Técnica Projetiva

8/9/2019 Técnica Projetiva

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tecnica-projetiva 1/7

Projective techniques in Consumer Research

ISSN 0378-5254 Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences, Vol 28, 2000

47

Projective techniques in consumer research

Suné Donoghue

OPSOMMING

Projektiewe tegnieke behels 'n dubbelsinnige stimu-lus waarvolgens die subjek sy/haar persoonlikheid,houdings, opinies en selfkonsep - as integrale deelvan die self - in ‘n situasie projekteer ten eindestruktuur of betekenis daaraan te gee. Projektiewetegnieke word in kwalitatiewe verbruikersgedrag- enbemarkingstudies gebruik om subjekte se onbe-wuste of "verskuilde" gevoelens, houdings en mo-tiewe bloot te lê en om stereotipiese en sydige re-sponspatrone uit te skakel.

Projektiewe tegnieke word in kwalitatiewe verbrui-kersgedragnavorsing gebruik en aan die hand vandie ontwerp en struktuur, verskillende tipes en dieanalise en interpretasie van data ontgin deur diegebruik van projektiewe tegnieke beskryf.Geldigheids- en betroubaarheidsoorwegings asookdie nadele en voordele van projektiewe tegniekeword bespreek. Gevallestudies word beskryf om tetoon hoe projektiewe tegnieke met ander kwalita-tiewe data-insamelingsmetodes (diepteonderhoudeen fokusgroeponderhoude) gekombineer kan wordom meer insig oor die hoe, waarom en wat van ver-bruikers se gedrag te bekom.

— Ms S Donoghue

Department of Consumer Science, University of Pretoria

INTRODUCTION

Various projective techniques for personality assess-ment and psychoanalytic treatment in clinical psychol-ogy have increasingly gained acceptance since WorldWar II (Bellak, 1992; Graham & Lilly, 1984:212; Kas-sarjian, 1974:3-85). A set of projective techniquesthat were originally developed by clinical psychologistswas adapted for use in consumer and marketing re-search (Berkman & Gilson, 1986:365; Loudon & DellaBitta, 1993:619; Kassarjian, 1974:3-85). These tech-niques became generally known as motivation re-search.

Projective techniques are not exclusively used tostudy consumer motivation, nor do these techniquescontain all the tools for such studies. Motivation re-search shares many techniques with other consumerresearch areas using qualitative rather than quantita-tive research approaches (Loudon & Della Bitta,1993:619).

Projective techniques may be classified as a struc-tured-indirect way of investigating the whys of situa-tions (Webb, 1992:125). They are not used to meas-ure (that is more the territory of other techniques suchas surveys), but to uncover feelings, beliefs, attitudesand motivation which many consumers find difficult to

articulate (Webb, 1992:125-126). Projective tech-niques help the researcher enter the private worlds ofsubjects to uncover their inner perspectives in a waythey feel comfortable with (Gordon & Langmaid,1988:90; Loudon & Della Bitta, 1993:619).

This article describes the use of projective techniquesin qualitative consumer research. Psychology's basictheoretical foundations - from which the use of projec-tive techniques in consumer research evolved - arebriefly discussed. Projective techniques are describedwith reference to their design and structure, the differ-ent types of projective technique are discussed, as arethe analysis and interpretation of data generated byusing projective techniques. Their reliability and valid-ity are investigated, and the advantages and disad-vantages of projective techniques are discussed.Case studies are presented where projective tech-niques have been used outside the clinical setting.

THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF PROJECTIVETECHNIQUES IN PSYCHOLOGY

Projective techniques involve the use of vague, am-biguous, unstructured stimulus objects or situations inwhich the subject "projects" his or her personality, atti-tude, opinions and self-concept to give the situationsome structure (Adams & Schvaneveldt in Burns &







49

the most flexible projective technique in marketing andconsumer research as the TAT pictures may be modi-fied to fit most marketing and consumer researchproblems, ranging from image studies to underlyingconsumer attitudes (Kassarjian, 1974:3-92; Churchill,1991:324; Berkman & Gilson, 1986:367).

The Rorschach inkblot test has not been used much,nor has it been adapted for use in marketing research(Kassarjian, 1974:3-93; Gordon & Langmaid,1988:96). It is assumed that the Rorschach test re-veals deep layers of the unconscious – the forces thatgive rise to psychoses. It would therefore be folly toassume that these same forces underlie aspects ofconsumer behaviour (Kassarjian, 1974:3-94).

Types of projective techniques

Projective techniques have been categorised in termsof the response types required of subjects. The first

category is association. The subjects are presentedwith a stimulus and they respond by indicating the firstword, image or thought elicited by the stimulus (Burns& Lennon, 1993).

In the case of word association, the subjects areasked to read a list of words and to indicate the firstword that comes to mind. The answers provide theresearcher with a variety of "consumer vocabulary”associated with brands or products (Green, 1984). This can be useful in discovering a brand image orproduct attributes. Brand personification requires thesubjects to associate a brand or product with a personor personality type. With the pictures and words tech-nique, the subjects are given a number of words andpictures and are asked to choose those they associ-ate with a brand or product and to explain their choice.This allows the researcher to discover the more emo-tional responses to brands and imagery (Green, 1984;Gordon & Langmaid, 1988:95-98).

In the second category, namely construction, the subject is asked to construct a story or a picture from astimulus concept (Burns & Lennon, 1993). The con-struction procedure requires more complex and con-trolled intellectual activity on the part of the subject.The subjects are for example handed a picture or aseries of pictures in which consumers and productsare the primary topics. One or more persons are usu-

ally depicted in ambiguous situations and the subjectsare asked to describe or assume the role of one ofthese people. They have to tell what this person isthinking, saying and doing. The subjects are asked tobuild a story around each picture, what led to it andwhat may happen in future (Dillon et al , 1987:136;Churchill, 1991:324; Gordon & Langmaid, 1988:101-103). These pictures derive from the psychologist’sTAT.

Projective questioning (third person techniques) re-quires the subjects to give opinions of other people'sactions, feelings or attitudes. “Bubble” drawings orcartoon tests provide an opportunity to fill in the

thought or speech bubbles of the characters depicted

in ambiguous situations that are of interest to the re-searcher (Gordon & Langmaid, 1988:101-106).

A third projective technique is completion. The subjectis given an incomplete sentence, story, argument orconversation, and asked to finish it (Burns & Lennon,

1993). Sentence completion is useful when time islimited, but depth of feeling still has to be tapped(Green, 1984; Gordon & Langmaid, 1988:99).

According to Gordon and Langmaid (1988:101), brandmapping is a completion technique for which a varietyof competing brands are displayed. The subjects areasked to group these brands according to some subject-stipulated characteristic. Brand mapping may beused in new product development and as a way togain an understanding of how subjects view a productmarket.

A fourth projective technique is termed “expressive”.

A subject is asked to role-play, act, draw or paint aspecific concept or situation (Burns & Lennon, 1993).Expressive techniques focus on the manner in whichthe subject constructs something, rather than on whatit represents (Gordon & Langmaid, 1988:106).

Choice ordering is a last type of projective techniqueand it is frequently used in quantitative research.However, the technique is informally used in qualita-tive research when the subjects have to explain whycertain things are "most important" or "least impor-tant", or to "rank" or "order" or "categorise" certain fac-tors associated with a product, brand or service(Gordon & Langmaid, 1988:112-113; Burns & Lennon,1993).

Analysis and interpretation of data

Interpreting data generated by using projective tech-niques follows two broad approaches. In quantitativeanalysis, the content of verbal or pictorial descriptionsor sorted information is analysed by classifying thecontent into categories that are then given numericalvalues (Burns & Lennon, 1993). Specific componentsof the test protocol are thus tabulated and used sys-tematically to evaluate either a subject's responses orthe empirical validity of generalisations about groups(Levy, 1981).

Qualitative analysis accepts introspection as data andlooks for subjective meanings, thus acknowledging theneed for interpretation (Levy, 1981). Qualitative analy-sis and interpretation of projective techniques are nodifferent from the procedures for qualitative researchin general. There are no systems of scoring or tabula-tion. Instead the description and explanation of theprojections by the subjects form the database whichthen requires ordering and interpretation (Gordon &Langmaid, 1988:118). It is phenomenological and in-terested in symbolic interactionism, trying to see whatlies behind or is meant by manifest behaviour (Levy,1981). Consumer researchers use a range of inter-pretive approaches to data, including semiotic analysis(Alexander et al in Catterall & Ibbotson, 2000) and




ISSN 0378-5254 Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en Verbruikerswetenskappe, Vol 28, 2000

50

story grammars (Mick et al in Catterall & Ibbotson,2000).

Reliability and validity

The value of any instrument, whether it is a self-

administered questionnaire or a projective technique,is dependent on the validity and reliability of the col-lected data (Kassarjian, 1974:3-95).

Dozens of studies in the psychology literature point toadequate reliability and validity of the carefully devel-oped and standardised projective techniques that areoften used by psychologists. On the other hand anequal number of studies suggest that these tech-niques are not sufficiently reliable or valid (Kassarjian,1974:3-95). One may well ask whether the projectivetechniques modified by marketing and consumer re-searchers provide reliable and valid data (Kassarjian,1974:3-95).

Reliability refers to the stability with which a tech-nique yields information (Macfarlane & Tuddenham,1951:35). In temporal reliability projective techniquesmust for example yield data that are stable over time.If subjects are tested and later retested, their re-sponses must remain similar and highly correlated(Kassarjian, 1974:3-95). Obviously, a subject's basicneed-value system (his or her underlying motivations)are enduring. If the responses are affected by situ-ational factors, the technique is unreliable and thedata are generally unusable (Kassarjian, 1974:3-95).

Another form of reliability that is crucially important toany projective technique is coder or interpreter reli-

ability. If two equally competent interpreters interpretthe data in a significantly different manner, the tech-nique should be questioned (Macfarlane & Tudden-ham, 1951:36).

Reliability may be established through triangulation,that is the use of two or more methods of data collec-tion (Cohen & Manion in Burns & Lennon, 1993; Belket al in Burns & Lennon, 1993). Combining projectivetechniques with informal interviewing will enhancetheir value. Projective stimuli are often used in con- junction with individual interviews, and focus-groupmoderators also use projective stimuli to enhancefocus-group discussions (Gordon & Langmaid,

1988:114; Solomon, 1994:25).

Validity refers to the degree in which the techniquemeasures what it is supposed to measure. If the projective technique purports to measure underlying mo-tivation (need-value system), how well does it actuallymeasure this basic substructure of the individual?(Kassarjian, 1974:3-96).

The purpose of projective techniques is to get belowthe surface of the underlying need-value system ofthe individual, his or her personality and motivations(Kassarjian, 1974:3-97). This implies that the re-searcher must be skilled to categorise and interpretresponse protocols. Allocating information to catego-

ries requires logical argumentation and interpretationof data. A skilled and experienced researcher contrib-utes to the inferential validity of a study, in other wordsthe validity of the logical inferences drawn during exe-cution of a research project.

Whereas the clinician is concerned with internal valid-ity, that is whether a study has generated accurateand valid findings about the individual who has beenstudied, the marketing and consumer researcher isconcerned with external validity, that is whether thefindings of a project can be generalised in similarcases (Kassarjian, 1974:3-96). Kassarjian (1974:3-96) questions the external validity of projective tech-niques when the marketing or consumer researcherhas to generalise from a small and perhaps unrepre-sentative sample to a population of potential users orbuyers. Webb (1992:128) believes that projectivetechniques are useful in the exploratory stage of a re-search project, when ideas and hypotheses are re-

quired. When projective techniques have brought hid-den attitudes or feelings into the open, other researchtechniques may be employed - techniques that arecapable of rendering results that can be used to gen-eralise about the characteristics of a population, forexample survey methods and attitude scales (Webb,1992:129).

Advantages and disadvantages of projective tech-niques

The primary disadvantage of projective techniques isthe complexity of the data and the corresponding skillsrequired of the researcher (Burns & Lennon, 1993).The responses have little meaning without careful

evaluation by researchers who are both trained andskilled interpreters of information. For this reason projective techniques are heavily criticised. A consider-able degree of subjectivity applies in the interpretationof responses to projective techniques, and the expertsfrequently disagree among themselves (Sampson,1986:42; Churchill, 1991:325).

Projective techniques are expensive to administer be-cause highly skilled research staff have to be em-ployed. Moreover, it is difficult to perform projectivetests with statistically significant samples, and this re-stricts generalisation of the results to the population asa whole (Webb, 1992:129).

It may be difficult to get the subjects to project them-selves into the roles the researchers wish them to as-sume. Some subjects may not agree to participate inexercises such as role playing (Webb, 1992:128;Berkman & Gilson, 1986:368).

The reliability of measures is very difficult to establish.However, triangulation does establish reliability (Belket al in Burns & Lennon, 1993).

Employing projective techniques does have several

advantages, for example the amount, richness andaccuracy of the information that is collected (Burns &Lennon, 1993; Wagner, 1995). Projective techniques





51

can make a significant contribution if the research isconcerned with beliefs, values, motivation, personalityor other aspects related to individuals, their uniquecognitions and behaviour (Kassarjian, 1974:3-97;Webb, 1992:128). These techniques provide a viewof the overall functioning of individuals (Thorndike in

Berkman & Gilson, 1986:368).

A variety of projective techniques is frequently used inthe context of intensive individual interviews or con-ventional focus-group discussions (Sampson,1986:40; Webb, 1992:125; Solomon, 1994:25).These techniques may be introduced at differentstages in the discussion once the subjects feel com-fortable with the moderator and each other (Green,1984). Projective techniques may be used as a wayof "breaking the ice" in a focus-group discussion atthe start of a qualitative research project (Webb,1992:128). Subjects enjoy projective techniques thatcreate new energy in a group discussion and lighten

the mood or tone of the proceedings (Gordon & Lang-maid, 1988:89; Green, 1984).

The nature of appraisals is usually well disguised andthe subjects are not aware of the purpose of the exer-cise. Even if they are aware of the general nature ofthe appraisal, they do not know which aspects of theirresponses are significant or the extent of this signifi-cance. The tasks presented to the subjects are usu-ally somewhat novel and quite unstructured. They donot perceive right or wrong answers to the exerciseand are encouraged to respond with a wide range ofideas (Burns & Lennon, 1993; Wagner, 1995;Thorndike in Berkman & Gilson, 1986:368).

Projective techniques supplement and verify intuitionin generating hypotheses - hypotheses on why con-sumers behave as they do, why they buy or not andwhy they are influenced or not may emerge from theresponse protocols. These hypotheses should subse-quently be tested and verified by way of experimentaltechniques, panel studies and surveys among repre-sentative samples according to carefully designedprocedures (Kassarjian, 1974:3-97, 3-98).

Most of these techniques make little or no demand interms of literacy or academic skills. They are pre-dominantly nonreading, largely independent of par-ticular languages, and in some cases do not involve

speech at all. Their scope is therefore much widerthan that of self-reporting or rating procedures(Thorndike in Berkman & Gilson, 1986:368).

Case studies

Three case studies are discussed below to illustratethe use of projective techniques as a research tool.

Will et al (1996) demonstrated that projective tech-niques are extremely useful in opening discussions ordebating issues that are socially sensitive, or wheresubjects may be embarrassed, lack knowledge or fearself-incrimination.

The research aimed at exploring the respondents’perceptions of factors that affect their health; aware-ness and knowledge of contraceptives and well-woman services; their attitudes, feelings and experi-ence of these services; barriers to use, and knowl-edge, attitudes and behaviour in connection with con-

traception.

The research was conducted by using a qualitativefocus-group methodology and projective techniquesthat were developed specifically for the project. Aword association technique was used to encouragethe subjects to think about factors that affect theirhealth. The factors were written on cards and pre-sented one at a time to the subjects for discussion.Using an association technique with prompt cardsallowed the moderator to use a choice-ordering tech-nique asking the subjects to rank the factors, for ex-ample which were important for health and whichwere least important? Sentence completion and pro-

jective questioning techniques involved asking thesubjects how someone else might complete a sen-tence or to comment on "other people's" experiences.The subjects reacted favourably to these sentencesor "quotes" and began to discuss their own experi-ences openly.

Another technique these researchers used was anadaptation of an element of brand mapping. The subjects were encouraged to examine and discuss arange of contraceptives that were displayed on a tray.This allowed the research team to gather interestinginsights into the subjects' awareness and perceptionsof different contraceptives. This information wouldotherwise have been difficult to generate through a

more direct questioning approach without the use ofvisual aids to facilitate discussion (Will et al , 1996).

Will et al (1996) stated that the application of projec-tive techniques is not restricted to social cause issuesand that these techniques would also be of value tothose in commercial marketing and consumer re-search who seek to understand how a product mightovercome certain social barriers to entry.

Donoghue (1998) followed a qualitative researchstrategy, using unstructured interviews and projectivetechniques to explore and describe the role of socialmotives and consumer stereotyping in selected up-

coming consumers' choice of large electrical house-hold appliances.

The projective techniques that were used includedsentence completion and construction. The construc-tion techniques involved asking the subjects to re-spond to pictures that depicted ambiguous situationsrelevant to the aspects that were being studied. Thesubjects were asked to assume the role of and tocharacterise the person depicted in each picture.They had to describe what was going on in each pic-ture, what gave rise to it and what they expected theoutcome to be.




ISSN 0378-5254 Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en Verbruikerswetenskappe, Vol 28, 2000

52

The results of this study indicated among other thingsthat social motives seemed to guide the subjects'choice of large electrical household appliances.These subjects apparently formed stereotypes of their reference groups and allocated certain symbolicmeanings to them, based on their ownership of large

electrical household equipment.

Donoghue (1998) successfully demonstrated that projective techniques may be used to reveal consumers’hidden attitudes, feelings, beliefs and motives that areintimately associated with the decision to buy or not tobuy.

Catterall and Ibbotson (2000) employed projectivetechniques in an education research project. Theyhad to contribute to the evaluation of a computer-based guide to a university library. The studentswere invited to use the guide and the researcherssubsequently administered a range of projective tech-

niques.

The projective techniques they used were word asso-ciation, sentence completion, cartoon bubble comple-tion, picture sorting and product personification. Theproduct personification technique required the stu-dents to imagine that the guide was a person and tocomplete, on this person's behalf, a dating agencyapplication form. Three distinctive "persons"emerged from the responses and the students helpedto interpret them.

When the students were asked to personify the guide,some thought of it as an electronic librarian (dull andboring). Others thought of it as a rather superior li-

brarian (a well-informed person who lets you knowthe right way to go). Still others personified the libraryguide in terms of the technology or platform(expensive and glossy, good to look at but not muchunderneath it all, or, nice form but not much sub-stance).

Although Catterall and Ibbotson (2000) experienced afew design pitfalls, they demonstrated that projectivetechniques could be fun and engaging for the subjects, especially when they become involved in theanalysis and interpretation.

CONCLUSION

Gordon and Langmaid (1993:3) believe that qualita-tive research may be used optimally in situations thatwould increase understanding, expand knowledge,clarify the real issues, generate hypotheses, identify arange of behaviours, explain and explore consumermotivations, attitudes and behaviour, identify distinctbehavioural groups, and provide input for future re-search. Qualitative research is mainly used for an-swering “how”, “why” and “what” questions. It is notused for "how many" questions, that is the prove-nance of the quantitative research schools of thought(Webb, 1993:112).

In consumer research qualitative data collection meth-ods include group discussions, individual in-depth in-terviews, observation and projective techniques(Webb, 1992:112). Group discussions and individualin-depth interviews have both advantages and disad-vantages. Whereas direct questions elicit responses

that may be simple to verbalise, projective techniquesreveal subjective thoughts and emotions. Projectivetechniques may be used in combination with individ-ual interviews and group discussions to overcomesome of the problems associated with both. Projec-tive techniques therefore complement other qualitativedata collection methods by drawing complete portraitsof consumers.

Kidder in Webb (1992:125) says projective techniquesare useful in ...encouraging in subjects a state of free-dom and spontaneity of expression where there isreason to believe that subjects cannot easily evaluateor describe their motivations or feelings ... or where

topics on which subjects may hesitate to express theiropinions directly for fear of disapproval by the investi-gator or when subjects are likely to consider directquestions as unwarranted invasion of privacy or tofind them threatening for some other reason.

It is possible to use projective techniques to find outfrom a consumer what the phenomenological charac-teristics of various products may be, in other wordsthe value character of a product in the consumer's lifeand not the physical characteristics of the product(Haire, 1950). Projective techniques are fundamentalto consumer research in that they provide a greaterdepth of understanding of what people truly think andfeel about a product (Green, 1984; Will et al , 1996).

REFERENCES

BERKMAN, HW & GILSON, C. 1986. Consumer behaviour .Concepts and strategies. 3rd ed. Boston. Kent.BELLAK, L. 1992. Projective techniques in the computerage. Journal of Personality Assessment 58(3):445-453.BURNS, LD & LENNON, SJ. 1993. Social perception: meth-ods for measuring our perception of others. InternationalTextile and Apparel Association Special Publication 5:153-159.CATTERALL, M & IBBOTSON, P. 2000. Using projectivetechniques in education research. British Educational Re-search Journal 26(2):245-247.

CHURCHILL, GA. 1991. Marketing research methodologicalfoundations. 5th ed. Chicago. Dryden.CRUMBAUGH, JC. 1990. The meaning of projective tech-niques. In Crumbaugh, JC, Graca, J, Hutzell, RR, Whiddon,MF & Cooper, EC. 1990. A primer of projective techniques of

psychological assessment . California. Libra.DONOGHUE, S. 1998. 'n Verkennend-beskrywende onder-soek na die rol van sosiale motiewe en verbruikerstereotiper-ing by bepaalde swart, vroulike, opkomende verbruikers sekeuse van groot elektriese huishoudelike toerusting . Skripsievir Magistergraad in Huishoudkunde. Pretoria. Universiteitvan Pretoria.DILLON, WR, MADDEN, TJ & FIRTLE, NH. 1987. Marketingresearch in a marketing environment . St Louise. Times Mirror.GORDON, W & LANGMAID, R. 1988. Qualitative market re-search. Aldershot. Gower.GRAHAM, JR & LILLY, RS. 1984. Psychological testing . Engle-





53

wood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.GREEN, J. 1984. Approaching the core of consumer behaviour.Marketing Research November:19-20.HAIRE, M. 1950. Projective techniques in marketing research.Journal of Marketing Research 14(5):649-656.JANDA, LH. 1998. Psychological testing: theory and applica-tions. Boston. Allyn & Bacon.

KASSARJIAN, HH. 1974. Projective methods. In Ferber, R.1974. Handbook of marketing research. New York. McGraw-Hill.KLINE, P. 1983. Personality: measurement and theory . London.Hutchinson.LEVY, SJ. 1981. Interpreting consumer mythology: a structuralapproach to consumer behaviour. Journal of Marketing 45:49-61.LOUDON, DL & DELLA BITTA, AJ. 1993. Consumer behaviour:concepts and application. 4th ed. New York. McGraw-Hill.MACFARLANE, JW & TUDDENHAM, RR. 1951. Problems inthe validation of projective techniques. In Anderson, HH &

Anderson, GL. 1951. An introduction to projective techniques.Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.PIOTROWSKI, C, KELLER, JW & OGWA, T. 1993. Projectivetechniques: an international perspective. Psychological Reports 72:179-182.SAMPSON, P. 1986. Qualitative research and motivation re-search. In Worcester, RM & Downham, J. 1986. Consumer mar-

ket research handbook . 3rd ed. Amsterdam. Elsevier.SOLOMON, MR. 1994. Consumer behaviour. Buying, havingand being. 2nd ed. Boston. Allyn & Bacon.WAGNER, EE. 1995. A logical analysis of projective techniquesbased on independence of items and latitude of response. Per-ceptual and Motor Skills 81:868-870.WEBB, JR. 1992. Understanding and designing marketing re-search. London. Academic Press.WILL, V, EADIE, D & MACASKILL, S. 1996. Projective andenabling techniques explored. Marketing Intelligence and Plan-ning 14(6):38-44. (Special Issue: Qualitative Market Research.)

Documents

Técnica Projetiva