MRC 2009

Thanks again to all speakers at Mobile Research Conference 2009 who inspired us with their insights and experience. Please find a brief description of each session below.

Tim Macer from meaning ltd opened the conference with a look at how technology is being used in mobile research and the advantages the technique offers. Pointing to the growth of online as a methodology, he expected mobile research take-up to take several years but to happen. In fact almost all the speakers underlined these advantages, from speed and sheer numbers of responses to the ability to survey 'in the moment' and to reach niche groups such as young people and business people. Tim predicted that the mobile web will also bridge the global digital divide by allowing researchers to reach people all over the world.

Michael Link and Karen Benezra from The Nielsen Company showed how mobile research can be an ethnographic tool using a recent project for Microsoft as the case study. Ralph Risk from Lightspeed Research shared three case studies from live events ranging from Champions League football to the Live Earth global concerts to show the many advantages of mobile research in action.

Jacob Lyng Wieland from the Danish Broadcasting Corporation and Berit Puggaard from TNS Gallup shared some fascinating insights into their experiences of using the mobile phone to measure TV broadcast quality in Denmark, not just looking at the ratings of particular programmes, but the emotions they trigger.

Frederic-Charles Petit and Steve Lavine from Toluna presented 'Anytime Anywhere Mobile Interviewing', comparing mobile voice and web response patterns.

Vasja Vehovar of the University of Ljubljana kicked off the second day looking at the mixed mode research method and how it can maximise response rates and project budgets. He also discussed sampling methodologies and how best to correct for bias. One of the most interesting aspects of his research was the comparison of the different research methodologies and their associated biases.

Malte Friedrich-Freksa of YOC AG and Gottfried Metzger from the University of Mannheim compared and contrasted the personal mobile panel research and ad hoc mobile portal research approaches, showing some interesting differences for researchers to consider when choosing the most appropriate methodology. Otto Hellwig and Tom Wirth from Respondi discussed how mobile questionnaires can improve data quality in online panels. Using an example of research carried out in Germany, they showed how interest in mobile surveys had actually increased the overall response rate of individual panel members, and why. AJ Johnson of Ipsos presented findings from a mobile survey carried out by SMS to understand respondent engagement levels and to compare mobile with online. As AJ showed, the results were rather mixed but bode well for mobile surveys, even those carried out by text messaging.

Dr Liz Nelson of Q Research shared her experiences of researching young people through a mobile research panel and called for the Market Research Society and ESOMAR to establish clearer guidelines for both mobile and online research. Believing that the mobile is the research platform of the future, Liz cautioned that the mobile methodology could result in consumers preferring 'nano surveys' rather than the 45 minute face-to-face or 20 minute online surveys researchers prefer.

Alex Wilke of Globalpark shared the results of a mobile survey into the Olympics to reveal how a range of factors including survey design, incentives and mode impact response rates and results. Rein Ahas of the University of Tartu provided an interesting perspective into using the mobile to monitor tourism levels in Estonia.

Mark Cameron of Techneos Systems used his session to discuss the multi-modal future of mobile research. Mark presented a thought provoking look into the future where the mobile is the gateway to research consumers rather than today's 'interrupt' research approach. Ingvar Tjostheim and Lothar Fritsch of the Norwegian Computing Center concluded the conference with an examination of GPS and privacy, a topic that had been raised by both speakers and delegates throughout the conference. They shared how they use a Location Matcher for survey responses whilst maintaining respondent anonymity.

 


QR Code