Don't Fall for This Consumer Trap: The Say-Do Gap
“But It Tested Well!” - Anonymous Former Marketing VP
So much of market research boils down to a simple goal: talk to consumers, ask what they want, and pass those insights to the marketing team to drive brand, advertising, and innovation. However, one of the biggest challenges we face is the “say-do gap” – when consumers report one thing in research but do another in the real world.
This discrepancy is not intentional, but a reflection of behavioral psychology – there are several unconscious biases that are easily missed in consumer research. Without addressing these, studies can deliver insights that sound good but don’t reflect reality.
The entire business’ success rides on these consumer insights being accurate – if we aren’t aligned with what our customers truly want, we have zero chance of survival. To overcome this, make sure your market researchers are using the right techniques to get data that reflects reality and gives your marketing team a fighting chance.
Here are four methods to uncover deeper, more accurate consumer insights.
1. Behavioral Observation
When filling out a survey or participating in a focus group, people do their best to be honest about their behaviors. But as many people who have tried to keep a food journal know all too well, sometimes we aren’t as aware of or honest about our choices as we might think. Instead of asking, create opportunities to observe real-time decision making to eliminate bias and get more accurate data.
Do this through:
In-store tracking & shop-alongs
Digital diaries and longitudinal studies to track behavior over time
Ethnographic research that places the researcher in the context of the consumer
2. Mitigate Focus Group Biases
Focus groups can provide valuable qualitative insights, but they also introduce potential biases such as groupthink, where participants subconsciously agree to others’ opinions, and confirmation bias, where facilitators unintentionally steer responses toward expected answers.
To reduce these effects:
Use skilled moderators with an understanding of behavioral psychology.
Encourage detraction and dissension among participants.
Use anonymous tools to collect private opinions before group discussion.
Supplement focus groups with individual contributions to validate findings.
3. Allow for Neutrality & Indifference
Consumers often feel pressured to solicit a strong opinion, even when they don’t have one. This can lead to forced or inaccurate responses. While hearing “I don’t care” and “no preference” can be frustrating, it's useful – now we know where more work is needed.
Don’t confuse:
Genuine enthusiasm and passive acceptance.
Forced binary choices and definitive preferences.
Low-energy or apathetic participants with lack of interest in content.
4. Conjoint Analysis & Trade-Off Experiments
For those entrenched in design and content, the differences between options may seem obvious. But for research participants, choosing between two products or advertisements might be a challenge due to a number of conflicting variables like design, function, and price. Conjoint analysis creates a clear “either/or” scenario that isolates these variables and zeroes in on the best overall option.
Use conjoint analysis to:
Separate preferred aesthetic and functional design attributes
Learn which functions consumers are willing to pay for
Fine-tune or wordsmith specific elements of advertising
