Recently, we at inVibe conducted a mixed-methods survey asking 150 NEUROs to evaluate three concepts about a treatment for epilepsy. Most (n=100) responded to open-ended prompts with a written response at the end of the study. Another 20 NEUROs responded with voice-recorded responses.
We asked NEUROs to rank three concepts in order from most to least preferred and then to explain their rankings, especially why they chose their top-ranked concept. We found that just as the research method we choose dictates the type of results we receive, the type of data we collect dictates the quality and depth of insights that can be produced.
OVERALL SUMMARY
When comparing the written and voice responses, we find that NEUROs have a lot more to say—about 7 times more!—when responding out loud. This is consistent with what we found previously when comparing written and spoken responses from Gastroenterologists about etrolizumab.
In addition, we found that written responses express positivity towards their preferred concept but provide very few details about why. Verbal responses, on the other hand, are about 5 times more descriptive, revealing specific reasons why NEUROs like what they like. This is consistent with prior inVibe concept testing research that demonstrated that both patients and HCPs use more descriptive language when speaking out loud.
DETAILED OBSERVATIONS
Digging deeper into this analysis, we compared the written responses and the voice responses using two forms of text composition statistics: total word count and descriptive language.
Quantity
The first way we compared the data quality between the written and verbal responses was to look at the number of words per response. What we found was a clear difference in volume.
| Quantitative Survey | Voice Response Survey | |
|---|---|---|
| Words per Response | Average: 10.8 Median: 8 Range: 1 - 37 | Average: 75.9 Median: 67 Range: 27 - 172 |
On average, voice responses were over 7 times longer than written responses. The shortest voice response is 26 words longer than the shortest written response, and the longest voice response is 137 words longer than the longest written response.
The shortest written responses provide extremely succinct explanations of what the NEUROs like about their preferred concept: “professional” and “Aesthetics.” By comparison, the shortest voice response tells us: “I felt [Concept] the most compelling. I think the imagery is the most unique and most appropriate regarding seizures. And that's about it.”
In the voice response, this NEURO identifies unique imagery and relevance to seizures as the reasons behind their concept preference. In writing, NEUROS do not specify what they find professional or what they like about the aesthetics, leaving the “why” behind their preferences unsaid.
Quality
The second way we compared the data quality between written and verbal responses was to look at descriptive language, specifically adverbs and adjectives. We found that not only was a greater quantity of data collected via voice response, but the responses are more descriptive as well.
| Quantitative Survey | Voice Response Survey | |
|---|---|---|
| Descriptive Words per Response | Average: 2.14 Median: 2 Range: 0 - 8 | Average: 10.1 Median: 9 Range: 5 - 21 |
NEUROs use on average 5 times more descriptive words in voice responses than in written responses.
Ten percent of written responses include no descriptive words at all, writing things like: “Order of importance” or “Its functionality” or “The statement and the graph.” These provide little to no insight into why these NEUROs like their preferred concept, making it difficult to draw actionable conclusions.
By contrast, NEUROs use descriptive words to describe visual elements and messages and convey the emotional impact of their preferred concept in the voice response data. For instance:
“I found the last concept, [Concept] with the [redacted] image, to be the most motivating. It clearly is visually appealing, it's memorable, you quickly get the sense that this is an [redacted] therapy, that it ties into brain functioning and seizure control. Unfortunately, the verbiage for this is not very good, and perhaps there were better choices of slogans or supporting evidence from the abundant materials that they could have used to highlight the benefits of [redacted] to the fullest.”
In this response, the NEURO includes explanations about what he likes the most and what he thinks could be improved about his most preferred concept. He identifies the imagery as “motivating” and “visually appealing,” but finds the messaging “not very good.” The detail in this response allows us to provide actionable insights to our clients about what the concept does well and what could be improved.
RESPONSE COMPARISONS
To further illustrate how the spoken and written responses compare, below are a few responses from the survey.
| Quantitative Survey | Voice-Response Survey |
|---|---|
| “It is an image that fits the world of epilepsy better in terms of the headline, the colours chosen, the iconographic representation, the visual effect” | “[Concept] was definitely the most motivating and, to me, was the most memorable because the imagery was impactful. It caught my eye. And the imagery was not just generic. It linked to seizures, and the roots of the tree linked to the [redacted]. And the imagery made me feel like, okay, how do I actually control these seizures in my patients? So, I think [Concept] was the winner for me.” |
| “The first picture showed a relevant every-day benefit for patients and also appeals to me emotionally. The second picture was also convicing but less powerfully” | “Personally, [Concept] was the most motivating overall. I think it provided the most sort of down-to-earth, practical application, the practical benefit of [redacted] and improving the quality of patients' lives. It is an activity that's very relatable. The kids were the subject here with epilepsy, playing basketball and having everyday victories, which correlate with long-term efficacy of [redacted]. So, yeah, I mean, I would say this was also the most memorable concept to me. I tend to like advertisements or educational campaigns that don't try to be too gimmicky, but I thought that the tagline, [redacted], was, again, certainly it meshes well with the imagery. It's easy for me to sort of imagine this being something I could offer several specific patients that currently are limited by their epilepsy. Yeah” |
Each of these responses cover many of the same topics: relevance to epilepsy, impactful imagery, relevance to patients, and emotional appeal. However, the voice responses convey more, identifying which parts of the imagery caught their eye, imagining how they would utilize these concepts in discussions with patients, and comparing this concept to others.
Utilizing voice-response data allows our trained linguists at inVibe to better help our clients understand the thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes of NEUROs and make more impactful recommendations to optimize concepts.
PARTNERING WITH INVIBE
Our Listening Platform makes it simple for HCPs, patients, and caregivers to speak with us about their experiences in an open and authentic way and easy for you to engage with their perspectives directly.
We’d love to collaborate with you on your research needs! Contact us to learn more about how the inVibe team can help you accomplish your business objectives, and even take a tour of the exciting new dashboard features allowing for better, faster research.
