Marketers should be wary of insight based on rational responses

The ways and means of gathering consumer opinion are becoming more complex thanks to emerging techniques such as eye-tracking and neuroscience in addition to collection of data through traditional surveys and focus groups. 

Mindi Chahal

This throws up a debate over the quality of responses marketers get from research projects, particularly when rational responses differ from intuitive ones.

It is an age-old argument that people in focus groups and surveys respond in the way they think they should or how they want to be perceived rather than telling the truth.

However, this debate is growing because of new technology, including eye-tracking and measuring brain activity or physical responses, yielding truer consumer reactions to brand activity.

This week, MMR Research Worldwide (MMR) released research into the value of brand sponsorship of sports events.

Using the World Cup as a case study it looks at the levels of association between brands and the tournament, using traditional questions to get rational responses and implicit techniques to access a respondent’s intuitive response.

Respondents were shown a series of images associated with the World Cup, such as brand logos and on-pack promotions interspersed with distracter images of Brazilian dancers and football stadia.

They were asked to hit the space bar every time they thought the image was associated with the World Cup. This was then repeated but the second time respondents were asked to hit the space bar when an image was not associated with the World Cup. The research was conducted leaving just enough time for an intuitive response.

This technique shows that Adidas was notably more successful than Nike at driving association levels with the World Cup and reveals the same story plays out for Coca-Cola versus Pepsi, McDonald’s and Burger King and Budweiser and Heineken.  

MMR believes that using these implicit techniques alongside traditional questions provides a truer account of brands’ sponsorship success and I agree.     

Marketers should watch out for the ways in which insight is gathered to attach value to those insights accordingly. A truer account of consumer responses to brand activity should be the preferred option.

Latest from Marketing Week


Access Marketing Week’s wealth of insight, analysis and opinion that will help you do your job better.

Register and receive the best content from the only UK title 100% dedicated to serving marketers' needs.

We’ll ask you just a few questions about what you do and where you work. The more we know about our visitors, the better and more relevant content we can provide for them. And, yes, knowing our audience better helps us find commercial partners too. Don't worry, we won't share your information with other parties, unless you give us permission to do so.

Register now


Our award winning editorial team (PPA Digital Brand of the Year) ask the big questions about the biggest issues on everything from strategy through to execution to help you navigate the fast moving modern marketing landscape.


From the opportunities and challenges of emerging technology to the need for greater effectiveness, from the challenge of measurement to building a marketing team fit for the future, we are your guide.


Information, inspiration and advice from the marketing world and beyond that will help you develop as a marketer and as a leader.

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3703 or email

If you are looking for our Jobs site, please click here