Overall findings
This concept did not resonate very strongly with participants because they could not relate to it. They had a number of criticisms about the visual and some were unfamiliar with what exactly heart disease is. While the text was seen as being clear and readable, it did not have a strong impact on participants. Also, there were some issues with the layout on the slide-and-shell format.
Specific Findings
Initial impressions:
This concept did not resonate very strongly compared to others with participants raising criticisms on a number of fronts.
“You see good heart and bad heart... It’s not that prominent… It doesn’t stick out.”
Ability to get attention and motivate reading:
Many participants suggested this was a lot like what they had seen in the past, and therefore it would not attract their attention. Also they were not clear which heart was diseased, making the message somewhat less effective.
Understanding of the message and meaning:
The idea of heart disease itself was also not well understood by many – they might think of heart attacks, but they are not sure what heart disease is and how it is caused by smoking. The idea of being four times more likely to develop heart disease was also not clear to everyone.
“Four times more likely than what? That line confuses me.”
© Decima Research Inc. | decima.com 37
Quality and effectiveness of the text:
While the text was clear and readable, it did not have the same impact as other concepts. In particular, “four times more likely” did not strike a chord with participants. Many said they wished to see the numbers or percentages of heart disease for non-smokers compared to smokers. Without more explanation about the direct links or more statistics, many participants refuted the message by saying there are many things that cause heart disease (lack of exercise, high cholesterol, or hereditary factors).
“Give me some firm concrete number that you are going to die at 40.”
Relevance:
Overall, this concept was not particularly relevant. The visual of an organ (even with the before/after format) did not make a strong emotional impact on the participants, which made it less relevant overall.
“More standard or what you’d expect to see and I’d just sort of glaze over it…didn’t even think the diseased heart looked all that bad, just carve the fat off.”
Ability to inform and educate:
Most participants said they felt there was no new information presented in this message because it was a message they have seen before.
“Nothing new here…”
Credibility:
Since this was something most people had heard about before, they found it credible that heart disease was linked to smoking, even if they did not exactly know how.
« C’est un message général, on le sait déjà. » Readability and visibility:
The subtext under the hearts was a little small for some (older) participants, but generally the rest was readable.
Cohesiveness of the headline and sub-text:
The idea of heart disease was not well understood by many. Some said they might think of heart attacks, but they were not sure they knew what heart disease was about.
“It says heart disease; it doesn’t specify what kind of heart disease.”
© Decima Research Inc. | decima.com 38
Quality and effectiveness of the picture:
Participants had some issues with the pictures. Firstly, many said they did not make an emotional or personal connection to the concept. Secondly, the picture of the hearts was seen as “old news,” mainly because they had seen these types of images often and they had become desensitized to them. It was therefore less effective than others tested.
Cohesiveness of picture and text:
Generally, the picture and the text were seen to fit well together, as they both told a story about heart disease.
Ability to be memorable:
Most participants said they felt there was nothing new to this message, and therefore not very memorable.
Flip-Top vs. Slide-and-Shell:
The layout on the slide-and-shell in particular was not well received because the top part was said to be too “boxy” with a text-box next to the boxed-in hearts.
Suggestions:
• Many participants said the picture did not have an impact on them.
They suggested if the picture depicted a person suffering from heart disease or other consequences of smoking the concept would be more effective than the anonymous organ. To many, the picture looked like “just a piece of meat”).
• Participants said the top part of the concept was too boxy and it did not work well for the slide-and-shell packs. Most agreed that it would look better laid-out in a different way.
• Participants said the “up to 4 times” could be changed to reflect the chances of a smoker versus a non-smoker in developing heart disease. They also suggested changing the message completely to something more strongly worded about the consequences of smoking and its effects on the heart – chances of dying from a heart attack for instance – instead of using “heart disease”, which many thought was too vague.
Concept Classification:
Best concepts (overall) - needs only minor adjustments Good opportunity - needs some improvements
Needs major improvement
Least effective - needs complete rethink/rework
© Decima Research Inc. | decima.com 39