Home Uncategorized Marketing Research VII

Uncategorized

Marketing Research VII

Hello everyone, I have an Assignment for you today. This assignment must be DONE by Tuesday, March 30, 2021, no later than 10 pm. By the way, I need this assignment to be PLAGIARISM FREE & a Spell Check when completed. Make sure you READ the instructions CAREFULLY. Now without further ado, the instructions to the assignments are below:

Instructions

After completing this unit, you should now have a better understanding of the ethical issues that can occur in every step of the research process, from identifying the problem to analyzing the data and presenting the information.

Below are several research case studies, one of which you will choose to review. Analyze the possible ethical implication of your chosen study. Based upon the details of your chosen case study, discuss the possible ethical implications to both the client and the researchers. Follow the instruction listed below.

Choose one of the following case studies:

Decision Analyst. (n.d.). A decision analyst proprietary panel of users. Retrieved from https://www.decisionanalyst.com/media/downloads/proprietarypaneltanningproducts (will be the 2nd attachment below)
Decision Analyst. (n.d.). A qualitative approach to understanding the path-to-purchase. Retrieved from https://www.decisionanalyst.com/media/downloads/QualitativePathtoPurchase (will be the 3rd attachment below)
Decision Analyst. (n.d.). A rose of any other color. Retrieved from https://www.decisionanalyst.com/media/downloads/RoseOfAnyOtherColor (will be the 4th attachment below)
Decision Analyst. (n.d.). China: A new world of possibilities. Retrieved from https://www.decisionanalyst.com/media/downloads/China-ANewWorldofPossibilities (will be the 5th attachment below)

After reviewing the case study, provide a summary of the case in your own words. Then, analyze the ethical implications involved in the study. In your analysis, be sure to answer the following questions:

How does ethics play a role in marketing research?
What are possible ethical implications for the client?
What are possible ethical implications for the researcher?
What should be included in the client/contract agreement to counteract ethical issues?

Your case study must be at least two pages in length, and at least one academic source should be used in addition to the case study itself. Any information from the sources must be cited and referenced in APA format, and your paper should be formatted in APA style.

By the way, the first attachment below which is a study guide. The 2nd through 5th attachments are the Case Studies (You must pick one to choose from). And lastly, below are several CSU articles from the study guide for this assignment. Any additional information must be cited & referenced. You are welcome to using other educational sites as long it’s pertaining to the topic. Be sure to use the resources below & be sure utilize the “Required Unit Resources” from the study guide for further information on this assignment. Remember NO PLAGIARISM & I need will need a PLAGIARISM REPORT upon completion.

MAR 3231, Marketing Research 1

Course Learning Outcomes for Unit VII

Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:

1. Discuss marketing research’s primary business functions.
1.1 Describe how ethics play a role in marketing research.

8. Examine the marketing research process as an information-gathering process.

8.1 Analyze ethical implications when gathering information.

Course/Unit
Learning Outcomes

Learning Activity

1.1
Unit Lesson Presentation; “Ethical Considerations of Marketing Research;”
“The Ethics of Marketing Research: Can I? Should I? Would I?;”Case Study

8.1
Unit Lesson Presentation; “Ethical Issues Encountered by Marketing
Researchers in India;” “Forewarning & Debriefing as Remedies to Deception in
Consumer Research: An Empirical Study;” Case Study

Required Unit Resources

In order to access the following resources, click the links below:

Fodness, D. (2005). The ethics of marketing research: Can I? Should I? Would I? Retrieved from

http://www.marketingprofs.com/5/fodness1.asp

Handa, M., & Vohra, A. (2010). Ethical issues encountered by marketing researchers in India. Journal of

Management Research, 10(3), 135–150. Retrieved from
https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc
t=true&db=bth&AN=60203587&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Klein, J. G., & Smith, N. C. (2004). Forewarning and debriefing as remedies to deception in consumer

research: An empirical study. Advances in consumer research, 31(1), 759–765. Retrieved from
https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc
t=true&db=bth&AN=35923723&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Masters, T. (n.d.). Ethical considerations of marketing research. Retrieved from

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/ethical-considerations-marketing-research-43621.html

Unit Lesson

The unit lessons for this course are presented through interactive presentations.

UNIT VII STUDY GUIDE

Ethics in Marketing Research

http://www.marketingprofs.com/5/fodness1.asp

https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=60203587&site=ehost-live&scope=site

https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=35923723&site=ehost-live&scope=site

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/ethical-considerations-marketing-research-43621.html

MAR 3231, Marketing Research 2

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

Unit VII Lesson

Unit VII Lesson PDF

Suggested Unit Resources

In order to access the following resource, click the link below:

The following article is a great example of ethical implications in research.

Kimmel, A. J., Smith, N. C., & Klein, J. G. (2011). Ethical decision making & research deception in the

behavioral sciences: An application of social contract theory. Ethics & Behavior, 21(3), 222–251.
Retrieved from
https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc
t=true&db=a9h&AN=60828094&site=ehost-live&scope=site

https://online.columbiasouthern.edu/bbcswebdav/xid-120187917_1

https://online.columbiasouthern.edu/bbcswebdav/xid-120310467_1

https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=60828094&site=ehost-live&scope=site

https://online.columbiasouthern.edu/bbcswebdav/xid-120187917_1

Case History

Category: Cosmetic

Methods: In-Person Focus Groups, Virtual-Ethnography (Remote Desktop Viewing), Path-to-Purchase,
Time-Extended™ Qualitative

Summary

Decision Analyst’s client, a cosmetic manufacturer, was interested in
gaining a better understanding consumer perceptions and usage of
Amazon.com. Management wanted to identify and understand why
cosmetics’ users read reviews, shop and buy online vs. in store and how
they might stop or reverse this trend to online, or possibly take better
advantage of the online channel. To this end, the client asked Decision
Analyst to propose an approach to address these needs and find solutions.

Strategic Issues

The client wanted to better understand the customer’s path-to-purchase and make improvements to their
website, as well as other websites which they controlled. Of specific importance to the client was the appeal
of Amazon.com to consumers versus other websites consumers access in the category, and leverage
findings to drive online sales. Additionally, they desired to find ways to improve consumers’ in-store
experience.

Research Objectives

The research objectives were to:

� Obtain a holistic assessment of the customer’s shopping experiences and requirements in the
context of shopper types, values, expectations, buying circumstances (missions), etc. between
various online retailers and stores.

� Identify linkages between the shopping experience and product experiences, and loyalty to the place
of purchase and brand/product.

� Explore shoppers’ desired online and in-store beauty shopping experiences.
� Uncover strengths and weaknesses of Amazon, as well as other competitive websites that the client

company can capitalize on, and areas of opportunity for client company websites.
� Understand how and why shoppers are using Amazon.com, and what missions it fulfills.

A Qualitative Approach to Understanding
the Path-to-Purchase

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

A Qualitative Approach to Understanding the Path-to-Purchase (Continued)

Research Design and Methods

The research design required two different groups of females 25 – 52 years of age who purchased prestige
makeup and/or facial skincare products in the past three months.

� Group 1: All Amazon and retail partner store shoppers; some of which happen to also buy at other
websites. Purchased prestige makeup and/or facial skincare products at a high-end store at least
once in the past year; also purchased from Amazon at least once in the past year and plan to do so
again within the next year.

� Group 2: All Amazon and other websites beauty shoppers; some of which happen to also buy at
retail partner stores. Purchased beauty from Amazon.com at least once in the past year, at least
once from other cosmetic brand and retailer websites and plan to purchase from Amazon again
within the next year.

A multi-phase qualitative approach was designed to gain deep understanding of consumers’ needs,
desires, shopping experiences, and shopping decision making behaviors, both in-store and online.

1. In-Person Focus Groups: A total of 4 focus groups were conducted (one Group 1 shoppers and
one Group 2 shoppers were conducted in 2 separate markets). These four group discussions allowed
us to listen to shoppers’ language about prestige beauty and delve into their shopping missions and
experiences.

2. Two-Day Time Extended™ Online In-Depth Interviews: Online interviews were conducted via our
proprietary online bulletin board platform among 15 women from Group 1 and 16 women from Group
2. The interviews lasted approximately an hour and provided a deeper understanding of participants’
online and store buying behaviors.

3. Follow-Up Phone Interviews With Remote Desktop Viewing (Virtual Ethnography): 45-minute
follow-up telephone interviews including remote viewing of participants’ computer screens. We
watched how participants used various websites to research and purchase prestige beauty products.
Half of the interviews included webcams which allowed us to see their facial expressions and
observe emotional engagement with the websites they visited.

Results

The client learned a great deal about what makes Amazon appealing to consumers. Specifically, they
learned where Amazon exceeded expectations and also what features were found to make for a loyal
following for Amazon. Additionally, the client learned Amazon’s failings and where the respondents felt
disappointed. These findings were used by the client to assist their major retail partner in a number of
areas, including improvements to their in-store, behind the counter processes and displays. The client used
this research to improve their own website, as well as other websites which they controlled to drive traffic
and increase online sales.

QualitativePathtoPurchase

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

Case History

Category: Children’s Toys

Methods: Package Testing, Virtual Shopping, Advanced Analytics, Quantitative Research,
Shopper Insights

Summary

Recently a major toy manufacturer was challenged by its management team
to grow sales of its top brand. The brand, a long-established market leader,
had weathered many economic ups and downs and was beloved by children
and parents all over the world. The brand’s marketers faced a big challenge
and were considering a bold (and potentially risky) change to help shift the
brand’s growth trend upward. Consumer research was carefully crafted
to understand shoppers’ reactions to the revised packages, and ultimately
revealed that the proposed changes would benefit the brand. It also led to
some unexpected and very informative discoveries.

Strategic Issues and Objectives

As the U.S. and world economies strengthened after World War II, many parents had comfortable
disposable incomes and could indulge their children’s dreams and desires. Like most youngsters,
American children loved playing with toys; in fact, for over a half-century, kids had been enjoying
imaginative play with our client’s top toy brand.

As with many product categories, development and production of toys had greatly accelerated as
consumers’ appetites for new and better “things” seemed unquenchable. Manufacturers were continuously
pressured to keep up with consumer desires. Product lines were extended, and then extended even
further. Consequently, innovation became a major focus for our toy manufacturer client.

The retail landscape also grew and adapted to this demand. Toward the end of the twentieth century, big-
box retailers entered the marketplace, and endless aisles of “things” were available for shoppers to admire
and purchase. Exponential growth in the number of “things” being marketed led to clutter and confusion on
the retail aisles. In turn, manufacturers struggled for share of shoppers’ attention at the “moment of truth” in
stores. Packaging was forced to play an ever-more-important role in the marketing mix.

A Rose of Any Other Color…

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

A Rose of Any Other Color… (Continued)

Although our client’s long-established and beloved brand was holding steady and maintaining its sales and
market share, its desire was to improve sales and grow market share–even in this crowded, challenging
market. The company asked us to help assess the impact of minor changes to package messaging, along
with a radical change it was also considering: a complete change of the brand’s color scheme.

Research Objectives

The objective was to determine what impact, if any, the proposed package-design changes would have on
brand impressions and sales. The impact on multiple product lines under the brand umbrella and across
shopper groups was examined. Our client intended to use this research to help decide whether to make
the extreme shift in brand visuals and also to choose a winning package design.

Research Design and Methods

A quantitative survey, including both an extensive virtual-shopping exercise and a thorough package-
design evaluation, was conducted online using our Logician® survey software and virtual shopping module.
The analysis focused on the shopping exercises carried out by the respondents. The detailed package
evaluation would provide diagnostic feedback to enhance our understanding of the virtual-shopping results.
The ultimate goal was to determine which package design was strongest at generating sales for the client’s
products.

First, Decision Analyst created the digital images for the virtual retail
shelves and constructed four shelf sets, each with approximately 150
facings. The shelves were representative of a typical plan-o-gram
for the appropriate toy aisles of a big-box retailer. Two pairs of aisles
were built: one pair contained the client’s current package, and the
other aisle displayed the test design. All other elements of each
aisle remained constant. Based on demographics of their children
and recent shopping behavior, respondents viewed one appropriate
toy aisle for their shopping exercise.

During the shopping task, we observed and recorded every
interaction shoppers had with packages. Respondents could
“pick up” a toy with a mouse click. Multiple sides of each package
could be viewed, and toys could be put back on a shelf or in a

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

A Rose of Any Other Color… (Continued)
Copyright © 2017 Decision Analyst. All rights reserved.

virtual-shopping cart. Shoppers could examine, replace, or purchase as many toys as they wished. Next,
respondents focused on one version of the client’s package and were asked to evaluate several aspects
of it. We asked questions to understand the imagery the packages portrayed and interest the packages
elicited in the products.

Results

The virtual-shopping exercise showed that the proposed changes would positively impact the brand’s sales.
The new packaging attracted more attention and generated more shopper interaction, and the nuanced
package messaging generated even more positive attitudes toward the brand. We also discovered that
shoppers’ behavior was different across the two toy categories. This totally new insight allowed our client
to think about packaging and on-pack or on-shelf messaging in new ways. They learned about more
opportunities to communicate with customers, and that they could send new and different messages to
them right there at the retail shelf. The company adopted the new package color and messaging and has
enjoyed tremendous success with it.

RoseOfAnyOtherColor

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

Case History

Category: Tanning Products

Methods: Proprietary Panel; Custom Research Panel; Tracking Research; Qualitative Research;
Quantitative Research; Attitude, Usage, & Behavior Research

Summary

A large consumer-packaged goods company wanted to gain insights into two consumer groups’ attitudes,
usage, and behaviors toward tanning products over a period of 16 months. This time period of research
was necessary to understand differences in product usage during peak tanning season as well as
off-season.

Strategic Issues

With rising concern of the health effects of tanning (namely skin cancer), and improvements made in self
tanning products, our client wanted to develop a deep understanding of consumers of tanning products,
namely thier shopping and usage behaviors through all seasons.

Research Objectives

The objectives of the research were to:

� Understand behaviors and usage habits of consumers over
several seasons.

� Elicit additional input on usage, such as other products used,
as well as record demographic and lifestyle questions.

� Gain insights into why consumers enter and leave the
category, what products or services they move on to, and
what would motivate them to use tanning products in other
seasons.

Research Design and Methods

The proposed methodology for this research was an online diary
that participants were be required to keep for 16 months.
A proprietary panel of consumers were recruited from Decision
Analyst’s American Consumer Opinion® Online panel, screened,

A Decision Analyst Proprietary Panel of Users

Decision Analyst’s American
Consumer Opinion® Online panel has
more than 7 million members.

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

A Decision Analyst Proprietary Panel of Users (Continued)

and qualified to fall into one of two user groups, depending on product usage. Screening also required that
participants had a digital camera and the ability to upload pictures to the online survey. Once screened,
consumers were asked to participate on an ongoing basis. An appropriate incentive was offered to
encourage continuous participation.

The online survey was programmed so that a survey could not be answered online until the previous
week’s or month’s survey responses had been made. This process encouraged consumers to record their
survey responses in order and as promptly as possible.

The basic survey was 10 minutes in length, and periodically the client team added additional open- or
closed-ended questions (typically once a month) to obtain answers to questions they had that were raised
from the responses, as well as questions about current market conditions and competitive products.
Retention rates remained high, as the survey was of high interest to users. Therefore, no additional
recruiting was needed over the 16-month period.

Qualitative Component

After the first three months of research, the client wanted to better understand the needs, feelings, and
motivations of the consumers. A question was added to the survey asking consumers to participate in a
30-minute, in-depth interview via telephone. An appropriate incentive was offered.

Decision Analyst’s qualitative team conducted 15 in-depth interviews, with the client team monitoring
the calls. A summary report was delivered to the client, along with a CD that included the findings of the
research, as well as audio clips of consumer quotes (actual audio from the telephone interviews).

Results

The client had a number of internal clients from the brand team who had high interest in this research.
New questions were frequently raised and added to the survey to better understand complex shopping
and usage behaviors, competitive threats, and product improvements. The client used the quantitative
and qualitative research for messaging and promotions, as well as input for product refinement and
development. They plan to continue the survey for another 16 months.

ProprietaryPanelTanningProducts

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

Journal of Management R

esearch

Vol. 10, No. 3, December 2010, pp. 135-150

Ethical Issues Encountered by Marketing
Researchers in India
Meenakshi Handa and Anupma Vohra

Abstract

With the growth of the marketing research function, the significance of ethical issues in the field is also
increasing. The validity of research findings and their utilization, respondent willingness to cooperate,
the rights of the various stakeholders in the research process as well as the very credibility of the
profession are impacted by research ethics. This paper provides the findings of an empirical investigation
into the frequency with which major ethical issues are encountered by marketing researchers-in
marketing departments and research agencies in India. The study finds that though the overall reported
frequency of encountering unethical practices is on the lower side, there is nevertheless a general
acknowledgment of the existence of these practices and that opinions on what constitutes unethical
practice is divided with regard to certain issues.

Keywords: Ethics, marketing research, respondent abuse, research integrity

Meenakshi Handa
University School of Management Studies
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University
Kashmere Gate, Delhi 110006

Anupma Vohra
Faculty of Management Studies
University of Delhi, Delhi 110007

INTRODUCTION

Ethics may be viewed as the study of human
conduct with an emphasis on determination of
right and wrong (Fraedrich and Ferrell, 1992).
According to Hunt, Chocko and Wilcox (1984)
ethical problems are essentially relationship
problems since ethical problems occur only when
an individual interacts with other people and
perceives that his/her duties and responsibilities
towards one group are inconsistent with those
towards some other group including one’s own self.

A number of studies on business ethics (Baumhart,
1961; Brenner and Molander, 1977; Murphy and
Laczniak, 1981; Vitell and Muncy, 1992) have
found that some of the most important ethical
problems identified in business are related to

marketing activities. According to Murphy and
Laczniak (1981) “the function within business
firms most often charged with ethical abuse is
marketing” and the most extensive concern about
ethical problems within the field of marketing has
been in the area of marketing research. Ethical
concerns are particularly significant to the field of
marketing research as not only is the effectiveness
of marketing research activities, but the very
credibility of the field depends on public readiness
to cooperate. Ethical issues related to marketing
research have been the subject of several studies
and debates (Bogart, 1962: Blakenship, 1964;
Crawford 1970; Smith, 1974; Tybout and Zaltman,
1974; Bezilla, Joel, Haynes and Elliot 1976; Day
1975; Coney and Murphy, 1976; Coe and Coe,
1976; Schneider, 1977; Frey and Kinnear 1979;
Hunt et al 1984; Ferrell and Skinner, 1988; Skinner,
Ferrell and Dubinsky, 1988; McDaniel, Verille and
Madden, 1985; Akaah and Riordan 1989; Akaah,
1990; Murphy and Laczniak 1992; Ferrell, Hartline
and McDaniel 1998; Malhotra and Miller 1998).

The marketing research industry in India has
witnessed substantial growth in recent years.
Liberalization of the Indian economy since the

136 Journal of Management Research

early nineties has led to unleashing of competitive
forces in many industries. Understanding consumer
needs and monitoring customer attitudes through
marketing research is being viewed by an increasing
number of business organizations as the key to
success. Not only multinationals such as Hindustan
Unilevers, Colgate-Palmolive, Proctor and Gamble,
Whirlpool, General Motors and Frito Lays, with
their tradition of formal marketing research but
also local firms such as Dabur India Ltd., Marico
and Ranbaxy Consumer Healthcare are enhancing
their market research budgets. As the marketing
research industry in the country grows both in
terms of size and number of players there is going
to be an increase in calls for paying more attention
to the rights and responsibilities of all stakeholders
in the research process. Although a vital concern,
ethical issues in marketing research in the Indian
context have not been the focus of any studies.
The importance of giving due regard to ethical
issues cannot be overemphasized. Unethical
practices affect the quality of decision-making
since they can undermine research results (Ferrell
and Skinner 1988). The extent of trust between
users and suppliers can affect the utilization of
research results (Moorman, Zaltman and
Deshpande, 1992). Also, negative perception
towards the profession could lead to legislation as
has been the case in countries such as the United
States where the Federal Trade Commission has
regulated against the use of research as a sales ploy.

This paper in the first part identifies the major
stakeholders in the research process, discusses how
they are likely to be affected by various ethical
challenges in the research process and reviews the
findings of the research done in this area. In the
second part, the paper presents the findings of a
study aimed at identifying the major ethical issues
faced by marketing researchers in India and the
frequency with which these issues are encountered.

STAKEHOLDERS IN MARKETING
RESEARCH

An important focus in the area of marketing
research ethics has been on the rights of the parties
involved in the research process (Murphy and

Laczniak, 1981). According to Malhotra and Miller
(1998), the research process has implications for
five different parties: The public, the respondents,
the clients, the researchers and the research
profession itself.

With regard to the rights of the respondents,
Murphy and Laczniak (1992) point to issues such
as deceptive practices which may include false
promises of anonymity and confidentiality,
incorrect sponsor identification, the use of research
as a sales ploy and misrepresentation of research
procedures. (questionnaire length, follow-up
interview). Also included are invasion of
respondent privacy and abuse of respondents such
as contacting them at an inconvenient time, overly
long interviews and insensitive questions.

The rights of clients relate to protection from
recommendations for unnecessary research,
misrepresentation of limitations of research
design, use of inappropriate analytic techniques,
misleading presentation of data, use of overly
technical language and protection from unqualified
researchers. Other ethical issues in the researcher-
client relationship are concerned with overbilling,
maintaining client confidentiality and avoiding
conflict of interest with other clients.

A researcher also needs protection in certain
matters. It would be unfair for clients to solicit
proposals for research when the preferred supplier
is already decided or to pass on research ideas and
techniques presented by one supplier to another
or to use them in-house. Disclosures by a client of
a research firm’s proprietary techniques,
misrepresentation of research findings, sponsoring
research to obtain predetermined results have been
identified as ethical issues in the researcher- client
relationship

According to Malhotra and Miller (1998) concerns
regarding responsibility towards the public at large
relate to (a) biased research such as using research
designs or methods that would result in misleading
findings (b) incomplete reporting and misreporting.
A study by Akaah and Riordan (1989) amongst US
marketing executives found that a third of the
executives were of the opinion that these practices

Volume 10, Number 3 • December 2010 137

were common. Unprofessional or unethical
marketing research practices are likely to negatively
impact the public’s willingness to cooperate in
surveys (Crawford 1970; Day, 1975; Bezilla et al.,
1976; Frey and Kinnear, 1979; Tybout and
Zaltman, 1974).

If marketing research is to be recognized as a
profession then it should be the endeavor to ensure
the right methods and the highest ethical standards.
The issue of certification of the profession is a
relevant one in this regard.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The extant literature on the subject of ethical
issues in marketing research mainly focuses on two
areas: (a) identifying the major ethical concerns in
marketing research and attitudes towards them (b)
studying the antecedents of unethical/ethical
practices in marketing research.

Identification of and Attitudes towards
Ethical Issues

Bogart (1962) addressed the dilemma faced by the
marketing researcher because of his dual
orientation as a professional and enumerated four
kinds of ethical problems in marketing research (i)
researcher honesty in doing what he purports to do
(ii) distortion in selection of research techniques in
order to produce desired findings (iii) judgment in
undertaking research projects which the researcher
knows will fail to yield the information his client
or employer wants, and (iv) respondent concerns
related to the purpose and sponsorship of a study.
Similarly, Blankenship (1964) identified ethical
issues as being involved in (i) the conflict of
interest in ownership and management of research
firms (for e.g. the research firm being a subsidiary
of an advertising agency (ii) financial aspects of
contract research (for e.g. pricing, entertaining etc.)
and (iii) implementation of research (for e.g.
protection of confidential information).

Crawford (1970) undertook a study wherein a
series of “action” situations from the field of
marketing research was posed to senior marketing

and research personnel. Respondents indicated
disapproval of actions such as use of ultraviolet
ink, hidden tape-recorders and one-way mirrors,
exchange of price-data, ignoring of executive
distortion of research findings, conflicts of
interests involving personal gain, and personnel
situations involving racial and religious
discrimination. Other ethical problems studied
included performing research for obtaining
predetermined conclusions, deliberate use of
technical jargon, selling in the guise of marketing
research, and failure to use research techniques
claimed to be used. Akaah and Riordan (1989)
replicated Crawford’s (1970) study and found
several changes in ethical judgments. In addition,
three organizational factors-extent of ethical
problems within the organization, top management
actions on ethics, and organizational role
(researchers vs. executives)-were found to underlie
differences in ethical judgments.

Smith (1974) used the term ‘pseudo research’ to
refer to marketing research performed to satisfy
needs of organization members other than
information needs. The motives behind pseudo
research may be (a) organizational politics: to meet
the power needs of executives, or to justify
decisions already made, or to serve as a scapegoat
(b) promotion of service: to impress clients or
prospects that the sponsor is sophisticated, modern
or sincere (c) personal satisfaction: to enhance self-
esteem, assuage anxieties and prove as a means for
managers to exercise their skills.

Day (1975) identified three threats to marketing
research that could possibly be controlled:
excessive interviewing, lack of consideration and
abuse of respondents and the use of marketing
research as a sales ploy. McDaniel et al. (1985)
studied the prevalence of the problems identified
by Day (1975) by conducting five surveys at two-
year intervals. The study concluded that all the
three areas investigated warranted attention from
marketing researchers. However, the use of
marketing research as a sales ploy was the greatest
threat as it was most likely to erode the trust of
respondents.

138 Journal of Management Research

An empirical study by Hunt et al. (1984) found that
research integrity, which referred to all dishonest
research practices, was the ethical issue most
frequently identified by both in-house and agency
researchers. The other more frequently identified
issues were those of treating outside clients and
respondents fairly, research confidentiality, and
social issues pertaining to elements of the
marketing mix, personnel issues. The study found
that though marketing researchers perceived many
opportunities for unethical behavior, they perceived
a very low frequency of actual unethical behavior
and that the presence of a professional code of
conduct did not have an impact on respondent
perceptions. Marketing researchers did not believe
that unethical behavior in general led to success in
marketing research.

Bowers (1999) point out technological
developments, in particular, the internet, advances
in telecommunication and the merging of
databases information as providing new
opportunities for research but is also raising several
ethical issues related to individual privacy and data
confidentiality.

A number of cross-national studies have been
undertaken in the area of marketing research
ethics, though they have been limited to developed
nations. Akaah (1990) did not find significant
differences in research ethics attitudes among
marketing professionals in Australia, Canada, Great
Britian, and the United States using Crawford’s
(1970) items. Giacobbe and Segal (2000) too find
that US and Canadian marketing researchers have
similar perceptions of the relative importance of
specific ethical norms.

Antecedents of Unethical/Ethical
Conduct in Marketing Research

A study conducted by Ferrell and Skinner (1988)
found the existence of an ethical code and higher
levels of formalization to be related significantly to
perceived ethical behavior in corporate research
departments, research firms and data
subcontractors. Centralization was related
positively to ethical behavior in research firms only,
and enforcement of ethical codes was related to

ethical behavior in research firms and amongst data
subcontractors. Acceptance of authority and
controls were not found to be related significantly
to ethical behavior in any of the organizations.

Zay-Ferrell, Weaver and Ferrell (1979) found that
differential association with peers and opportunity
is a better predictor of ethical/unethical behavior
amongst marketing managers primarily engaged in
research than the respondent’s own ethical beliefs.
Skinner et al. (1988) also propose that the behavior
of referent others and opportunity to engage in
unethical behaviors are better predictors of
unethical behaviors in marketing research
organizations than the individual’s own ethical
belief system..

Ferrell et al. (1998) found that marketing research
firms and data-subcontractors tend to possess and
enforce internal codes of ethics, and were aware of
and enforced external codes of ethics, to a much
greater extent than corporate research departments.
This was explained by the marketing research
firms’ and data subcontractors’ desire to maintain
control mechanisms that provide evidence of the
quality of their service. Malhotra and Miller (1998)
developed an integrated model for ethical decision-
making in marketing research that incorporates
various perspectives and stakeholders. The
cognitive moral development (CMD) of the
decision maker determines the manner in which an
ethical issue will be treated. A set of alternative
solutions to the problem is identified and evaluated
by the decision-maker from the perspective of one
or more of the ethical philosophies. The action or
behavior actually undertaken and the outcome feed
back into the management of the marketing
research process.

Studying the influence of cultural dimensions on
marketing research professionals’ reported ethical
research behavior, Akaah (1993) found that
marketing research professionals in organizations
of bureaucratic-innovative-supportive culture
reflect the highest reported research ethics
behavior, followed by those in organizations of
innovative-supportive and bureaucratic-only
cultures.

Volume 10, Number 3 • December 2010 139

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study attempts to measure the perceptions of
marketing researchers in India regarding the
frequency with which various situations with
ethical dimensions are encountered in marketing
research.

Data Collection Procedure and Sample

Primary data for the study was collected through
two structured questionnaires which formed part
of a larger study on the status of marketing
research in India. Respondents for the first
questionnaire were executives heading the
marketing research function/ marketing executives
handling the marketing research function in
business organizations using formalized marketing
research – that is, marketing research for which a
specific budget was allocated. To identify business
organizations using marketing research the
membership list of the Market Research Society of
India (MRSI) was used as a preliminary starting
point. In order to include other marketing research

users a combination of judgmental and snowball
sampling was used thereafter. Data was collected
through personal interviews and e-mail. A total of
132 business organizations participated in the
study.

The target respondents for the second
questionnaire were heads/senior personnel in
market research agencies. Here again, the
membership list of the Market Research Society of
India was used as an initial starting point.
Thereafter, snowball sampling was used. Marketing
research agencies with offices/branches located in
the National Capital Territory of Delhi and in
Mumbai were approached through personal visits,
after prior telephonic appointments. In all, data was
obtained from 35 research agencies. As per
industry sources, these 35 agencies together
represent more than 70 % of the outsourced
marketing research in the country. Tables 1 to 3
present a profile of participating user
organizations, research agencies and the
respondents.

Table 1: Business Organizations using Formal Marketing Research: Description of Sample by Annual
Sales Turnover and Industry Type (Figures in $ million)

Annual Sales Turnover*

Group A Group B Group C Group D Total
Above $ 450 $ 225 to $ 450 $ 110 to $ 225 Below $ 110

No. % of Total No. % of Total No. % of Total No. % of Total No. % of Total
Industry Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample

Consumer Non-Durables 5 3.8 5 3.8 15 11.4 18 13.6 43 32.6

Consumer Durables 10 7.6 8 6.1 9 6.8 8 6.1 35 26.5

Industrial Products 4 3.0 3 2.3 8 6.1 5 3.8 20 15.1

Services 6 4.6 4 3.0 10 7.6 14 10.6 34 25.8

Total 25 18.9 20 15.2 42 31.8 45 34.1 132 100.0

* Information on Annual Sales Turnover collected in ` and converted into US$

Table 2: Market Research Agencies: Description of Sample by Annual Turnover (Figures in $ million)

Classification by Size
(Annual Turnover from MarketingResearch*) Number % of total sample

Group A Agencies: $ 2.25 million and Above 15 42.9

Group B Agencies: Below $ 2.25 million 20 57.1

Total 35 100.0

* Information on Annual Turnover from Marketing Research collected in ` and converted into US$

140 Journal of Management Research

Table 3: Work Experience Profile of Respondents

User Organizations MR Agencies

Years of Work Experience Number % of Sample Number % of Sample

> 10 Years 30 22.7 21 60

5-9 years 80 60.6 14 40

< 5 years 22 16.7 Nil Nil

Total 132 100.0 35 100

Development and Testing of Data
Collection Instruments

Subsequent to a review of the extant literature
preliminary interviews/discussions were conducted
with heads of research units in marketing user
organizations, and heads/senior persons from
marketing research agencies. These persons had
between eight to twenty years of experience in their
field of work. A large pool of statements reflecting
various situations with ethical dimensions relevant
to marketing research was generated. From this
pool, items were selected such that they each
represented different aspects of the construct
being studied and together represented the
construct as comprehensively as possible.
Respondents were required to indicate their
perceptions regarding the frequency with which
these situations were encountered in the conduct
of marketing research on a five-point scale ranging
from “Very Infrequently” to “Very Frequently”.
The option of indicating if a respondent did not
perceive a particular situation to be an ethical issue
was also provided.

The questionnaires were presented to academic
experts for evaluation and after revisions based on
the feedback were pretested through personally
administered pretests with the relevant respondent
groups and necessary modifications were
incorporated. The final versions of the
questionnaires contained eighteen items.

STUDY FINDINGS

Perceptions of Marketing Research
Managers

Tables 4 and 5 present the perceptions of

marketing research managers regarding the
frequency with which situations involving ethical
issues/ dilemmas were encountered in the conduct
of marketing research in India.

Hiding the real identity of the sponsor from
respondents ranked the highest in terms of
frequency of encounter, with 52 percent of
marketing research executives rating the issue as
being frequently or very frequently encountered.
However, 27 percent of the marketing research
executives were of the opinion that this was not
really an ethical issue and that hiding the identity
of sponsors was required for the research to serve
its purpose and that it really did not harm the
average respondent’s interest if he/she was not
informed about the identity of the sponsor.

Hiding the real purpose of the study ranked as the
second issue in terms of frequency of encounter,
with 35 percent of the respondents giving it a
rating as being frequently or very frequently
encountered in the conduct of marketing research.
In the case of this issue, 34 percent of the
marketing research managers participating in the
study were of the opinion that this was not an
ethical issue really as long as the respondents’
interests were not affected.

Interviewer dishonesty at the field level ranked as
the third issue in terms of frequency of encounter,
with 33 percent of the respondents giving it a
rating as being frequently or very frequently
encountered. Some of the respondents qualified
their rating with the statement that although they
may not have encountered many actual cases of
interviewer cheating, they had to be constantly
vigilant about this. Although the overall frequency

Volume 10, Number 3 • December 2010 141

may not be very high, the fact remains that data
collection is the basic foundation on which the
quality of research depends and doubts about
interviewer integrity can cause the overall research
findings and conclusions to be treated with
skepticism.

Recommendations by agencies for use of

proprietary research models lacking proper
validation/other inappropriate methods, and lack
of proper implementation and validation of
fieldwork were rated as the fourth and fifth most
frequently encountered ethical issues in the
conduct of marketing research. Both the issues
have received a rating of frequent or very frequent
from 11 percent of the respondents.

Contd. . .

Table 4: Ethical Issues Encountered in the Conduct of Marketing Research in India: Perceptions of
Marketing Research Managers

Frequently or Very Neither Frequently Infrequently or
Frequently Encountered nor Infrequently Very Infrequently

(% Respondents) Encountered Encountered
Ethical Issue (% Respondents) (% Respondents)

(i) Hiding the real identity of 52.3 18.9 1.5
sponsors of a project from
respondents.*

(ii) Hiding the real purpose of
the project from respondents. ** 35.3 28.1 2.4

(iii) Interviewer dishonesty with
regard to following conditions,
specifications and instructions
for field work. 32.6 56.0 11.4

(iv) Recommendations by agencies
for use of proprietary research
models lacking proper validation 10.6 56.8 32.6

(v) Lack of proper implementation
and validation of fieldwork 10.6 53.0 36.4

(vi) Use of data from one project in
a related project by agencies. 3.8 43.2 53.1

(vii) Recommendations to clients by
agencies for unnecessary/overly
expensive research 2.3 22.2 75.5

(viii) Pressure from management to
modify/misrepresent research
results to support a predetermined
point of view 2.3 5.3 92.4

(ix) Use of marketing research as a
sales ploy. 0.8 18.9 80.3

(x) Not being able to protect the
anonymity of respondents when
they have been led to believe that
their anonymity will be ensured. 0.8 3.0 96.2

(xi) Violation of client confidentiality
by research agencies. 0.0 14.4 85.6

142 Journal of Management Research

Frequently or Very Neither Frequently Infrequently or
Frequently Encountered nor Infrequently Very Infrequently
(% Respondents) Encountered Encountered
Ethical Issue (% Respondents) (% Respondents)

(xii) Use of gifts, bribes and entertainment
by agencies in order to secure
marketing research business 0.0 12.1 87.9

(xiii) Pressure from management to modify
design/ methods for a research project
in order to arrive at predetermined
conclusions. 0.0 5.3 84.7

(xiv) Pressure from sales department
to provide respondent details to be
used as sales leads 0.0 4.5 95.5

(xv) Abuse of respondents
(e.g.harassment for cooperation,
overburdening ) 0.0 3.8 96.2

(xvi) Use of hidden tape recorders/cameras
etc. without the knowledge of
respondents 0.0 0.8 99.2

(xvii) Solicitation of research proposals by
clients when agency is already
predetermined / to obtain research ideas 0.0 0.0 100.0

(xviii) Use of respondent identification
techniques although an anonymous
survey is promised. 0.0 0.0 100.0

(xix) Others 11.4 18.9 9.8

* 27 percent of the respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue.

** 34 % percent of the respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue

n = 132

More than fifty percent of the respondents have
rated both the issues as being encountered neither
frequently nor infrequently. Also, they have
received an overall mean rating of 2.77 and 2.74
respectively.

All the remaining issues presented to the
respondents regarding ethical dilemmas received an
overall rating of 2.18 or less with not more than 2
percent of the respondents rating the issue as being
encountered frequently or very frequently. Thus
issues like protection of respondent identity, abuse
of respondents, use of marketing research as a
sales ploy, unethical methods to secure marketing
research business, pressures from management to
modify research design or research results so as to

support a predetermined point of view were
mainly perceived to be encountered infrequently or
very infrequently.

The comparison of responses of marketing
research managers classified according to industry
type presented in Table 5 indicates no significant
differences other than with regard to three areas.
In the case of implementation of field work by
agencies respondents from consumer product
organizations perceived the problem as being
encountered somewhat more frequently than those
in the other two industries. With fewer number of
buyers, managers in organizations manufacturing
industrial products are likely to be obtaining a
considerable amount of feedback and inputs for

Volume 10, Number 3 • December 2010 143

decision-making through direct customer contact.
Webster (1978) noted that as compared to
consumer products, industrial product transactions
are characterized by “stronger buyer seller
interdependence through limited sourcing and
technical interrelationships”. Similarly, in the case
of services, the different kinds of service
encounters provide opportunities for data
collection. On the other hand, the customers for
consumer goods tend to be large in number and
also widely dispersed geographically, often with
several intermediaries between the firm and the
end-consumer. There is thus greater dependence
on independent field work for data collection. This
may be the reason for executives in consumer
product organizations to perceive this as a more
severe problem.

The use of data from one project in a related
project by agencies is perceived to be encountered
more frequently by respondents in the service
industry. However, the researchers in this study
could not ascribe any specific reason for this. In
the case of use of respondent identification
techniques the overall rating given to the issue was
1.02 thereby indicating that overall the practice
involved was seen as taking place very infrequently.

Ethical Issues in Marketing Research:
Perceptions of Marketing Research
Agency Personnel

Tables 6 and 7 present the perception of marketing
research agency personnel regarding the frequency
with which situations involving ethical issues are
encountered in the conduct of marketing research.

Hiding the identity of sponsors received the
highest rating with 46 percent of agency
researchers giving it a rating of 4 or more. Six
percent of the marketing research agency personnel
were of the opinion that this was not an ethical
issue and that hiding the identity of the sponsors
was sometimes required for a study.

Hiding the real purpose of the research ranked
second in terms of frequency of encounter, with
46 percent of the respondents giving it a rating of

4 or more. About 9 percent of the marketing
research agency personnel did not consider ethics
to be involved in the situation.

Interviewer dishonesty ranked third in terms of
frequency, but only 14 percent of agency personnel
gave it a rating of 4 or more and the overall rating
was 2.69. The perceptions of marketing research
managers and marketing research agency personnel
seem to differ on this issue, with the former rating
it as being more frequently encountered than the
latter. It is possible that agency personnel were
more cautious in responding about an important
aspect of the research process, the quality of which
they were responsible for maintaining. All other
situations presented received a rating of 2.26 or
less from agency personnel, indicating that
according to the respondents these issues were
encountered either infrequently or very
infrequently in the conduct of marketing research.

There were significant differences between
marketing research agency personnel and marketing
research managers with regard to several other
issues also. Recommendations by agencies for use
of proprietary research models lacking proper
validation, lack of proper implementation and
validation of field work, recommendations to
clients for unnecessary/overly expensive research,
use of hidden tape recorders etc., and use of gifts
etc. were issues which received a higher overall
mean rating from marketing research managers.
Issues such as pressure from clients/management
to modify research design or research results and
solicitation of research proposals, were rated by
agency personnel as being encountered more
frequently. It seems that each group is more
cautious in rating aspects for which their own
group members are responsible.

CONCLUSION

The study finds that overall marketing research
personnel in India, as their counterparts in other
countries, are aware of and acknowledge the
existence of various ethical challenges in their
profession. The overall reported frequency of
encountering many of the unethical practices is,

144
Journal of M

anagem
ent R

esearch

Table 5: Frequency of Encounter of Ethical Issues in the Conduct of Marketing Research-Perceptions of Marketing Research Managers
across Industries–Descriptive Statistics and One-Way ANOVA

Industry Consumer Consumer Industrial
Situation Total Sample Non-Durables Durables Products Services ANOVA

Mean Std. Dev. R Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. FValue

(i) Hiding the real identity of sponsors 3.72 0.59 1 3.76 0.79 3.78 0.42 3.53 0.52 3.72 0.46 0.617
of a project from respondentsa

(ii) Hiding the real purpose of the project 3.52 0.60 2 3.59 0.50 3.67 0.61 3.39 0.61 3.36 0.68 1.743
from respondentsb

(iii) Interviewer dishonesty with regard to 3.23 0.68 3 3.26 0.73 3.31 0.72 2.95 0.69 3.29 0.52 1.465
following conditions, specifications
and instructions for field work

(iv) Recommendations by agencies for 2.77 0.65 4 2.72 0.67 2.86 0.60 2.65 0.75 2.79 0.64 0.522
use of proprietary research models
lacking proper validation/other
inappropriate methods

(v) Use of data from one project in a 2.45 0.67 5 2.53 0.55 2.54 0.66 2.60 0.82 2.15 0.66 3.276*
related project by agencies

(vi) Lack of proper implementation 2.20 0.63 6 2.67 0.65 2.36 0.73 2.10 0.51 2.01 0.56 6.255**
and validation of fieldwork

(vii) Recommendations to clients by 2.18 0.62 7 2.14 0.71 2.23 0.49 2.20 0.77 2.18 0.52 0.139
agencies for unnecessary/overly
expensive research

(viii) Violation of client confidentiality by 1.99 0.55 8 1.98 0.56 2.14 0.60 2.00 0.46 1.85 0.50 1.666
research agencies

(ix) Use of marketing research as a 1.92 0.71 9 2.05 0.79 1.80 0.83 1.75 0.44 1.97 0.58 1.233
sales ploy

(x) Use of gifts, bribes and entertainment 1.74 0.66 10 1.84 0.69 1.80 0.72 1.80 0.62 1.53 0.56 1.634
by agencies in order to secure
marketing research business

(xi) Abuse of respondents (e.g. 1.49 0.57 11 1.63 0.62 1.49 0.51 1.40 0.68 1.38 0.49 1.408
harassment for cooperation,
overburdening)

Contd. . .

V
olum

e 10, N
um

ber 3
•

D
ecem

ber 2010
145

(xii) Pressure from management to modify/ 1.40 0.70 12 1.44 0.73 1.49 0.85 1.45 0.60 1.24 0.50 0.892
misrepresent research results to
support a predetermined point of view

(xiii) Pressure from sales department to 1.28 0.54 13 1.35 0.61 1.31 0.63 1.20 0.41 1.21 0.41 0.627
provide respondent details to be
used as sales leads

(xiv) Pressure from management to modify 1.28 0.56 13 1.33 0.61 1.26 0.56 1.15 0.37 1.32 0.59 0.542
design/methods for a research project
in order to arrive at predetermined
conclusions

(xv) Solicitation of research proposals by 1.27 0.45 15 1.26 0.44 1.20 0.41 1.40 0.50 1.29 0.46 0.893
clients when agency is already
predetermine/to obtain research ideas

(xvi) Not being able to protect the anonymity 1.25 0.54 16 1.35 0.69 1.20 0.41 1.30 0.66 1.15 0.36 1.035
of respondents when they have been
led to believe that their anonymity will
be ensured

(xvii) Use of hidden tape recorders/cameras 1.15 0.38 17 1.19 0.45 1.20 0.41 1.10 0.31 1.09 0.29 0.739
etc. without the knowledge of
respondents

(xviii) Use of respondent identification 1.02 0.15 18 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.09 0.29 3.065*
techniques although an anonymous
survey is promised

(xix) Others 1.24 1.59 – 1.14 1.63 1.00 1.48 1.50 1.64 1.47 1.66 –

n = 132

R = Rank
a 27 % of the respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue
b 17 % of the respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue

Responses on a scale from 1 to 5 with 1=Very Infrequently and 5=Very frequently

* Significant at 0.05 level

Industry Consumer Consumer Industrial
Situation Total Sample Non-Durables Durables Products Services ANOVA
Mean Std. Dev. R Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. FValue

146 Journal of Management Research

Table 6: Ethical Issues Encountered in the Conduct of Marketing Research-Perceptions of Marketing
Research Agency Personnel

Issue Frequently or Very Neither Frequently Infrequently or
Frequently Encountered or Infrequently Very Infrequently

% Respondents Encountered Encountered
% Respondents % Respondents

(i) Hiding the real identity of sponsors 48.5 51.5 0.0
of a project from respondents*

(ii) Hiding the real purpose of the 50.0 46.9 3.1
project from respondents**

(iii) Interviewer dishonesty with regard 14.3 42.9 42.8
to following specifications and
instructions for field work

(iv) Recommendations by agencies 8.6 11.4 80.0
for use of proprietary research
models lacking proper validation

(v) Pressure from clients/management 5.8 17.1 77.1
to modify/ misrepresent research
results to support a predetermined
point of view

(vi) Lack of proper implementation 5.7 14.3 80.0
and validation of fieldwork by agencies

(vii) Pressure from management to modify 2.9 26.5 70.6
design/ methods for a research project
in order to arrive at predetermined
conclusions

(viii) Use of marketing research as 2.9 22.8 74.3
a sales ploy

(ix) Solicitation of research proposals 2.9 17.1 80.0
by clients when agency is already
predetermined / to obtain research ideas

(x) Recommendations to clients by 0.0 20.0 80.0
agencies for unnecessary/overly
expensive research

(xi) Violation of client confidentiality 0.0 11.4 88.6
by research agencies

(xii) Use of data from one project in a 0.0 5.7 94.3
related project by agencies

(xiii) Pressure from client/sales 0.0 2.9 97.1
department to provide respondent
details to be used as sales leads

(xiv) Not being able to protect the 0.0 0.0 100.0
anonymity of respondents when
they have been led to believe that
their anonymity will be ensured

Contd. . .

Volume 10, Number 3 • December 2010 147

(xv) Use of hidden tape recorders/ 0.0 0.0 100.0
cameras etc. without the knowledge
of respondents

(xiv) Use of respondent identification 0.0 0.0 100.0
techniques although an anonymous
survey is promised

(xvii) Abuse of respondents (e.g. harass- 0.0 0.0 100.0
ment for participation, overburdening)

(xviii) Use of gifts, bribes and entertainment 0.0 0.0 100.0
by agencies in order to secure
marketing research business

(xix) Others ( Delayed payments, 2.9 22.8 74.3
over-bargaining etc.)

* 6 % of respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue

** 9 % of respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue

n = 35

Issue Frequently or Very Neither Frequently Infrequently or
Frequently Encountered or Infrequently Very Infrequently
% Respondents Encountered Encountered
% Respondents % Respondents
Contd. . .

Table 7: Ethical Issues Encountered in the Conduct of Marketing Research-Perceptions of Marketing
Research Agency Personnel – Descriptive Statistics and Comparison with Marketing Research Managers

Situation MR Agency Personnel Comparison with
MR Mgrs.-t test

Mean Std. Dev. Rank t value Sig.

(i) Hiding the real identity of sponsors 3.52a 0.57 1 1.721 .088
of a project from respondents a

(ii) Hiding the real purpose of the 3.47b 0.57 2 .414 .679
project from respondents b

(iii) Interviewer dishonesty with regard 2.69 0.87 3 3.479 .001*
to following specifications and
instructions for field works

(iv) Recommendations by agencies for 2.26 0.66 4 4.090 .000*
use of proprietary research models
lacking proper validation

(v) Use of marketing research as 2.14 0.70 5 -1.684 .094
a sales ploy

(vi) Lack of proper implementation and 1.97 0.82 6 5.745 .000*
validation of fieldwork by agencies

(vii) Pressure from clients/ management 1.94 0.87 7 -4.268 .000*
to modify design/ methods for a
research project in order to arrive at
predetermined conclusions

148 Journal of Management Research

Situation MR Agency Personnel Comparison with
MR Mgrs.-t test
Mean Std. Dev. Rank t value Sig.

(viii) Solicitation of research proposals 1.94 0.77 7 -4.964 .000*
by clients when agency is already
predetermined / to obtain research
ideas

(ix) Pressure from clients/management 1.91 0.98 9 -3.527- .001*
to modify/ misrepresent research
results to support a predetermined
point of view

(x) Recommendations to clients by 1.83 0.75 10 2.575 .013*
agencies for unnecessary/overly
expensive research

(xi) Violation of client confidentiality 1.63 0.70 11 2.891 .006*
by research agencies

(xii) Use of gifts, bribes and entertain- 1.51 0.51 12 1.897 .060*
ment by agencies in order to
secure business

(xiii) Abuse of respondents (e.g. 1.49 0.51 13 .063 .950
harassment for participation,
overburdening)

(xiv) Pressure from client/sales 1.43 0.56 14 -1.428 .155
department to provide respondent
details to be used as sales leads

(xv) Use of data from one project in 1.31 0.58 15 9.900 .000*
a related project by agencies

(xvi) Not being able to protect the 1.20 0.41 16 .507 .613
anonymity of respondents when
they have been led to believe that
their anonymity will be ensured

(xvii) Use of hidden tape recorders/ 1.03 0.17 17 2.811 .006*
cameras etc. without the
knowledge of respondents

(xviii) Use of respondent identification 1.00 0.00 18 .897 .317
techniques although an
anonymous survey is promised

(xix) Others 1.09 1.40 – –

Measured on a scale from 1 to 5 with 1=Very Infrequently and 5=Very frequently.
a 6 % of respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue.
b 9 % of respondents did not consider this to be an ethical issue.

* Significant at 0.05 level.

Volume 10, Number 3 • December 2010 149

nevertheless, on the lower side.

A substantial section of marketing research
managers and a smaller number of agency
personnel participating in the study were of the
opinion that hiding the real identity of the sponsor
and the purpose of the research from respondents
was sometimes required for meeting the objectives
of a study and may not be strictly termed as
unethical as long as it does not harm the interests
of the parties involved. This is consistent with the
findings of other studies also. For example, Akaah
and Riordan (1989) found that only 30 percent of
marketing professional surveyed disapproved of
the practice of hiding the real identity of the
sponsors. Nevertheless, the issue does raise ethical
questions and as far as possible requires measures
such as informing about the true identity and
purpose of the study after the data collection has
been completed.

Interviewer dishonesty with regard to following the
specifications and instructions for field work
ranked as the third ethical issue in terms of
frequency of encounter. This is part of the
category of issues which have been collectively
termed as research integrity (Hunt et al., 1984) and
is concerned with the very credibility of the
research function and needs ensuring that no
compromises are made in this area. Not only are
compromises in research design, execution and
reporting, unethical but they also make poor
marketing strategy in the long run (Schneider and
Holmes, 1982).

Marketing research managers and research agency
personnel differ with regard to perceptions about
the frequency of encounter of a number of ethical
issues. In almost all cases where differences exist,
each group tends to rate issues pertaining to their
own group as much less frequently encountered
than do members of the other group.

REFERENCES

Akaah, I. P. (1990), Attitudes of Marketing Professionals towards Ethics in Marketing Research: A Cross-national Comparison,
Journal of Business Ethics, 9: 45-53.

Akaah, I. P. (1993), Organizational Culture and Ethical Research Behavior, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(1): 59-63.

Akaah, I. P. and Riordan, E. A. (1989), Judgments of Marketing Professionals about Ethical Issues in Marketing Research: A
Replication and Extension, Journal of Marketing Research, 26 (February): 112-20.

Baumhart, R. C. (1961), How Ethical are Businessmen? Harvard Business Review, 39(4): 6-19.

Bezilla, R., Joel, B., Haynes, J. B. and Elliot, C. (1976), Ethics in Marketing Research, Business Horizons, 19(April): 83-86.

Blankenship, A. B. (1964), Some Aspects of Ethics in Marketing Research, Journal of Marketing Research, 1(May): 26-31.

Brenner, S. N. and Molander, E. A. (1977), Is the Ethics of Business Changing, Harvard Business Review, 55, (January-February):
57-71.

Bogart L. (1962), The Researcher’s Dilemma, Journal of Marketing, 26 (January): 6-11.

Bowers D. (1999), A Snapshot of US Research, Market Research, (Fall): 34-35.

Coe, T. L. and Coe, B. (1976), Marketing Research: The Search for Professionalism, in Bernhardt, K. L. (Ed.), Marketing: 1776-
1976, and Beyond, pp. 257-9, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL.

Coney, K. A. and Murphy. J. H. (1976), Attitudes of Marketers toward Ethical and Professional Marketing Research Practices, in
Nash, Henry W. and Robin, Donald P. (Eds.), Proceedings: Southern Marketing Association, pp. 172-4.

Crawford, M. C. (1970), Attitudes of Marketing Executives toward Ethics in Marketing Research, Journal of Marketing , 34 (April):
46-52.

Day, G. S. (1975), The Threats to Marketing Research, Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (November): 462-467.

Day, R. L. (1975), Comment on Ethics in Marketing Research – Their Practical Relevance, Journal of Marketing Research, 12(May):
232-3.

150 Journal of Management Research

Ferrell, O. C. and Skinner, S. J. (1988), Ethical Behavior and Bureaucratic Structure in Marketing Research Organizations, Journal
of Marketing Research, XXV(February): 103-109.

Ferrell, O. C., Hartline, M. D. and McDaniel, S. W. (1998), Code of Ethics among Corporate Research Departments, Marketing
Research Firms and Data Subcontractors: An Examination of a Three Communities Metaphor, Journal of Business Ethics,
17: 503-516.

Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, O. C. (1992), Cognitive Consistency of Marketing Managers in Ethical Situations, Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 20(3): 245-252.

Frey, C. J. and Kinnear, T. C. (1979), Legal Constraints and Marketing Research: Review and Call to Action, Journal of Marketing
Research, 16(August): 295-302.

Giacobbe, R. W. and Segal, M. N. (2000), A Comparative Analysis of Ethical Perceptions in Marketing Research: USA vs. Canada,
Journal of Business Ethics, 27(3): 229-245.

Hunt, S. D., Chocko, L. B. and Wilcox, J. B. (1984) Ethical Problems of Marketing Researchers, Journal of Marketing Research,
21(August): 309-24.

Malhotra, N. K. and Miller, G. L. (1998), An Integrated Model for Ethical Decisions in Marketing Research, Journal of Business
Ethics, (17): 263-268.

McDaniel, S. W., Verille, P. and Madden, C. S. (1985), The Threats to Marketing Research: An Empirical Reappraisal, Journal of
Marketing Research, 22(February): 74-80.

Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Deshpande, R. (1992), Relationships between Providers and Users of Market Research: The
Dynamics of Trust Within and between Organizations, Journal of Marketing Research, 24: 314-328.

Murphy, P. E. and Laczniak, G. R. (1981), Marketing Ethics: A Review with Implications for Managers, Educators and Researchers,
in Enis, B. M. and Roering, K. J. (Eds.), Review of Marketing, pp. 251-66, American Marketing Association, Chicago.

Murphy P. E. and Laczniak G. R. (1992), Traditional Ethical Issues Facing Marketing Researchers, Marketing Research: A Magazine
of Management and Applications, March: 8-21.

Schneider, K. C. (1977), Subject and Respondent Abuse in Marketing Research, MSU Business Topics, 25(Spring): 13-19.

Schneider, K. C. and Holm, C. K. (1982), Deceptive Practices in Marketing Research: The Consumer’s Viewpoint, California
Management Review, 24(Spring): 89-96.

Skinner, S. J., Ferrell, O. C. and Dubinsky, A. J. (1988), Organizational Dimensions of Marketing Research Ethics, Journal of Business
Research, 16(May): 209-23.

Smith S. A. (1974), Research and Pseudo-research in Marketing, Harvard Business Review, (March-April): 73-76.

Tybout, A. M. and Zaltman, G. (1974), Ethics in Marketing Research: Their Practical Relevance, Journal of Marketing Research,
11(November): 357-68.

Vitell, S. J. and Muncy, J. (1992), Consumer Ethics: An Empirical Investigation of Factors Influencing Ethical Judgments of the
Final Consumer, Journal of Business Ethics, 11: 585-97.

Webster, F. E. Jr. (1978), Is Industrial Marketing Coming of Age? in Bonoma, T. V. and Zaltman, G. (Eds.), Review of Marketing,
pp. 138-59, American Marketing Association, Chicago.

Zay-Ferrell M., Weaver, K. and Ferrell, O. C. (1979), Predicting Unethical Behavior among Marketing Practitioners, Human Relations,
32(July): 557-569.

content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Case History

Category: Skincare System

Methods: Time-Extended™ Online Focus Groups, Global Research, Research in China

Summary

A multinational personal-care products manufacturer was interested in expanding its skincare business in
China and wanted to identify the unique needs and applications to deliver a pipeline of skincare products
specially designed for Asian consumers.

Strategic Issues

As one of the largest emerging markets, China has had rapid economic
growth in the past few years, and it has become a very attractive and
lucrative market with great potential for new endeavors and foreign investors.
Like most modern women from all over the world, Chinese women are
becoming more and more interested in personal-care and beauty products
and concerned with keeping their skin’s youthful appearance and overall
healthy look.

Research Objectives

The primary objective was to assess the credibility of the concepts that had been developed and the
market potential for new skincare products in China. The purpose of the research was to identify key
differences and similarities between performing in-home beauty treatments on their own, compared to
receiving beauty treatments at a salon with professional staff.

Research Design and Methods

Decision Analyst had previously conducted a qualitative study for this client. After results had been
analyzed, the client asked Decision Analyst to explore and strengthen propositions taken forward from
the previous research, to redefine and strengthen those propositions, and to make strong links between
identified unmet needs and propositions. In addition, Decision Analyst helped to identify the new products’
benefits and credibility, as well as pinpointed ways to increase the appeal and believability of the concepts.

China: A New World of Possibilities

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

The research was conducted with the Time-Extended™ online
methodology, which allowed for the gathering of in-depth
reactions from target consumers living throughout the world
at the most convenient times for the consumers. Decision
Analyst’s experience developing and using online forums, along
with its worldwide panel of 8+ million consumers, made this a
feasible and effective methodology. Decision Analyst recruited
and invited participants living in two major and affluent tier-one
cities in China to participate in the forums. The study included
a total of six forums divided into three segments based on
age, income, and skin type. These written discussions were
conducted in Simplified Chinese.

Results

Overall, the discussions revealed that the concepts were viewed positively and indicated a probability of
success. The respondents believed the concepts would help them achieve salon-quality results while
performing skincare treatments in their home, and they expressed a universal need for the concepts. The
research results indicated which concepts resonated most with the respondents and, thus, warranted
further development. Decision Analyst recommended modifications to winning concepts based on
elements that were seen positively and elements that were seen negatively. The results pointed the client’s
new product development team in a direction that would enable the manufacturer to expand its skincare
business in China.

China: A New World of Possibilities (Continued)

604 Avenue H East • Arlington, TX 76011-3100, USA
1.817.640.6166 or 1.800.ANALYSIS • www.decisionanalyst.com

Forewarning & Debriefing as Remedies to Deception in Consumer Research:
An Empirical Study

Jill Gabrielle Klein, INSEAD
N. Craig Smith, London Business School

ABSTRACT
This research examines the effectiveness of forewarning and

debriefing as measures to mitigate the use of deception in consumer
research. Findings from an exploratory study suggest that these
remedial measures may not only improve practice, but also lower
respondent concern and increase the likelihood of research partici-
pation. Implications for researchers are discussed.

INTRODUCTION
Unethical practices have been blamed for reduced consumer

willingness to participate in research (e.g., Bearden, Madden and
Uscategui 1998). While some of these practices are clearly avoid-
able, other practices are arguably unavoidable, particularly some
deceptive practices. Forewarning and debriefing have been pro-
posed as remedial measures to mitigate the use of deception, but
doubts have been raised about the extent and adequacy of their use
by consumer researchers (Toy, Wright and Olson 2001) and re-
spondent reactions to these measures are largely unexplored. In this
paper, we examine the effectiveness of forewarning and debriefing
as measures to mitigate the use of deception. First, we look at how
deception is addressed in psychology as a basis for proposing
appropriate remedial measures. We then report an exploratory
study where respondents evaluated four common deceptive prac-
tices in a market research context that researchers might consider
justifiable (primarily to eliminate demand characteristics).

REMEDIAL MEASURES TO MITIGATE
DECEPTION

Ethical principles governing psychological research origi-
nated with the Nuremberg trials of 1947 and the Nuremberg Code
can be seen as the basis of all subsequent guidelines governing
experimentation with human participants (Schüler 1982). Volun-
tary participation and informed consent are fundamental prerequi-
sites. The first American Psychological Association (APA) code
was approved in 1953 and made substantially more stringent in the
1973 and subsequent revisions, particularly in light of controversy
over the Milgram obedience experiments (Baumrind 1964). The
guiding principles are perceived to be exacting, though they are to
be applied within a cost-benefit framework, resulting in debates
about the code ‘ s interpretation and implementation (Kimmel 1996).

The distinction we have made between avoidable and appar-
ently unavoidable but problematic practices in consumer research
is consistent with the APA approach to deception. The current
version of the code (APA 1992; under revision for 2002) requires
that deception not be used if it is avoidable. If an alternative
procedure is not feasible, the use of deceptive techniques must be
justified by the study’s prospective scientific, educational, or ap-
plied value. A weakness of this approach is that psychologists might
be too quick to anticipate significant scientific output, though
Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) provide a partial check.

The APA code also states that participants must not be de-
ceived about a significant aspect of the study that would affect their
willingness to participate, perhaps because of physical risks, dis-
comfort, or unpleasant emotional experiences. It is important to
consider the form and effects of the deception. Commercial and
academic consumer research generally uses only “mild decep-

tions”—deceptions that are not targeted at respondents’ fundamen-
tal, self-related beliefs or values and unlikely to affect their willing-
ness to participate—instead, respondents are deceived about “pe-
ripheral factors such as the research sponsor, why a procedure or
measure is used, or the purpose of the study” (Toy, Olson and
Wright 1989, p. 72). However, while the risk of harm to the
individual by or as a result of the deception might be less or
negligible, even mild deceptions are morally problematic (Kimmel
and Smith 2001).

Deception is widely used in psychology, notwithstanding the
provisions of the APA code and critics who charge that any use of
deception is an unacceptable violation of the individual’s right to
voluntarily choose to participate in research (Adair, Dushenko and
Lindsay 1985). Proponents of allowing deception argue that it is
essential in many studies. Broder (1998), for example, cites memory
research and studies of incidental learning and of cognitive illusions
that could not have been conducted without deception. Under these
circumstances, it is argued, the decision to be made is not whether
to use deception, but whether the research is necessary (Kimmel
1996).

The APA code stipulates that deception must be explained
promptly to participants within a debriefing to correct any
misconceptions. However, it may not be sufficient simply to tell
respondents that they were deceived and to provide correct
information; effective debriefing may require “dehoaxing” and
“desensitizing” (Toy, et al. 1989). Providing an educational benefit
is often viewed as an important part of debriefing, particularly if the
participants are students (Schüler 1982). This does not lessen the
possible harm from deception, but it may partially compensate and
be included in the researcher’s assessment of the benefits and costs
of research participation.

Forewarning is a more uncertain remedy to deception. Under
informed consent provisions of the APA code (1992), researchers
are obligated to brief participants beforehand about the study and
explain that, should they choose to participate, they might withdraw
at any time. However, the participant’s decision relies upon the
information provided by the researcher. Clearly, if fully informed
about the study, there can be no deception. Under forewarning,
subjects in a deception experiment may be “informed in advance
that some information may have to be withheld and that full
disclosure of the purpose and procedures will be made at the end of
the experiment” (Adair, et al., p. 60). However, if deceit is used to
obtain consent, by definition it cannot be informed (Baumrind
1985). Further, reliance is placed on the researcher’s estimate of the
risk to the respondent (Schüler 1982). One solution to these prob-
lems is to pretest the experiment to establish whether subjects
would give consent, absent the deception (Kimmel 1996). A similar
approach is adopted in the study reported below.

A case can be made that intentional deception is never permis-
sible (Bok 1978). However, a more balanced view would argue that
some deception in consumer research is morally justifiable (Kimmel
and Smith 2001). In keeping with the treatment of deception in
psychological research, we propose treating deception in consumer
research as permissible under conditions where the researcher has
no alternative procedure available, the deception is mild, and
appropriate remedial measures are used. We recognize that this

760 / Forewarning & Debrieflng as Remedies to Deception in Consumer Research: An Empirical Study

position is not uncontroversial and note that our focus is on the use
of remedial measures to mitigate the use of deception, rather than
the ethics of deception, per se.

The appropriateness of remedial measures can be subject to
empirical inquiry. The purpose of the study reported below was to
illustrate in an exploratory study how possible remedial measures
for deception in consumer research might be investigated and to
demonstrate their effectiveness. Drawing on psychology, as dis-
cussed, the remedial measures examined are forewarning, debrief-
ing, and the use of monetary and other forms of compensation. In
addition, we explored the implications of a non-deceptive ap-
proach, i.e., telling the truth. Remedial measures were examined
within a market research context, drawing upon industry codes of
conduct to establish that the practice is considered problematic.

STUDY OF CONSUMER RESPONSES TO
DECEPTIVE PRACTICES

Overview
Respondents evaluated four deceptive practices that might be

considered unavoidable and justifiable (subject to the above crite-
ria): study purpose and sponsor deception, undisclosed taping, and
interview length deception. Benefits from research participation
were also explored, consistent with Schuler’s (1982) observations
on the importance of assessing research costs and benefits for
participants. Scenarios were manipulated in an attempt to deter-
mine whether the remedial measures we have identified may reduce
respondent concern about deceptive practices and increase the
likelihood of future participation in research. We sought ethical
evaluations and emotional reactions of consumers as well as mea-
sures of the impact of these practices and of possible remedial
measures on research participation.

Development of Scenarios
Pilot study. In a mall-intercept study, 352 adult consumers

were asked to imagine that they were a participant in a given market
research scenario and to indicate their response to the described
event. In total, the pilot study examined consumer reactions to 35
scenarios (each respondent rated 3 unrelated scenarios). The prac-
tices found to be most egregious to consumers were: study sponsor
deception, breach of confidentiality, frugging (fundraising under
the guise of research), videotaping without consent, and the non-
disclosure of a follow-up interview. Some remedial measures were
tested; for example, warning people of a follow-up interview led to
more positive ratings.

The criteria for selection of scenarios for the current study
were whether the deceptive practice was ethically suspect (relative
to industry codes), perceived to be relatively frequent, and arguably
unavoidable. Accordingly, practices included in the pilot study that
are clearly avoidable were dropped from the main study, including
frugging and the non-disclosure of a follow-up interview. A further
consideration was the scope for remedial measures that lessen the
potential for harm and reduce negative reactions to the research
experience. In addition to the pilot study, the development of the
main study scenarios was informed by a separate investigation of
practitioner and consumer respondent experiences of market re-
search.’ Following pretests, the final set of 23 scenarios was
adopted. Below, we describe the scenarios used and our rationale
for their selection.

J. Length of Interview. Interview length deception often oc-
curs because interviewers fear respondents would decline to par-
ticipate if given an accurate estimate of the time needed, perhaps
because they have overlong and poorly constructed questionnaires.

It is widely regarded as frequent and problematic. We regard
deception by commission, where interviewers lie about the inter-
view length, as unethical and clearly avoidable. This is consistent
with industry codes that prohibit deception to secure cooperation
(e.g., ICC/ESOMAR 1986) or specify that “respondents must not
be enticed into an interview by a misrepresentation of the length of
the interview” (CASRO1995, p. 5). Deception by omission is more
troubling. Some recent industry initiatives require interviewers to
state the likely duration of the interview (MRA CAC 1993).
However, for some studies, length may vary substantially, accord-
ing to consumer responses and interest (Laroche, McGown, and
Rainville 1986). Accordingly, five scenarios involving interview
length were tested: (1) the interview is said to last 15 minutes and
it does last 15 minutes; (2) the interview is said to last 15 minutes
and it takes 30; (3) the interview is said to last 30 minutes and it does
take 30; (4) the respondent is not told the interview length and it
takes 15 minutes; (5) the respondent is not told the interview length
and it takes 30 minutes.

2. Taping. Undisclosed taping of an interview would be
deception by omission. Researchers may not wish to disclose taping
because it might bias responses or influence participation rates. The
CMOR (1999) Respondent Bill of Rights states that respondents
will be told in advance if an interview is to be recorded, consistent
with CASRO (1995) and PMRS (1984). However, ICC/ESOMAR
(1999), in a change to its code, permits recording without advance
notice if it would otherwise result in “atypical behavior”. However,
respondents must be told about the recording at the end of the
interview. Accordingly, two possible remedial measures for
audiotaping were examined: debriefing and forewarning. There
were three scenarios: (1) a control scenario in which the respondent
becomes suspicious of taping (due to “clicking” heard on the phone
line) but the respondent is never informed of the taping by the
interviewer; (2) the respondent is informed at the end of the survey
that the interview was taped; (3) the respondent is forewarned
(during solicitation) that the interview will be taped.

3. Deception Concerning Purpose of Study. Revealing the
purpose of a study may bias responses. CMOR’s (1999) Respon-
dent Bill of Rights commits researchers to disclosing the nature of
the survey. The MRA CAC ( 1993) guidelines suggest that this need
only note the general topic of discussion. Particularly troubling are
instances of deception by omission where a different purpose is
implied though unstated. For example, Tessar (1994) reported
consumer frustration at being asked to do one thing (watch televi-
sion programs) and then being questioned on something else
(advertising). Accordingly, a typical advertising effectiveness re-
search scenario was utilized to examine purpose deception. The
respondent in the scenario is asked to watch a television program,
even though the purpose of the study is to test advertisements aired
during the program. Five remedial measures (or combinations
thereof) for this deception were examined: ( 1 ) forewarning that the
purpose cannot be revealed; (2) debriefing about purpose; (3)
providing a benefit to compensate for the deception (a quiz about
the program, with the possibility of winning a prize); (4) forewam-

separate studies were helpful in developing the scenarios
used here. A survey of American Marketing Association (AMA)
practitioners provided confirmation of prior research on the preva-
lence of specific suspect practices and suggestions for alternative
approaches and perceived justifications for practices considered
unavoidable. Secondly, a mall-intercept study improved our un-
derstanding of consumers’ positive and negative feelings toward
research and of the context within which ethically problematic
practices may arise.

ing and debriefing; (5) forewarning, debriefing, and providing the
benefit.

4. Deception Concerning Sponsor of Study. Revealing the
sponsor of a study also might bias responses. Moreover, it can
confiict with an obligation of research companies to protect client
confidentiality that is specified in most industry codes. CMOR’s
(1999) Respondent Bill of Rights, the MRA CAC (1993) guide-
lines, and some other codes, commit researchers to disclosing the
name of the interviewer and the research company. This disclosure
is unlikely to produce biased responses because it does not reveal
the study sponsor. The problem is more difficult for in-house
researchers where nondisclosure or deception may seem unavoid-
able (Sudman 1998). Accordingly, five scenarios were tested: (1)
control condition in which sponsor is not mentioned; (2) sponsor of
research (client) is revealed; (3) respondent forewarned that spon-
sor cannot be revealed; (4) research firm identified and respondent
forewarned that sponsor cannot be revealed; (5) respondent fore-
warned that sponsor cannot be revealed in advance, then is de-
briefed about sponsor identity.

5. Benefits. The effects of research participation benefits were
examined, in keeping with our earlier discussion of compensation
in psychological research. Monetary incentives are recommended
(e.g., Bearden, Madden, and Uscategui 1998) and the American
Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR 1999) advo-
cates incentives as a “best practice” for maximizing response rates.
One of CMOR’s earliest initiatives was the development of “thank
you” cards for mailing to survey respondents that explained the
benefits of market research. We tested four scenarios: (1) a control
condition in which no benefits or incentives were given (same as
control condition in study sponsor deception), (2) indirect benefits
of research (“participation in research helps produce products that
people would like to see in the stores”), provided during solicita-
tion; (3) indirect benefits of research provided at the conclusion of
the interview; (4) $5 voucher incentive; and (5) $20 voucher
incentive.

Method
Data were collected in mall-intercept interviews in a middle

class mall in Jacksonville, Florida. Potential participants were
stopped as they shopped and were asked to participate in the study.
Each respondent saw one scenario only, to minimize possible
demand effects. Respondents were asked to read the scenario and
then answer 3 sets of questions on the following two pages. The first
two sets of questions asked for reactions to the scenario, the third
asked respondents for demographic information and their level of
participation in market research studies. When they were finished,
respondents were thanked for their participation and given a written
debriefing. A sample scenario (undisclosed study purpose with
forewarning) is provided below:

Imagine that one afternoon you are at home and the phone
rings. The person on the other end of the phone says:

“Hello, I’m with a national marketing research firm and we are
calling consumers to ask whether they would be willing to
participate in a study by watching a new TV program airing on
network TV this evening. We will call you after the show to
discuss your reactions. We would like you to watch this
program as you would any other program, therefore we cannot
say anything more about the specific questions you will be
asked. Would you be willing to participate?”

Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 31) 1761

You agree. After the show the research firm calls. The first few
questions are about the TV program, the remainder of the 15
minute interview is about the advertising that appeared during
the program.

Dependent measures. Our dependent measures were prima-
rily intended to establish whether consumers would respond more
favorably to research practices that include remedial measures to
mitigate deception. Two sets of dependent measures were used,
presented to the respondents as questions 1 and 2 (rotated within
each scenario type to minimize possible order effects). One set
measured respondents’ ethical evaluation of the market research
company’s action described in the scenario. The set comprised the
eight items of the Reidenbach and Robin (1990) multidimensional
ethics scale (MES) and a single unidimensional measure of ethical
evaluation (very ethical/not at all ethical). It should be noted that
these measures are of respondents’ perceptions of the ethics of the
research practices. Many deceptive practices could still be unethi-
cal regardless of how they might be evaluated by research respon-
dents.

The second set of dependent measures comprised 7 items
measuring emotional reactions to the scenario, its effects on re-
search participation, and whether respondents felt deceived. More
specifically, respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale
the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with seven statements
relating to participation in the study described (where appropriate),
future participation in market research, and whether they would feel
upset, angry, happy, irritated, or deceived by the experience. Our
assessment of emotional reactions to research practices is in con-
trast to previous studies. While practitioners and academics may
discuss questionable practices in terms of whether or not they are
ethical, it is quite possible that consumers themselves may evaluate
practices in terms of how irritating or upsetting they are. Again, our
purpose is to establish the effectiveness of remedial measures. We
expect consumers to respond more favorably to the more effective
remedial measures on one or more of our dependent measures.

Sample. Four hundred and six individuals agreed to participate
in the study (a 24.5% participation rate).2 The sample was 50.5%
female and median household income was $30,000-44,999. Rela-
tive to the U.S. population, minorities wereoverrepresented (25.9%
of respondents were black, 60.2% were white) and the sample was
skewed toward the young (66% were 37 or younger), and was better
educated (65.3% had one year of college or more). Respondents
were familiar with market research; two-thirds had been asked to
participate in a marketing research study in the previous 12 months,
27.8% reported having been asked to participate 3 or more times in
the past year (the mean value for prior research participation was
2.41).

RESULTS
Table 1 shows mean values for respondent ratings of the

different scenarios. Below, we discuss the analysis of each group of

ontract research firm reported a refusal rate (percentage of
people who said no when asked to participate) of less than 1%.
However, this is after “wave-offs”, people who, when passing the
interviewer, indicate that they are not interested in participating in
a research study. The research firm reported a wave-off rate of
75.5%, consistent with other studies it has conducted in this mall.
Hence, the participation rate for this study was 24.5%.

762 / Forewarning & Debriefing as Remedies to Deception in Consumer Research: An Empirical Study

TABLE 1
Respotidetit Ratings of Scenarios (N=406)i

Scenario

1. Length of Interview
told 15/actually 15
told 15/actually 30
told 30/actually 30
not told length/actually 15
not told length/actually 30

2. Taping
undisclosed audio-taping (c)
debriefing
forewarning

3. Deception- Purpose
told program/really ad (c)
forewarning
debriefing
told program/really ad/incentive
forewarning and debriefing
forewaming/debriefing/incentive

4. Deception- Sponsor
sponsor identified (c)
forewarning
research firm/forewaming
forewarning/debriefing
generic control (c)

5. Benefits
indirect/solicitation
indirect/at end
$5 voucher
$20 voucher
generic control (c)

Participate

N/A
N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

N/A

3.33
3.61
4.50
N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

Future

4.28
3.76
4.50
4.11
5.28

4.06
4.19
4.72

3.33
4.67
5.39
3.72
3.81
3.61

3.83
3.67
3.78
3.67
3.29

3.83
4.33
3.94
4.33
3.29

Negative

2.32
3.51
2.31
3.07
2.15

3.29
2.98
3.04

2.96
2.94
4.33
3.23
2.71
3.89

2.86
2.48
2.87
2.89
3.87

3.31
3.04
2.98
2.54
3.87

Deceived

2.33
3.59
1.94
2.50
2.17

3.47
3.63
2.28

3.06
2.78
4.89
3.44
2.75
3.22

2.28
3.56
3.22
2.89
3.88

3.06
2.56
3.61
3.06
3.88

Happy

4.35
4.12
3.83
4.11
3.50

2.88
4.00
4.61

3.44
4.78
4.67
3.67
3.81
3.94

3.78
3.71
4.44
3.56
3.65

3.67
4.22
3.76
3.94
3.65

Unethical

3.72
3.59
3.22
3.22
3.11

4.76
4.45
3.06

3.72
3.89
2.89
3.83
4.38
4.11

3.72
3.11
3.17
4.06
4.06

4.28
3.83
3.61
3.17
4.06

‘Approximately 18 respondents per scenario.

scenarios in turn. ANOVA’s and contrast tests were conducted to
analyze differences in responses across scenarios. Because the
dependent measures “irritated,” “upset,” and “angry” were highly
correlated, they were averaged as an index of negative reactions
(Cronbach’s a=.87). Ethical evaluations reported in the table and
analyzed below reflect the unidimensional measure only.3

J .Length of Interview. In examining interview length, we are
interested in: (1) whether deception about length led to a more
negative reaction than did the truth (or no information) about

3We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to test
the dimensionality of the MES in this study. This revealed a two-
factor structure rather than the three dimensions of the scale,
suggesting that attempts to understand the underlying rationale for
respondents’ ethical judgments, based on the MES, would not be
reliable in this context.

length; (2) whether the actual length of the interview would have an
impact on respondents’ reactions; and, (3) whether telling versus
not telling respondents about the length of the interview would
influence responses. As Table 1 shows, respondents had the great-
est negative reaction when they were deceived about the length of
time the interview would take. Respondents who read the scenario
in which there was deception about the length of the interview
(“told 15/actually 30”) had significantly higher negative reactions
(t(84)=2.93, p<.01 ) and felt significantly more deceived (t(84)=3.52, p<.01) than respondents who saw the other scenarios. Deception about length did not significantly affect how happy respondents would feel (t(84)=.47, n.s.), or how ethical they judged the research to be (t(84)=.65, n.s.).

The two scenarios in which the interview lasted 15 minutes
were contrasted against the two scenarios in which the interview
lasted 30 minutes (the deception scenario was excluded). The
length of the interview did not affect responses to scenarios: the t-

scores for contrasts for all seven of the dependent measures were
non-significant. There were also no differences in reaction between
scenarios in which the length of the interview was disclosed during
solicitation and when the length was not disclosed (the deception
scenario was again excluded from this analysis). Those who were
not told the length of a 30 minute interview were more likely to
participate in the future (t(84)=2.91, p<.01), had less of a negative reaction (t(84)=3.09, p<.01) and felt less deceived (t(84)=2.95, p<.01) than did those who were deceived about interview length.

In summary, respondents appear to be most sensitive to being
deceived about the length of the interview. The actual length of the
interview (15 or 30 minutes) did not affect ratings nor did the
disclosure of the interview length at the commencement of the
interview. However, participation in future research would appear
to be more likely if people are not told the length of a 30 minute
interview, rather than told that it will be 15 minutes and it takes 30
minutes.

2. Taping. Two possible remedial measures for audiotaping
were examined: debriefing and forewarning. These two procedures
were contrasted against a control scenario in which the respondent
becomes suspicious of taping. Debriefing respondents at the end of
the interview did not affect reactions relative to the control (all t
values were n.s.). Forewarning, however, did prove to be a success-
ful remedial measure. Forewarned respondents were significantly
happier with their participation, felt less deceived, and judged that
the procedure was significantly less unethical than respondents in
the other two taping conditions (t(47)=2.28, p<.05, t(48)=2.19, p<.05 and t(48)=2.82, p<.01, respectively). Forewarning produced no significant differences in negative emotional reactions or will- ingness to participate in the future.

3. Deception Concerning Purpose of Study. Five remedial
measures (or combinations thereof) for study purpose deception
were examined. Forewarning respondents that they would not be
told the purpose of the study (as opposed to simply deceiving them)
led respondents to be significantly more likely to participate in the
future, and significantly more likely to be happy with the experi-
ence (t(100)=2.48, p<.05 and t(100)=2.46, p<.05, respectively). Debriefing respondents (relative to the control group) had a diverse impact on reactions to the scenario: debriefed respondents were significantly more willing to participate in the future and were happier with the research experience (t(100)=3.82, p<.001 and t( 101 )=2.46, p<.05, respectively). But they also felt more deceived and had more of a negative reaction to the scenario than did the control respondents (t(100)=3.22, p<.01 and t(100)=2.77, p<.01, respectively). The other remedial measures (incentive; forewarn- ing and debriefing; and forewarning, debriefing and incentive) did not have any significant effect on reactions and no remedial measure had any significant effect on ethical judgments relative to the control condition (all t values were n.s.). Thus, while forewarn- ing produced some positive reactions, debriefing produced both positive and negative reactions, perhaps because it reveals the deception. Accordingly, in combining forewarning and deception, the positive effects of the forewarning appear to be canceled out by telling respondents they were deceived. In addition, offering an incentive did not ameliorate the effects of the deception.

4. Deception Concerning Sponsor of Study. Methods of pro-
tecting against bias due to respondent awareness of the study
sponsor were examined by comparing a control scenario in which
the sponsor is identified with three alternative practices. As Table
I shows, the means across the different scenarios are quite similar.
There were no significant differences between the control scenario
and the alternative strategies (with the exception of a single signifi-
cant finding: respondents felt more deceived when they were

Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 31) 1763

forewarned that they would not be told the study sponsor compared
to when the sponsor was identified). However, when contrasted
against a generic control, where there was no identification of the
study sponsor, all four of these remedial measure scenarios evoked
less negative reactions. There were significant differences on the
negative reactions measure between the control and forewarning
(t(83)=3.03, p<.01 ), research firm/forewarning (t(83)=2.25, p<.05), and forewarning/debriefing (t(83)=2.18, p<.05), though not for the other dependent measures (all t values n.s.). Thus, the findings suggest that not identifying the study sponsor can be problematic and show that remedial measures can reduce respondent concerns, but they do not speak to the superiority of any one remedial measure.

5. Benefits. The effects of explaining indirect benefits of
research to consumers and of offering a voucher incentive were
examined. The explanation of indirect benefits during solicitation
did not significantly affect reactions relative to the control (in which
respondents were simply asked to participate). The explanation of
indirect benefits at the end of the interview, however, did leave
respondents feeling significantly less deceived than respondents in
the control (t(84)=2.08, p<.05). The vouchers did not have any effect on respondents relative to the control, except for the finding that the $20 voucher led to significantly lower negative reactions compared to the control (t(84)=2.80, p<.01). Thus, there is some indication that the incentives for participation in research need to be reasonably substantial. However, there were no significant differ- ences on any of the measures between the $20 voucher scenario and the indirect benefits scenarios, suggesting monetary incentives may not be needed if respondents can be persuaded the research is worthwhile.

DISCUSSION
Overall, we found that remedial measures did reduce per-

ceived negative consequences and mitigate the use of deceptive
practices. Consistent with prior industry research (e.g., Humbaugh
1998), we also confirmed that deceptive practices (specifically,
interview length deception and study purpose deception) appear
likely to reduce future participation, at least relative to remedial
measures. Our study points to the potential effectiveness of reme-
dial measures in market research, at least for the deceptive practices
investigated. Subject to our study limitations, research industry
efforts to promote development of these measures might well be
warranted, as well as their more widespread adoption by academic
researchers. Below, we comment on each measure in turn.

Telling the truth is more of an alternative to deception than a
remedial measure. Clearly, from an ethical standpoint, it is prefer-
able to avoidable deception. However, researchers may be uncer-
tain when a deception is avoidable. Our study suggests that it is
possible to test when a deception can be avoided without compro-
mising research integrity or participation rates. For example, we
found that disclosure in advance of the actual length of even a 30-
minute interview did not result in more negative evaluations rela-
tive to nondisclosure or relative to disclosure of a 15-minute
interview. Also, we found that disclosure of the research firm in
combination with forewarning (that sponsor identity could not be
revealed) was no different to forewarning alone.

The results of our study suggest that forewarning has consid-
erable potential in mitigating adverse consequences of deception in
market research. Forewarning about taping led respondents to feel
happier with the research experience, to feel less deceived by the
research, and to judge it as more ethical than did debriefing or
failing to disclose that the interview was being taped. Likewise,
forewarning respondents that they would not be told the purpose of

764 / Forewarning & Debriefing as Remedies to Deception in Consumer Research: An Empirical Study

the study made them happier with the experience and more likely
to participate in the future. Forewarning also reduced negative
reactions to study sponsor deception. Thus, telling respondents
ahead of time that they will be taped, or that they will not be told the
sponsor or the purpose of a study, appears to be an effective
remedial measure.

Debriefing was less effective in reducing respondent concern
about deceptive practices. In some cases, debriefing generated
negative reactions, including feeling deceived—perhaps because
the deception is revealed and its effects are not fully assuaged as a
result of the debriefing. However, from an ethical standpoint, this
may not make it any less necessary as a way of redressing a
deception, at least in the absence of forewarning. Nonetheless,
forewarning alone may suffice for much commercial research,
given our findings on forewarning. In particular, it may be sufficient
in most studies to forewarn respondents that a study sponsor cannot
be revealed for reasons of client confidentiality. One test to be
applied is whether advance knowledge of the identity of a research
sponsor would have influenced the respondent’ s decision to partici-
pate.

Compensation also appears to be effective, though perhaps it
need not be monetary. Explaining the benefits of research
participation at the end of an interview appeared to be advantageous.
While not significantly affecting willingness to participate in the
future, or positive or negative feelings about the research relative to
a control condition, telling respondents why their participation is
worthwhile reduced feelings of deception, and was generally as
effective as providing a $20 voucher.

Turning more specifically to implications for academic re-
search, we note that Toy, et al. (1989) found that many academic
marketing studies employ deception, though less than 40% reported
conducting a debriefing. While the proportion of debriefings that
actually took place was likely higher, it’s very possible that many
researchers are not sufficiently familiar with debriefing techniques
or the ethical obligations that go with the use of deception (Toy et
al. 2001 ). Our discussion of deception shows that there may be good
reasons for journal editors to require that the use of debriefings be
reported and, perhaps, the rationale for the deception (Adair, et al.
1985). A further consideration is the obligation of an educational
compensation to academic research participants, who are often
students.

Limitations
Interpretation of our results must be tempered by the study

limitations. First, although our findings for remedial measures
overall are relatively robust, this was a broad and inevitably
exploratory study and this limits claims that can be made about the
relative merits of different remedial measures or their most appro-
priate levels. A more complete design would extend to a greater
number of treatments and levels for each treatment and with more
scope for analysis across issues. Second, there are inevitable trade-
offs between control and richness in the use of an experimental
design. More specifically, respondents read descriptions of re-
search situations, and were not subject to the questionable practices
directly. While we considered the latter approach, we concluded
that to deliberately engage in unethical practices in order to test their
effects would not be appropriate. Third, it is likely that there is some
degree of non-response bias influencing our findings. We had only
respondents willing to participate in the mall-intercept. In many
respects, however, the participants in our study represent the
segment of greatest interest to research practitioners: those who are
willing to participate in research and comprise the pool of available
respondents for market research. Fourth, although administered as
a mall-intercept, all the scenarios in our study questionnaire re-

ferred to phone research. Finally, the scenarios were set in a market
research context, though we believe they are applicable to academic
consumer research as well as commercial research. Problematic
practices and remedial measures could be explored within the
context of academic research, perhaps with researchers testing
different approaches as part of other studies (e.g., changes in
respondent satisfaction with short or long debriefings).

CONCLUSION
In sum, we argue that deception in commercial and academic

consumer research may be avoidable because alternatives are often
available. Academic researchers are well advised to anticipate IRBs
drawing their attention to possible alternative non-deceptive ap-
proaches. Where alternative procedures are not available, the
researcher must consider whether an intentional deception is war-
ranted by the possible benefits of the study, even if the deception is
mild. If the deception is considered justifiable, its effects may be
mitigated by the use of forewarning and debriefing. This approach
may make research participation less aversive in addition to being
less potentially unethical and reducing any harm that might other-
wise be perpetrated.

REFERENCES
AAPOR (1999), “Best Practices for Survey and Public Opinion

Research.” Effective date May, 1997. American Association
for Public Opinion Research: www.aapor.org.

Adair, John G., Terrance W. Dushenko and R.C.L. Lindsay
(1985), “Ethical Regulations and Their Impact on Research
Practice,” American Psychologist 40 (January), 59-72.

APA (1992), “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of
Conduct.” Effective date December 1, 1992. American
Psychological Association: www.apa.org.

Baumrind, Diana (1964), “Some Thoughts on Ethics of
Research: After Reading Milgram’s ‘Behavioral Study of
Obedience’,”/l/weri’ca« Psychologist 19, 421-423.

Baumrind, Diana (1985), “Research Using Intentional Decep-
tion: Ethical Issues Revisited,” American Psychologist 40
(February), 165-174.

Bearden, William O., Charles S. Madden, and Kelly Uscategui
(1998), “The Pool is Drying Up,” Marketing Research 10
(Spring), 26-33.

Bok, Sissela (1978), Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private
Life. New York: Pantheon.

Broder, Arndt (1998), “Deception Can Be Acceptable,”
American Psychologist 53 (July), 805-806.

CASRO (1995), “Code of Standards for Survey Research.” Port
Jefferson, NY: Council of American Survey Research
Organizations.

CMOR (1999), “Respondent Bill of Rights.” Council for
Marketing and Opinion Research: www.cmor.org.

Humbaugh, Pam (1998), “Respondent Cooperation: Audit
Update Yields Ways to Improve Results,” Opinion 1
(Winter), 2.

ICC/ESOMAR (1986), “ICC/ESOMAR International Code of
Marketing and Social Research Practice,” in Robert M.
Worcester and John Downham, ed.. Consumer Market
Research Handbook. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

ICC/ESOMAR (1999), “ICC/ESOMAR International Code of
Marketing and Social Research Practice.” Effective date
1994. European Society for Opinion and Marketing Re-
search: www.esomar.nl.

Kimmel, Allan J. (1996), Ethical Issues in Behavioral Research.
Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 31) 1765

Kimmel, Allan J. and N. Craig Smith (2001), “Deception in
Marketing Research: Ethical, Methodological, and Disciplin-
ary Implications,” Psychology and Marketing 18 (July), 663-
689.

Laroche, Michel, K.L. McGown and Joyce Rainville (1986),
“How Ethical Are Professional Marketing Researchers?”
Business Forum (Winter), 21-25.

MRA CAC (1993), Guidelines and Practices to Promote
Respondent Cooperation. Rocky Hill, CT: Marketing
Research Association, Consumer Advisory Council.

PMRS (1984), Rules of Conduct and Good Practice. Toronto:
Professional Marketing Research Society.

Reidenbach, R. Eric and Donald P. Robin (1990), “Toward the
Development of a Multidimensional Scale for Improving
Evaluations of Business Ethics,” Journal of Business Ethics
9, 639-653.

Schüler, Heinz (1982), Ethical Problems in Psychological
Research. New York: Academic Press.

Sudman, Seymour (1998), “Survey Research and Ethics,” in
Advances in Consumer Research 25, Joseph W. Alba and J.
Wesley Hutchinson, ed. Provo; UT: Association for
Consumer Research, 69-71.

Tessar, Linda (1994), “Research on Research-The Respondent
Perspective.” Rocky Hill, CT: Marketing Research Associa-
tion.

Toy, Daniel, Jerry Olson, and Lauren Wright (1989), “Effects of
Debriefing in Marketing Research Involving ‘Mild’
Deceptions,” Psychology and Marketing 6 (Spring), 69-85.

Toy, Daniel, Lauren Wright, and Jerry Olson (2001), “A
Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Deception and
Debriefing Effects in Marketing Research,” Psychology and
Marketing 18 (July), 663-689.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Marketing Research VII ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Hire a Writer

Client Reviews

4.9

Sitejabber

4.6

Trustpilot

4.8

Our Guarantees

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Money Back

If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

New to Your Trusted Assignment Help Service? Sign up & Save

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00

Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.

Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.

Order Now Order Now