Mobile apps or native websites?

A key decision for researchers who are looking to deliver content or services via mobile platforms is whether to provide specific mobile apps or a native website. When smartphones were first launched, many thought that mobile apps were a stopgap, and would eventually be replaced by web browser access as phones became more powerful. This is because mobile apps were able to store many elements on the phone, as well as make greater use of the phones processor rather than relying on a website. On the other hand, mobile-optimised websites were dependent on powerful processors and were tied into the user interface limitations of the web. Over time, as web technologies became more powerful, it was assumed that the need for apps would go away. However, the reverse has been the case, with more use of the mobile web driven by apps. There are also a number of technical reasons why apps are so popular. For example, there are potential security advantages over websites and they typically have more responsive user interfaces. However, one more practical explanation from a research participant’s perspective is that by presenting a single icon on a smartphone screen, apps are considerably more convenient for users. Evidence increasingly suggests that mobile platforms are being dominated by apps rather than the web.¹⁹ This has the potential to create important implications for the way in which researchers provide access to their research studies.

 

Which produces better insights – mobile or online research?

Although mobile has become a key part of consumer lives, research agencies can still be hesitant to use mobile techniques out of concern that clients may be unfamiliar with them, or concerned about their effectiveness.
A study by research technology firm uSamp compared the use of online techniques with that of mobile, exploring the following hypotheses:

• Mobile methodology is preferable for shopper/shopability studies because mobile technology can capture insights closer to the moment of purchase, and it can deliver point-of-sale truth via photographic evidence, rather than relying on memory recall of an online respondent.

• Mobile research delivers more granular responses in sensory evaluations on IHUTS than laptop/desktop, because recall bias is eliminated.

• Mobile delivers richer insights overall, including on open-ended questions.

The research was based on a study of UK and US consumers’ in-store purchasing of a range of leading-brand crisps (potato chips in the USA). Research participants either completed the survey on their mobile device or online on their PC/laptop browser. The research was run as a mini-diary approach, with completion on their mobiles while in-store. Online respondents were asked to complete their next phase ‘as soon as possible’ after the purchase.
Findings suggested that there was a much higher accuracy among participants responding on mobile devices because they were less reliant on recall. When triangulating answers, for example on where the products were stocked on shelves, online respondents were found to be often guessing the answers. This study highlights the value of mobile research, in that it enables consumers to provide data with in the context of the environment in which they are currently operating. The only downside that was found relating to the use of mobile devices was that respondents were likely to be less patient when it came to complicated or difficult-to-complete surveys.