Examples

See it in action

Explore three illustrative simulated examples. Each one shows the kind of directional report you'd receive after testing an idea.

Illustrative simulated example

Simulated panel: 25 profiles4 example responses shown

Decision summary

58%likely to buy
Mixed signalMedium confidence

Signal: Parts of the offer resonate. Change one variable and retest.

Estimated buying-interest share: 58% of the simulated panel selected one of the two higher response options.

Confidence: Confidence shows how consistently simulated responses lean, not certainty that customers will buy.

Next test to run

Change either the promise or the price, then run the same test again.

This is directional feedback from a simulated panel, not a forecast or a count of customers who will buy.

View tested idea

A refillable deodorant with a subtle cedar scent and a sleek aluminum case.

Category: Personal care. Price: $14.99. What's new: Refillable, low-waste packaging with a natural scent profile..

Response distribution
Definitely no
7%
Probably no
15%
Not sure
20%
Probably yes
33%
Definitely yes
25%
Demographic patterns

Groups with fewer than 10 profiles are shown qualitatively to avoid false precision.

Age

18-244 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Higher lean
25-346 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
35-445 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
45-545 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Lower lean
55-645 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Lower lean

Income

$150k+4 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Higher lean
$100k-$150k5 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Higher lean
$50k-$75k6 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
$75k-$100k5 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
$25k-$50k5 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Lower lean

Gender

female13 profiles · 62% estimated share
male12 profiles · 52% estimated share

Region

west7 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Higher lean
northeast6 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
south6 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
midwest6 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Lower lean

Ethnicity

asian4 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Higher lean
hispanic5 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
black5 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
white8 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Similar lean
other3 profiles · Small subgroup, directional only · Lower lean
Reasons and concerns

Reasons to buy

  • Refillable packaging reduces waste and appeals to eco-conscious buyers
  • Scent profile feels upscale and gender-neutral
  • Premium materials signal quality and durability
  • Easy to picture using it daily
  • Sustainability story feels credible at this price point
  • Aluminum case looks good on a bathroom shelf

Concerns

  • Unsure if the cedar scent will suit everyone's taste
  • Refill process might be inconvenient or messy
  • Price could be higher than drugstore options people are used to
  • Would want proof it lasts all day before committing
  • No mention of whether it's aluminum-free formula
Example responses

I like the idea of a refillable deodorant because it feels more sustainable than the usual plastic sticks. The cedar scent sounds refined, but I would want to smell it first.

Age 25-34 · Female · $50k-$75k · West · Hispanic

This sounds premium and eco-friendly, which is appealing. If the refills are easy to order and not too pricey, I'd consider switching.

Age 35-44 · Male · $75k-$100k · South · White

The aluminum case feels elevated, but I'd need to know how well it works compared to what I use now.

Age 55-64 · Female · $100k-$150k · Midwest · Black

I'm drawn to the sustainability angle. At $14.99 it's reasonable for a refillable, though I'd want a trial size first.

Age 18-24 · Female · $25k-$50k · Northeast · Asian

Method notes

We generate survey-style reactions from simulated demographic profiles, then summarize how those responses lean. The result is directional and should guide the next real-world test.

Agreement level

1.180

Lower = more agreement

Group spread

0.140

Lower = more consistent

Panel size

25 profiles

Panel mix

Age, gender, income, region, ethnicity

Scoring guide

default

Scoring model

Standard text model

The scoring approach was evaluated against human survey responses in an arXiv preprint. Read the arXiv preprint.

Ready to test your own idea?

Get directional feedback before your next real-world test.