How do CATA questions work? Relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity

Abstract

AbstractThe present research contributed to a better understanding of how check‐all‐that‐apply (CATA) questions work by examining the relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity. Seven consumer studies were conducted (147–157 people per study) using within‐subjects experimental designs where participants twice evaluated the same set of stimuli on the same set of terms (or attributes), respectively with CATA questions and intensity scaling (7‐point category scale; 1 = “not at all,” 7 = “extremely”). As a function of perceived intensity, the average CATA citation frequency tended to follow a sigmoidal‐like relationship where likelihood of selecting a CATA term increased more slowly at the extreme ends of the intensity scale (1–2 and 6–7) and linearly otherwise. This illuminates why for a given term, CATA questions are less suited for discriminating between samples that are of similar “low” or “high” intensity.Practical ApplicationsCATA questions are popular for sensory product characterization tasks with consumers. Despite their simplicity, they accurately discriminate among samples, and term citation frequency is a proxy for perceived intensity, albeit not a direct measure hereof. Versatility and applicability of CATA questions to characterize diverse stimuli using diverse types of terms/attributes was demonstrated. By showing that likelihood of CATA term selection typically increases with perceived intensity according to a sigmoidal‐like shape, the present research shows that CATA terms best discriminate between samples when these vary in intensity rather than being of similar “low” or “high” perceived intensity.