4 Kinds of Market Research Bias and How to Avoid Them

Like middle-aged relatives on Facebook, biases are pervasive and difficult to ignore. People can’t help but see the world through their own experiences and opinions, so it’s pretty difficult to not be a little biased in one way or another. And since consumers and researchers are actually people (shocking, I know), you can bet market research is probably a little biased as well.

The good news is there are plenty of ways to anticipate and reduce the different kinds of biases that affect quantitative and qualitative research methods, and impact respondents. In this exciting two-part series, we’ll outline eight biases that are particular to market research and how you can avoid, or at least mitigate, their effects.

1. Confirmation Bias

What it is: Confirmation bias comes from our natural tendency to interpret data in a way that is consistent with what we already believe. But this keeps analysts from getting the whole story of the data, because they inadvertently read it—and draw conclusions—through their own subjective context.

How to avoid it: If your data is telling you exactly what you want to hear, you might need to listen more closely. Interpreting through a moderator offers a more articulate understanding and leaves less room for your own interpretation. For example, biased reading of vague words like “good” can skew data, so further probing a respondent to elaborate will help reveal a less ambiguous meaning. For more tips on avoiding confirmation bias, check out this article.

2. Culture Bias

What it is: An extension of confirmation bias, culture bias derives from assumptions about motivations and influences that are based in how we view other cultures. It’s a form of ethnocentrism, where someone judges another culture solely by the values and standards of their own culture.

How to avoid it: The best way to avoid culture bias is to conduct and analyze research through a partner who can straddle any potential cultural divides. Around here, we minimize this bias by using in-country moderators and analysts to fairly capture local, cultural nuances.

3. Survivorship Bias

What it is: Survivorship bias occurs when analysts concentrate on the concepts or stimuli that won the respondents’ favor, or “survived,” and dismiss those that lost. The problem is that focusing on only the winners means you lose the lessons of the failures, or are even distracted from any faults in your research design just because you found a winner.

How to avoid it: While dwelling only on winners doesn’t sound so bad, it would be kind of like if after losing the Super Bowl, the defeated team suddenly ceased to exist. It’s just as important to understand why a concept won as it is to understand why another lost, so it’s helpful to think of your results on a spectrum of success.

4. Social Desirability Bias

What it is: This bias occurs when respondents answering in the presence of others give more socially acceptable or responsible answers than they ordinarily would.

How to avoid it: A common symptom of traditional focus groups, this bias can be remedied through online market research, where participants may feel less inhibited to honestly discuss even their worst habits and qualities. For instance, we employ Instant Research Groups in which respondents interact with each other digitally while answering open-ended questions and follow-ups posted by a trained moderator, offering anonymity and reducing social pressure.

As you can see, there are a ton of factors that can skew your market research conclusions. And, we’re here to help you avoid their damaging effects. Tune in this Thursday for the exciting conclusion to our research bias saga. In the meantime, check out this handy eGuide to maximizing your research results by combining quantitative and qualitative research.

You can now read about four more kinds of research bias in part two, found here.