Archive for May, 2010

We took part in a webinar in cooperation with Peanut Labs.  The subject was blending.  But that’s not what our commentary is about.   Our thanks go out to an incredibly professional team.  These things take quite a bit of work.  It’s not enough to announce it; you have to get folks to listen in and stay engaged.  If we thought we could do it as well as they do we would do it.  But we don’t and they do.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the peanuts are innovative.  They brought the industry digital fingerprinting and now they are the kings of social networks.  It will be interesting to watch them as the year’s progress.

Well, we are Yankee fans and we write this Blog so we must be right.   But this has to tie into sampling or it makes no sense here.   Baseball teams have to fill out a roster according to a fundamental model.   They will be playing a game that has offense and defense.  During those moments that they play defense, they require nine players, each with a particular position to fill.  Think of those nine positions as the model that drives sample selection in the baseball world.

The baseball diamond, with its nine field players, structures the kinds of people that will be on a baseball team.

So when George S. puts together a team, he has to keep in mind that his census of nine must be considered as part of his criteria.

When we chose sample we need to fill out some form of model that we seek to represent.   It could be the census of the United States or that of an industry.  Whatever it is, the sample frame must represent something.  Keep that in mind next time you order sample from your friendly provider.

What does your sample frame represent?

We believe that when you buy sample from a panel house you are accepting their blending model by default.   Therefore, even if they do not do any blending you are assuming that they do.

Baseball is a game of stats and blending is the practice of combining sources with the use of statistics.  Baseball is ubiquitous in the US as are soccer and rugby and cricket wherever you call home.

Blending and the rules of the game had best become second nature to all of us.

When we say that a blend is a statement of intent on the part of a researcher we mean that in every possible way.  Our conclusion is that we have the professional responsibility to know what the blends we receive are best used for.

Many panel companies mix sample sources together for good business purpose.  At best they might pursue some element of consistency.  Think of the last time you used a sample from an online provider, did you really enquire as to its sample design.

The samples we receive are the product of their constituent parts.  To assume that these parts are the same from sample to sample and time to time is almost ludicrous.  What we get is what we ask for.  When we fail to ask the right questions, we get an unknown amalgam of whatever is best assembled by the sample provider.

Yes.  They intend well.  But they are not the sampling professional.  We are the ones who will take data that comes from those respondents and make something out of it.  What can you make when you have no understanding of its component parts?

As Cher would say, “Forget about it!”

Blending in online panels will happen with our without our involvement.  In our mind blending is the scientific combination of sources to replicate an intended standard.  We seek to represent something that matters to us when we blend.  It is our responsibility as a profession to blend samples together to achieve our objectives.

When we purchase a sample from an online panel we are accepting their concept of a blend.  We are more than accepting it we are endorsing it.  We are stating by our actions that it is fit for purpose.  That purpose, more often than not is to perform market research.  Thus, even though we have little knowledge that the blend used by the panel is fit for anything, replicates anything and isn’t replete with bias, by using it we endorse it as fit for our use.  We elevate it.

Is that what you meant to do?