474 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS product. It is true to say that no preparation put on the market merely with a plain description of the sort of purpose for which it is to be used, would be able to survive in modern times. In short, the product can only sell if there are claims which indicate its precise usefulness, and provided the product lives up to them, then there is no reason, fundamentally, why the preparation should not be bought and febought by the consuming public. It is reasonable to suggest that with a new product one of the objects in using a consumer panel is to find out whether or not the panel will accept the claims which are to be made. It would seem to be of little avail if the present procedure of panel testing is pursued, bearing in mind that the general method is to sample a product merely on the generic title, as for example, a shampoo or a hair cream, etc., without making any attempt to gain the confidence of the panel by indicating the reasons for the test. Such a procedure places members of the panel under some considerable disability if they are to give correct answers. It could be said that with the innate conservatism of all humans, the majority tend to reject something which is new unless it is supported by some particular gimmick which is obvious at the very beginning. Let us see the implications of what might appear to be a simple straight- forward consumer panel test. The makers of a product decide to alter the method of manufacture by using an improved and more efficient plant. They wish to know whether the public would notice the difference, a vital point if the preparation is of significant importance in the market. This is a fairly simple experiment because, presumably, the product is unaltered in perfume and its theological properties. But because a question has to be asked, the psychological reactions of people come into play. Which do you prefer? Many will have courage and say neither others will start to worry because they wonder whether they are expected to find differences. Is this a test of their powers of observation--is it a trick? Or what? They may guess or find refuge in, "I don't know." Whichever way they vote, given a panel of reasonable statistical size, it is a good chance that the results will approach the 50-50 level. Under such condi- tions, it would be fair to ask the reasons why one moiety prefers one and not the other. These remarks should be considered and any statement which raises a query in the minds of the laboratory should be examined just in case a new aspect of the preparation be unmasked. Generally speaking, if the outward appearance, the odor, color and composition are constant, then the test statistically will indicate parity. The difficulties lie when a change in composition has to be made but sometimes circumstances may simplify the problem, as for example, war- time restrictions. As long as the modification simulates the old standard, the purchasing consumers will go a long way to understand the reasons and

CONSUMER RESEARCH ON NEW PRODUCTS 475 while a few may complain, they do so benevolently. At any rate, in war- time stringencies, there is no place for panel testing. One simply does one's best and there it is. In peacetimes it may be desirable, however, to reformulate as a simple piece of economics. Here the problem is interesting because it is almost certain that the change will lead to alterations in the properties of the product. Even a modification of the perfume compound may lead to a change in the theological properties which could have an effect on popular acceptance. Experience shows, time and time again, that a change in odor note can influence, in no small measure, the apparent effectiveness or otherwise of the product in the eyes of the consumer. If one perfume is preferred to the other, then in those preferences will be found a significant percentage who claim that the product with the preferred odor was more effective in doing its job. This sort of answer is in alignment with a psychological reaction and the over-all goodness will be interpreted by each individual in a manner con- sistent with his or her innate scale of preferences. This important point is fully discussed in a most interesting paper by A. Kennedy (Pharm. •., January, 1959, Vol. 182, 5) entitled "The Psychology of Clinical Trials." In fact, play on this individual order of desirables had led to newspaper competitions where features of certain commodities, as for example, motor cars, were listed and the competitors invited to place them in an order of desirability. The successful person to gain the prize--which was of signifi- cant value--was the one whose list conformed most closely to the order of preferences produced by a statistical calculation based on all the forms sent in. It has been said that one famous motor car firm spent an enormous sum of money on a consumer research of this type and the new model launched on the basis of this assessment proved to be an absolute failure! But this result is not to be unforeseen. Many of the contestants will look on the exercise as a challenge to their cleverness and will try to picture what others are likely to think, rather than to register their own views, especially as each item was not without merit. Even a change of color can affect the issue. Often in a product which is colored, a consumer will complain that the quality of the recent purchase was different and will then declare that its effectiveness in use was quite in- ferior to previous supplies, even though examination of the returned prod- uct proved that the contents, other than the color, were up to standard in all aspects. Much more difficult is to attempt to make a product which is to be com- petitive with an existing one. If it were to be an exact copy--which heaven forbid--then market testing would demand identity of appearance, texture, odor and pack. To do this, it is necessary to buy a supply of the product on the market and to repackage it in a plain standard container. Apart from