred here as PC)
– Mobile / Tablet (referred here as Mobile)
 Census representation of Sample
Methodology
Platform
PC Mobile
CBC (3 concepts per screen) 200 200
PCR (Similar to CVA) NA 200
CBC (2 concepts per screen) NA 200
Partial Profile NA 200
Shortened ACBC NA 200
*We thank IndiaSpeaks and uSamp for providing the sample in India and US respectively

10. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 10
PCR – Pairwise
comparison rating
CBC Mobile
(2 concepts)
CBC Mobile
(3 concepts)
Partial Profile Shortened ACBC
 Similar to CVA
technique in data
collection
 Estimation done in
two ways
– Discrete
Estimation
– Chip Allocation
 2 concepts
per screen
(excluding
none)
 3 concepts per
screen
(excluding
none)
 Similar to CBC
on PC
 6 attributes
evaluated
per concept
 2 concepts
per screen
 Only Pre-
screening and
consideration
set sections
 Can we go back to the
basics?
 Is less
better?
 What is the
impact of
Visual
Transformation
?
 Do lower
number of
attributes
improve
respondent’
s ability to
focus?
 How well can
simpler tasks
predict
respondents
choice?
Description
Evaluated the following techniques on mobile and compared them
with CBC on a PCRationaletotest

11. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 11
 9 point rating
 Rating
responses
transformed to:
‒ Discrete
Choice
‒ Chip
allocation
for estimation
 No
frills, clear
display of
concepts
 Acts as
None
 2 Concepts per
screen
PCR – Pairwise comparison rating

12. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 12
CBC mobile (2 concepts)
 None option
shown at the
bottom
 More width
per concept
 Higher Font
Size

13. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 13
CBC mobile (3 concepts)
 None option
shown at the
bottom
 Optimized
Coding to fit
on one
screen
 Optimal use
of real estate

14. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 14
Partial profile
 None option
shown at the
bottom
 Only 6 attributes
per screen
 Brand and price
on every screen
 Clear display
of concepts
with high
font size

15. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 15
NearNeighborhoodConcepts
Shortened ACBCBuildYourOwnPrescreening
 Simplified BYO
task
 Prescreening of
attributes
 Well defined
concepts
 7 attributes in a
concept
ScreeningTasks

16. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 16
Evaluation of research from multiple viewpoints
Researcher Perspective
 Average Time Taken
 Readability
 Ease of understanding
 Enjoyability
 Encouragement to give honest opinions
 Realism of tablet configuration
Respondent Perspective
 Robustness of results on mobile as compared to
those on PC
 Adaptation of various techniques to the mobile
platform

17. Results – Researcher’s Perspective

18. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 18
Technique
CBC PC 1 1
PCR – Chip Allocation 0.44 0.57
PCR – Discrete Estimation 0.64 0.79
CBC Mobile (2 concepts) 0.77 0.75
CBC Mobile (3 concepts) 0.84 0.91
Partial Profile 0.83 0.78
ACBC 0.79 0.71
Correlation analysis shows most of the methods are similar to
results of CBC PC
Correlation Analysis with utilities of CBC PC

19. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 19
 Hold out tasks placed in middle and end of exercise
 They were of similar format as conjoint exercise
Hold Out task prediction rates are all in “well accepted” range.
4 Methods do better in hold out task when compared with that of PC
Statistical Significant Difference from CBC PC at 95% confidence level for each country
Hold Out Task Accuracy
Technique
CBC PC 63.5% 58.1%
PCR – Chip Allocation 53.9% 56.5%
PCR – Discrete Estimation 64.5% 66.1%
CBC Mobile (2 concepts) 82.2% 58.0%
CBC Mobile (3 concepts) 64.8% 54.6%
Partial Profile 78.5% 67.4%
ACBC NA 79.2%

20. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 20
MAE tells a similar story with 3 methods on mobile doing better
than CBC on a PC
MAE Analysis
Technique
CBC PC 0.09 0.10
PCR – Chip Allocation 0.27 0.29
PCR – Discrete Estimation 0.06 0.06
CBC Mobile (2 concepts) 0.04 0.10
CBC Mobile (3 concepts) 0.09 0.11
Partial Profile 0.05 0.09
ACBC 0.10 0.10

21. Results – Respondent’s Perspective

22. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 22
3
3.3
3.7 3.7 3.8
4.5
3.1
3.6
4.9
3.7
4.2
5.8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
CBC PC CBC Mobile
(2 Concepts)
PCR CBC Mobile
(3 Concepts)
Partial Profile ACBC
InMinutes
US
India
Avg. Time taken to complete trade-off exercise
Respondents take more time on mobile devices, but simpler tasks
are quicker, for example CBC on Mobile – 2 tasks
ACBC, takes slightly more time, even more so in India, indicating that Indian market is not that
familiar with these techniques

23. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 23
82%
85%
81%
76%
85%
73%
64%
52% 53%
72%
56%
52%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CBC PC PCR CBC Mobile
(2 concepts)
CBC Mobile
(3 concepts)
Partial Profile ACBC
US
India
Readability
Readability is not an issue and respondents find the survey legible
on mobile
Statistical Significant Difference from CBC PC at 95% confidence level for each country

24. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 24
81% 79%
73%
62%
69% 69%
73%
78%
74%
68%
76%
72%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CBC PC PCR CBC Mobile
(2 concepts)
CBC Mobile
(3 concepts)
Partial Profile ACBC
US
India
Ease of understanding is comparable to that of PC for simpler tasks across both
countries. India scores well on ease of understanding for all techniques
Statistical Significant Difference from CBC PC at 95% confidence level for each country
Ease of Understanding

25. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 25
73%
59%
55%
48%
58%
53%
68%
78%
75%
65%
74%
80%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CBC PC PCR CBC Mobile
(2 concepts)
CBC Mobile
(3 concepts)
Partial Profile ACBC
US
India
Indian respondents enjoyed the survey on mobile more than their
US counterparts
Statistical Significant Difference from CBC PC at 95% confidence level for each country
Enjoyability

26. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 26
76% 75%
64%
61%
71% 73%73%
81% 82%
75%
87%
81%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CBC PC PCR CBC Mobile
(2 concepts)
CBC Mobile
(3 concepts)
Partial Profile ACBC
US
India
Majority felt that they were encouraged to give honest opinions
for all the methods evaluated on mobile platforms
Statistical Significant Difference from CBC PC at 95% confidence level for each country
Encouragement to give honest opinions

27. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 27
75% 75% 73%
63%
71%
67%69%
77% 75% 72% 72% 74%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CBC PC PCR CBC Mobile
(2 concepts)
CBC Mobile
(3 concepts)
Partial Profile ACBC
US
India
Tablet configuration, which was similar for all techniques, gets very
similar response from all respondents
Statistical Significant Difference from CBC PC at 95% confidence level for each country
Tablet configuration looked realistic

28. Implications

29. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 29
Yes it is POSSIBLE!
Conjoint surveys on mobile platform provided robust data quality
Respondents could read and answer comfortably on mobile platforms
Respondents took slightly longer to complete the surveys on mobile platforms
Respondents felt that the product combinations looked realistic to them on mobile platforms

30. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 30
By combining simple techniques with basic aesthetics!
All methods customized for mobile platform performed well. Simplicity and optimal use of screen
gives great results
“3 Tasks concept” should be avoided on mobile platform as respondent perceptions are less
favorable -- though accuracy parameters do not differ much
“2 Tasks concept” is the preferred layout for mobile platform. Both full profile and partial profile
perform well. However, full profile is easier to understand
PCR, when done through discrete estimation, performs well. ACBC, even though it gives good
accuracy, perhaps should be avoided as it takes longer and scores lower on “Ease of understanding"

31. © Absolutdata 2014 Proprietary and Confidential 31
If you need help with Analytics or Research, please write to us:
americas.sales@absolutdata.com
europe.sales@absolutdata.com
asia.sales@absolutdata.com
For Media related queries -media.relations@absolutdata.com
For all other queries -info@absolutdata.com
314 Marble Arch Tower,
55 Bryanston Street,
London W1H 7AA
Phone : + 44 207 868
2240
UK OFFICE
DLF Cyber City SEZ,
Building#14, 4th
Floor, Tower B,
DLF Phase-III, Sector 24 &
25A, Gurgaon-122002,
Phone: +91.124.4953.400
INDIA OFFICE
Absolutdata Analytics
Middle East JLT
Office 1604, Tower BB1
Mazaya Business Avenue
Jumeirah Lake Towers
Phone: +97150-1577257
DUBAI OFFICEHEAD OFFICE
1851 Harbor Bay Parkway,
Suite 125, Alameda,
California, USA – 94502
Phone: +1 510 748 9922
Fax: +1 510 217 2387

32. Name
Designation
Phone:
Email:
Follow us on: