The qual revolution

x Sponsored content on Research Live and in Impact magazine is editorially independent.
Find out more about advertising and sponsorship.

Immediately after World War II, market research in Britain consisted of fairly straightforward usage and attitude surveys. By the 1950s, however, the emphasis had moved increasingly into developing research’s ability to explain, and not simply to describe. Attempts to uncover why consumers bought particular products and brands were given extra impetus by the growing concept of brand image. 

On the technical side, the development of attitude-scaling methods and other work in the US, by sociological researchers such as Paul Lazarsfeld, led to the use of more complex (and longer) questionnaires – and of more advanced statistical techniques, such as factor analysis. But, on the whole, this was a process of evolutionary development rather than revolutionary change. 

In the middle of the 1950s, however, came two potentially game-changing developments. One was the advent of computers into research agency work. Over time, this dramatically altered research activities, initially in the fields of media and panel research. Even so, the main impact of this and other technological developments was not fully felt until later, with the creation of the internet, the introduction of mobile phones and the growth of ‘big data’. 

The second major development of the 1950s – the arrival of ‘motivation research’ – had more immediate effects. Up until this point, the application of psychological theory to market research in the UK had been limited and relatively uncommon. However, growing publicity for the work of US psychologists and psychoanalysts such as Ernest Dichter helped to increase interest – and heighten controversy – among UK researchers, advertising agencies and their clients. In the case of BMRB, for example, a reconnaissance visit by Dichter in 1955-56 led us to set up a new qualitative research unit and alter our company organisation.

From the mid-1950s onwards, the impact of motivation research on the profession and marketing in the UK generally was striking. It triggered sometimes heated debates on a wide range of issues, including: how important is it for a survey sample to be representative of the survey population; and how is ‘representative’ best defined? How much weight can be attached to the findings from small samples? How reproducible are the findings? What are the effects of interviewer/respondent interactions, and the setting and context of an interview? What training is needed by people carrying out motivational research? What are the relative merits and limitations of ‘depth interviews’ and group discussions? How can possible biases held by the survey designer, interviewer or analyst best be allowed for? Is there too much reliance on ‘gurus’? Could such research be more appropriately carried out closer to the creative department within an advertising agency?

Arguments about these and related questions risked creating a virtual polarisation of the market research profession – ‘qual’ v ‘quant’. It took some years for any general agreement to be reached about the appropriate relationship between the various research approaches. This upheaval, which started in the 1950s, can reasonably be described as a revolution – but it was one that led to a better understanding of the nature of differing methods and techniques, and to a more broadly based profession.

John Downham is a Fellow and former chairman of MRS