50 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS compared with competitive products, if any exist, or examined for major advantages and/or disadvantages. An intelligent panel, able to communicate its thoughts is more use for research guidance than one which is representative of the total population in social class, but possibly less articulate. The presentation of the test products is very important because it can influence subjective assessment. When one panelist receives more than one product for testing it is important that the visual differences, particularly code numbers, do not have undue influence. Questionnaires provide the test results and are therefore extremely important. Testing of questionnaires in small pilot runs or the use of two different questionnaires in the same test, one for each of two matched panels, is recommended to check for any questionnaire bias. Statistical handling of the test data will give the statistical significance of the results but consultation with the product development chemist is necessary in order to interpret them. Since so much depends upon the results of initial consumer tests it is necessary to plan the work carefully and a lot of research remains to be done to validate some of the test methods routinely used. For example, in paired comparison tests, some means of identifying the "guessers" is needed. DISCUSSION Me. C. PuGm You used selection of, as you describe, an intelligent, articulate and literate panel for the finer points of assessment. Do you think you could select a panel that could go outside the realms of just picking the right product and could also assess the snags in the presentation of a pack, price, and such other things that so often cause the real difference between consumer tests and the results of test market- ing? THe. L•.CTUeER: I do not think that consumer panel testing can completely forecast test marketing results. However, testing of concept, different presentation, different packs, different prices, can help guide the selection of the most favourable combination. MR. C. PUGH: Would you care to comment on the use of mini test market proced- ures, such as selling in staff shops or collaborating with local shops as a way of reducing the errors in the product launching here one can include presentation and to some extent price. One cause of failure in predicting the market experience of a product is that one, initially well liked, palls when you use it repeatedly. Do you have any views on ways of assessing this characteristic or downfall in product testing? THE LECTUREm I feel that a shop in a large shopping area, which is used by all kinds of people might offer better scope for such testing. Long term testing can be carried out to check the question of a product being initially well liked but palling with time. De. K. SAMES: You have given no helpful guide to the number of questions you consider optimum. Would you please comment? THE LECTURE•: I cannot possibly say xvhat is the optimum number of questions

THE ROLE OF CONSUMER STUDIES IN RESEARCH 51 on a questionnaire. I advise that questionnaires should be kept as short as possible in order to give the required information. DR. I. SAMES: In page 008 under "questionnaires" you sub-divide a question into seven categories of likes and dislikes. If one were to make that into nine and have the prefix "I think it is fabulous", and have the suffix "I think it is lousy" you have covered the whole gambit of human expression. I wonder whether making the question into a type of census form renders question fatigue more likely and question objection more probable. Would you not agree that so many sub-divisions are un- desirable? TI•E LECTURER: The example cited is only one question, which indicates the kind of answer required. It looks long but only involves the panelist in reading through the statements to see which comes nearest to his or her opinion, and ticking DR. K. SAMos: I think you have to be extremely "intelligent, literate and articulate" to differentiate between disliking a thing moderately and disliking it slightly. What are your views on the optimum duration of the test before the panel are invited to complete their questionnaires? Are you prepared to wait for your panel to use all the product to form their opinion, or do you wish them to try it for a period of one week, two weeks, or longer, and then to complete the questionnaires? It is my personal experience, which I understand is not specific, that if a product is used only for part of its life you can get a falsely good impression the defects would have appeared had you gone on using it. T• L•CTUR•R: If yOU want initial reaction, a short test which just gives panelists the opportunity to try the product is satisfactory a longer test is necessary if you require reactions when panelists get to the end of the pack or after a long period of use. In order to administer the test it is easier to set a time limit rather than let each individual continue until they have finished the pack, because of the different rates at which people use products. However, if should be possible to ensure that the test goes on long enough for most people to use up all the product. MR. N.J. V• ABBg: In a Round Robin design, one sometimes obtains the finding that A is better than B, B is better than C, but C is better than A. How would you interpret such a result? T• L•CTUR•R: Such apparent anomalies can sometimes be explained by a chang- ing standard of judgement, which may be shown up in comments on the question- naire. It might be necessary to interview some of the panelists to try and get more information, and such checking can lead to useful new ideas. DR. T. J. ELLIOTT: Do you have any knowledge of the variation in results depend- ing on how one carries out the paired comparison test. I gather that if one wanted to evaluate a shampoo, the best way of doing it is to use shampoo A on one half of the head and shampoo B on the other, under the control of a professional hairdresser. If you are giving the panel two products to evaluate would you prefer if they used the two products simultaneously or would you prefer to let them use one product for a week, and the second product for the consequent week? How infallible is human memory? If one uses a product for a week and at the end of the week changes to another product, the one week of formative experience on product A is probably going to influence the reaction to product B, whereas if the two products are used simultaneously, a different result is obtained. Do you have any knowledge of this?