Survata Study Uncovers Consumer Sentiment on Smart Speaker Sponsored Content

Read our exclusive release with Business Insider.
Download our full Smart Speaker Insights Sheet here.

Survata Study Uncovers Consumer Sentiment on Smart Speaker Sponsored Content
Apple HomePod Owners are Most Interested in Sponsored Content

In a study of 2,000 U.S. consumers, Market and Advertising Research and Measurement firm Survata today released findings on consumers’ sentiment toward receiving sponsored content on smart speakers, a growing consumer-device market. While the majority of consumers aren’t enthusiastic about experiencing more advertising, Survata found some interesting trends among the different smart-speaker brand owners.

Though they represented the smallest segment of smart speaker owners, Apple HomePod users are the most likely to be interested to hear about sponsored products or services (35 percent). That stands in contrast to Google HOME owners at 22 percent and Amazon Echo/Dot users at only 17 percent. In addition, Apple HomePod owners also were the most likely to think sponsored content would very positively affect their smart-speaker experiences (22 percent), compared to only 12 percent for Google HOME owners and 7 percent for Amazon Echo/Dot owners.

As brands and advertisers look to new ways to connect with potential customers, Survata also analyzed the types of sponsored content that consumers would find most helpful. Almost half (47 percent) thought restaurant sponsored recommendations would be helpful, with special events (41 percent), groceries (39 percent) and electronic products (37 percent) rounding out the top four.

The smart speaker study also uncovered some other notable findings, including:
23 percent: Ages 35-54 were the most likely group to be interested in sponsored content.
41 percent: High-frequency smart speaker users also were most likely to have interest in sponsored content.
38 percent: A plurality of consumers use their smart speaker 2-10 times a day.
72 percent: The most common task people use their smart speaker for is to listen to music, followed by checking the weather (54 percent) and asking questions or facts (52 percent).

For a full breakdown of all of the Survata Smart Speaker Study findings, you can view the full report here.

Survata conducted its Smart Speaker study in September 2018, interviewing 2,001 consumers. For more information on Survata’s methodology, please visit

Download our full Smart Speaker Insights Sheet here.

2018 Midterm Elections – Insights Sheet

2018 Midterm Elections Insights Sheet

Survata conducted a study to determine sentiment towards the upcoming 2018 Midterm Elections the weekend prior to voting day. Metrics such as voter turnout, registration, political ideology, and voting issues were included.

Findings include:

-Among voters planning to turn out, Asian Americans (92%) lead for ethnic groups, Liberals for ideology (94%), and Suburbanites (87%) for communities.

-When it came down to the issues respondents expressed the most consideration for healthcare (64%), taxes (56%), and the economy (54%).

-34% of 18-24 year-olds will consider the #MeToo movement while voting during the Midterm Elections.

To download the full Insights Sheet – click here.

Survats at Cynopsis Measurement & Data-Boot Camp

Survata was invited to teach at the upcoming Cynopsis Measurement & Data-Boot Camp in New York on November 7th. Our VP of Measurement, Jon Stewart, will be conducting a workshop titled “Maximizing your Programmatic Buy”. Measurement leaders from WPP, Facebook, Viacom, and Publicis will participate in this day-long event to build the essential, muscular foundation around how digital media is bought, sold, and measured.

Our session details:

Maximizing your Programmatic Buy
Programmatic media buying means that it’s easier for buyers to identify and evaluate their audiences across platforms, and easier for sellers to deliver the audiences that their clients want. But there’s still lots of murky water in the programmatic world that can lead to misspent money and lousy ROI. That’s why you need to attend this session.


Current best practices for the programmatic ecosystem
How to Assess your buy
How to Optimize the campaign
How to Evaluate results, from initial impression to conversion

Attending the boot-camp? Send us a note to connect.

To learn about about Survata’s Ad Measurement solutions, please contact us.

Zappi and Survata Launch Real-Time Brand-Impact Measurement Application

Ad Pulse Allows Brands to Measure and Test Brand Lift During Ad Campaigns

BOSTON and SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 30, 2018 — Today, Zappi, a leading consumer-insights automation platform, and top market and advertising research and measurement company Survata, announced Ad Pulse, an always-on attitudinal advertising metric that gives brands consistent brand-impact measurement for all of their advertising campaigns. Built on Zappi’s insights platform and directly powered by Survata, the world’s most advanced Ad Measurement platform with the industry’s largest consumer reach, Ad Pulse applies a uniform methodology to measure the brand impact of key brand metrics such as familiarity, awareness, consideration and usage. Brands now have a continuous and consistent way to know whether an ad drove brand impact on important key performance indicators (KPIs).

The launch of Ad Pulse comes at a time when brands need help to better understand ad spend return on investment (ROI). Brands are increasingly reluctant to rely solely on proxy metrics to measure digital spend and new research found that 76 percent of consumers exposed to digital ads do not recall seeing them. “Traditional behavioral metrics don’t always deliver meaningful insights,” said Lauren Palmer, Research Program Director for Corporate Advertising at IBM. “To ensure your digital advertising is effective and achieves strong ROI, it is critical to measure and optimize off the KPIs that really matter – those that are directly linked to your specific marketing objectives.”

“Zappi’s biggest brand clients have always used our platform to ensure their campaigns were the most effective, from concept to creative development, but they needed that same uniform consistency to measure the creative performance in action,” said Stephen Phillips, CEO of Zappi. “Ad Pulse will become the premier technology-driven solution to give brands certainty that their ads are driving brand impact.”

What differentiates Zappi Ad Pulse is that it operates in real-time, is scalable, and remains always-on. Brand-lift studies from the traditional, legacy players often are cost-prohibitive for smaller campaigns and come with a host of implementation issues. Ad Pulse has a seamless implementation and focuses on evergreen KPIs making brand measurement more accessible to all campaigns for any brand.

“Combining Zappi’s data science and automated insights capabilities with Survata’s Ad Measurement platform was a no brainer. This lets Zappi’s brand clients test all campaigns in an always-on fashion. It’s a consistent measurement currency for a campaign’s brand impact,” said Chris Kelly, co-founder and CEO of Survata. “We knew the industry was looking for an application that not only deploys simply and quickly, but also drives the exact measurements that brands need to compete in today’s noisy environment. Ad Pulse provides consistency for measuring the brand impact on every campaign’s brand impact.”

“Like P&G’s Mark Pritchard’s call for ubiquitous viewability measurement, our clients want ubiquity for measuring and tracking brand impact from advertising. While we previously provided this for pre-testing and in-context testing, now we’re expanding this measurement to inflight ads,” said Tiama HD Fowler, Executive Vice President for Strategic Product at Zappi. “With Ad Pulse’s launch, brands now can demand minimum brand impact measurements in the same way they did for viewability.”

To begin measuring your digital ads with Zappi Ad Pulse, click here.


Zappi is the world’s most powerful automated consumer insights platform. Zappi helps global brands make better decisions to drive business growth, shape product development, and enhance their advertising and branding efforts. Zappi puts the consumers at the heart of all your business decisions and eliminates risk. For more information, visit


Survata is a fast-growing measurement technology company that provides advertising measurement and market research to the world’s leading brands and agencies. The Survata platform provides the world’s fastest way to measure the branding impact of advertising and measure the behaviors and opinions of consumers. The company is headquartered in San Francisco and backed by leading Silicon Valley venture capital investors. Learn more at

Nudge Theory in Research

This is Part 1 out of 3 written by our Market Research Ops Analyst, Jason Lee, on how Researchers can ensure they are writing their studies in the best way to get better data.

Nudge Theory in Research
By Jason Lee

Surveys… we’ve all taken them a hundred and one times for a million different reasons. Chances are, you’ve recently taken one, and you didn’t think too hard about it. But have you ever considered that the wording of the question, or even the placement of the answers may have influenced your choice? That the mere BOLDING, underlining, italicizing of a phrase could drastically alter the way you perceive and answer a question?

In recent years, Nudge theory has gained popularity and renown worldwide in every aspect of life – from Silicon Valley tech companies to politics, and even to public health. This new-age theory in behavioral science, political theory and economics, suggests that indirect influence and subtle suggestions can be harnessed as ways to influence people’s behavior and decision-making.

Nudging provides an alternative to traditional ways of achieving positive results, such as through educating, creating legislation or enforcing through mandates or demands. After being published, Nudge theory was quickly accepted and has since influenced the way several political campaigns have unfolded in the US[1] and Great Britain[2]. Several “nudge units”[3] exist around the world at all levels from national (UK, Germany, Japan and others[4]) all the way to the international level (IMF, World Bank, United Nations).

We can define the ”Nudge” as all persuasive action leading up to the final decision a person makes. Also known as choice architecture,[5] the “Nudge” is described in The Journal of Consumer Research as the “design of different ways in which choices can be presented to consumers, and the impact of that presentation on consumer decision-making which then can alter someone’s behavior in a predictable fashion without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives.”[6] In layman’s terms, nudge theory doesn’t take away choices, or alter the reward at the end to achieve results. Instead, it uses certain methods of pushing the brain to make a certain choice, even without that person actively knowing they’re being influenced. To count as a mere nudge, the intervention must be easy and “cheap” to avoid[7]. Nudges cannot be demands, mandates, or exclusions of choices.

To put this concept into perspective, if a supermarket wants customers to make healthier choices, they could place the fruit at eye level and move the junk food onto the higher or lower shelves. This would count as a nudge. However, if a supermarket were to refuse to carry junk food, this would not be a nudge, since the supermarket is now limiting the choices of the customer. [8]

Nudge theory has been widely accepted by fortune 500 companies for managerial practices, by governments to sway decision making, and even by local grocery stores to promote better patron health. So why hasn’t market research caught on? As researchers why are we not more frequently, and consistently using Nudge theory to create better questions, to ensure better results?

In light of all of this, you may be asking yourself “How can I incorporate this into my studies? How do I take this theory and apply it in the field?”.

Take a minute to think about the questions below. Do you have the answer?

“A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?”

A. $0.05

B. $0.10

C. $0.15

D. $0.20

Many people respond by saying that the ball must cost 10 cents. Is this the answer that you came up with? Although this response intuitively springs to mind, it is incorrect. If the ball cost 10 cents and the bat costs $1.00 more than the ball, then the bat would cost $1.10 for a grand total of $1.20.

But what if we change the formatting of the question? After reading these, do you have a different answer?

“A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?”

“A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?”

“A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?”

“A bat and a ball cost $1.10 IN TOTAL. The bat costs $1.00 MORE THAN the ball. How much does the ball cost?”

A. $0.05

B. $0.10

C. $0.15

D. $0.20

The correct answer to this problem is that the ball costs 5 cents and the bat costs — at a dollar more — $1.05 for a grand total of $1.10.

After running this study for 250 respondents on the Survata platform, one can see that over 83% of respondent chose the incorrect answer when presented the question without formatting.

But why do so many people answer incorrectly? The answer is that people often substitute difficult problems with simpler ones in order to quickly solve them. In this example, some people seem to unconsciously substitute the “more than” statement in the problem (the bat costs $1.00 more than the ball) with an absolute statement (the bat costs $1.00). This makes the problem easier to solve.

Now that we know the above, is it possible for us as researcher to “nudge” the brain to slow down? Will that “nudge” result in answers that are far more likely to be correct and of a higher quality? Are there techniques which work better than others?

This phenomenon of irrationality, where the same questions/answers, simply formatted differently, with or without bolding, underlining, italics, or CAPITALIZATION will lay the groundwork of the next few articles to come. By the end of this series, I hope to have rattled your brain enough for you to ask the most important question as researcher: “How do I ensure that I’m asking better questions, so that I will receive the best possible data?”


[1] Carol Lewis (2009-07-22). “Why Barack Obama and David Cameron are keen to ‘nudge’ you”. London: The Times. Retrieved 2009-09-09.

[2] “About us – Behavioural Insights Team – GOV.UK”.

[3] Ebert, Philip; Freibichler, Wolfgang (2017). “Nudge management: applying behavioural science to increase knowledge worker productivity”. Journal of Organization Design. 6:4.

[4] 5555, corporateName=Department of Premier and Cabinet; address=1 Farrer Place, Sydney, NSW, 2000; contact=+61 2 9228. “Behavioural Insights Unit – What’s new in the Behavioural Insights Unit”.

[5] Scheibehenne, Benjamin; Greifeneder, Rainer; Todd, Peter (2010). “Can there ever be too many options? A meta-analytic review of choice overload”. Journal of Consumer Research. 37(3): 409–25. doi:10.1086/651235. JSTOR 10.1086/651235

[6] Thaler, Richard H.; Sunstein, Cass R.; Balz, John P. (2013). Shafir, Eldar, ed. The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. pp. 428–39.

[7] Saghai, Yashar (2013). “Salvaging the concept of nudge”. Journal of Medical Ethics. 39: 487-493. doi:10.1136/medethics-2012-100727.

[8] Kroese, F.; Marchiori, D.; de Ridder, D. (2016). “Nudging healthy food choices: a field experiment at the train station”. Journal of Public Health. 38 (2): e133-e137.

Survata at The ARF OTTxScience Conference with Branded Entertainment Group (BEN Group)

Today, OTT gives audiences more control over the content they consume. They pick the platform, the schedule and the genre of entertainment. And their numbers are growing. Within this changed landscape comes great opportunity for those who can stay ahead of the curve. Survata was invited to speak with our client, Branded Entertainment Group (BEN Group), to discuss how brands can build brand equity and measure their success in the OTT era.

Our session details:

How OTT Has Changed the Way People Consume TV and What It Means For Brand Building
October 18th, 2018 – 11 AM
Universal City, CA
As OTT rises and gains TV market share, advertisers cannot rely solely on traditional Linear TV for brand building. Discover the latest demographic and behavioral trends of OTT viewership along with how this is influencing the industry. What opportunities are arising from OTT viewership for building effective brand equity?


Aaron Frank – SVP Insights, Strategy and Marketing, Branded Entertainment Network (BEN Group)
Jon Stewart – VP Measurement, Survata

To see the full conference details, please visit The ARF’s website. Attending the conference? Send us a note to connect.

Survata at PRSA International Conference 2018

Survata was invited by the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) to speak with our client (Dynamic Signal) at their International Conference in Austin. The session “Viral PR: How Data Studies Inform News and Syndicate to Shape Industries” will take place on October 7th at 4:45 PM and cover how organizations can create, execute and pitch data studies that go viral and drive PR, marketing and sales success.

Session Objectives:
-Understand how data studies can inform their news strategies.
-Determine where white spaces exist for them to own a metric.
-Create studies and surveys that drive to viral headlines.
-Inform their larger thought-leadership, marketing communications and product-messaging initiatives.

Joelle Kaufman, CMO, Dynamic Signal
Chris Kelly, CEO, Survata
Sam Moore, Public Relations, Sam Moore Communications

To learn more about session, please visit the PRSA website. Attending the conference? Send us a note to connect.

Survata at Advertising Week NY 2018

After our appearance last year, Survata returns to Adverting Week New York 2018. Our VP of Measurement, Jon Stewart, will be joining ARF’s Scott McDonald session on “Two Aspects of Data Integrity: Accuracy and Ethics”. The session will take place on Tuesday, October 2nd at 2:30 PM and will cover:

-Results of proof-of-concept testing on third-party data validation method.
-Release of the ARF Code of Research Ethics that has been in progress since March 2018.
-GDPR at five months in: what course the legislation has set advertising on and what are the implications of this direction.

Featured Speakers:

Pete Doe – Chief Research Officer, Clypd
Abby Mehta, Ph.D. – SVP, Marketing Insights & Media Analytics, Bank of America
Michael Schoen – VP, Marketing Services, Neustar
Jon Stewart – VP of Measurement, Survata
Scott McDonald, Ph.D. – President & CEO, ARF (moderator)

To learn more about this session, please visit the Advertising Week program.

Insights Summary: Nike + Colin Kaepernick

Survata conducted a study to determine consumer sentiment towards the Nike ad featuring Colin Kaepernick the week it aired. Metrics such as brand favorability, and purchase / viewing intent were included for both Nike and the NFL.

The sample was nationally representative of the US population on age and gender. Over one-third of respondents (35%) chose not to disclose their political affiliation, likely due to the sensitive nature of the survey topic.

Almost half of all respondents have purchased Nike in the past (48%). Ad recall for the Nike ad featuring Colin Kaepernick was 42% at the overall level. Those who reported having seen the Nike ad were more likely to view Nike favorably than those who had not seen the ad (29% to 16%).

Download the full Insights Summary Sheet here to get additional data broken down by age, gender, and political idealogy.

Survata interviewed 501 online respondents between September 7th–10th, 2018. The study was sampled within the United States, and was nationally representative of the US population on age and gender. The margin of error for this study at a 95% confidence level is 4.4%.

To learn about about Survata Market Research, please contact us.

Survata Talks High-Growth Startups with Scott Gorlick, Formerly Operations at Uber

Head of Operations at Survata, Katie Harper, sat down to chat with Scott Gorlick about his time at Uber, how to break into startups, and what’s got him excited about the future. Gorlick joined Uber in 2012 as one of the first 100 employees and spent six years scaling the company’s operations. After two years helping to run the Atlanta business, he moved to San Francisco to serve in a variety of business operations leadership roles. During his time at Uber, the ridesharing firm went from 10 cities to more than 500+ cities in over 70 countries. Since leaving Uber, Gorlick has moved back to his home state of Florida and is focused on investing in the next generation of startups.

Katie Harper: What led you to Uber?

Scott Gorlick: As a senior in college, I said my dream job would be at the intersection of business and public policy. After graduating, I started consulting for Deloitte, where I was focused on strategy and operations. One rainy night in Chicago, we were running late for a client dinner and couldn’t find a taxi anywhere. I had just read about Uber, so I downloaded the app, pressed a button, and a black car showed up to take us to dinner. And it was fifteen dollars. I was hooked and instantly knew that I wanted to be a part of this company. Very late that night, I shot over a cold email.

After going through a couple rounds of interviews, I flew out to San Francisco to meet with the team. When I got there, I think they were all a little surprised by how young I was. Barely twenty-three at the time, I blurted out, “I’m old enough.” One thing led to another, and I got the chance to join Uber and help start the business in Atlanta. So, in a circuitous and weird way, I ended up right at the intersection of business and public policy just as I had wanted.

What prepared you for the role?

Nothing I had done up until that point could have truly prepared me for Uber, but I do think there were a couple of things that I learned at Deloitte that were incredibly valuable. First, learning project management and how to structure my thoughts logically helped me move faster at Uber. I fully believe that when you’re organized, you can do three times more work. Second, I was also on the road for the vast majority of that year, and I learned to get comfortable being uncomfortable. It sounds crazy, but not knowing where I would be traveling that week, plus the last-minute booking of flights, hotels, and then changing everything all over again, left me oddly prepared me for rolling with the punches at a fast-growing startup.

How did your role at Uber evolve over time?

When I joined, I started and helped run the Atlanta market. Very few of my friends had any idea what Uber was at the time, and we heard over and over again that Atlanta was “too spread out” and a “driving city.” Our first goal was to make sure that riders could get a car whenever they needed one. It was an intense, operations-heavy role, but I loved every single second of it. We stayed incredibly busy hiring a team, pitching drivers to try out our platform, making sure we had enough cars out 24/7, running analyses to see where we could get better, and answering every driver question. In about 2 years, we had scaled Atlanta up to a very significant business.

In mid 2014, I moved to San Francisco to take what I had learned in Atlanta and use it to help scale our global teams. We found that 95% of cities were the same across the board, but that last 5% was very localized. To succeed in those markets, we needed to get there early and have a presence on the ground. That kept me occupied for a while, and then I led teams that worked on special projects, include pricing, operational efficiency, strategy, and expansion. I loved that role because we had a great team and were always working on ten different things at the same time.

When did you know you had joined a rocket ship?

I don’t remember if it was a single point in time, but there were definitely moments. From the early days, Uber was a product people loved. Every time someone tried to shut us down, our riders and drivers stood up in a way that inspired us to keep pushing. When UberX got better, faster and cheaper than a taxi, I knew that the market for our product was huge.

Which parts of the growth were most painful?

In the early days when we were just starting out, everything was scrappy. We had a hundred people at the company, and we were constantly outgrowing the processes we had built the week before. Fortunately, Ops and Engineering at Uber worked well together, and we were able to partner to build some amazing tools that made it easier to grow the business.

2017 was also incredibly painful for the company. Up until that point, Uber had grown quickly, but we were an 8-year-old company in a 60-year-old company’s body. We had optimized for growth and scale at the expense of our culture. A lot of things were broken, and it was a really tough year. While it was a rough time for us, I’ve seen a lot of change at Uber and I’m encouraged by the progress. We’ve still got ways to go, but the team is incredibly resilient. I think Dara and the team are doing a really great job moving Uber forward and are ultimately going to take the company to the next level.

If you were put in a similar position at a similar company now, what you would want to tackle first?

If I was starting at a company like Uber now that is focused on a particular marketplace with supply and demand, I would figure out which side is harder first and focus first on that. For Uber, our business does not exist without our driver partners. When we started in Atlanta, there were maybe a thousand limo drivers in the entire city. We were going to get a lot more riders than that, so for us to be able to scale, we needed some way to grow the number of limo drivers in the city. When you build any marketplace, you have to be creative about how you grow the business.

What advice do you have for someone trying to break into operations?

Read up and see what companies are interesting to you. [Here’s Scott’s recommended reading list.] When you find a company you like, you need to get your foot in the door. Odds are good that the founder’s email address is (first name) Hit them up over email, Facebook, or Twitter and try to start a conversation there. These people are spending hundreds of hours building brands, so they truly want to hear from fans. If you like the company, you shouldn’t be afraid to show it.

Next, realize that the role that you want may not exist yet. You might have to create it. When you’re talking to founders of companies that are really small, your skillset might not match a job that’s posted; they’ll need engineers but not operations people. Find a way to be helpful. We had people drive for Uber who provided feedback on the experience. If you’re looking at a consumer product company, try their product. Showing that you’re willing to put that effort and sweat on the table goes a long way. Ultimately, what it comes down to is hustle.

Since leaving Uber this year, you mentioned here that investing is next for you. Why do you want to be an angel investor?

I like venture for a couple of reasons. First, I like solving interesting problems. I think the world fifteen years from now is going to look a lot different than it does today. A lot of that progress is going to be driven by the hard-charging entrepreneurs that create companies in the next several years. As an angel investor, I can invest in and advise companies that I think are going after some of the biggest opportunities. Second, I like helping people build companies. Working side by side with people to scale their businesses has always been fun for me. I think that a lot of the things we learned scaling Uber are applicable to other companies starting out. Third, working at Uber was a life changing experience and all it took was a few people taking a bet on me. And that’s what angel investing is. There are a lot of amazing founders out there and all it really takes is for someone to believe in them.

How’s that change going for you so far?

I’ve invested in several companies I’m very excited about already, and we’ll see how it goes. Venture is a long game, and it can take years to know if an investment will be successful. I’m most interested in companies that are in the marketplace, direct to consumer, eSports space, or operating out of Florida. I strongly believe that not all great tech companies have to be built in Silicon Valley, so I joined Florida Funders as an Operating Partner and will be a part of First Round Capital’s Angel Track this fall. If you’re working on a company in any of these spaces, would love to chat!

Questions or comments? Feel free to reach out to Katie Harper here.