CHARLES W. HOLLAND and DAVID W.
CRAVENS*
Fractional factorial experimental designs typically yield favorable cost-
benef1t relationships when compared to the various classical designs. The essential
aspects of the fractional factorial design are outlined, and its use in the study of a
marketing problem is illustrated. The types of research situations where the design
Fractional Factorial Experimental Designs in
Marketing Research
The potential value of applying experimental design
techniques to marketing research problems has been in-
creasingly recognized in recent years. Several classical
experimental designs have been described and applied
to marketing problems [2, 3, 7, 9, 11, 14]. 1 Yet, appar-
ently little attention in marketing has been given to the
very important general class of experimental designs
called fractional factorials. Use of these designs allows
the researcher to investigate a large number of variables
(factors) with a small number of experimental runs. They
have proven to be extremely useful in industrial research
and development applications. Because of their impor-
tance, almost all of the experimental design literature
published in the last ten years has been in the area of
fractional factorial designs.
These designs offer the marketing researcher a po-
tentially useful methodology for examining cause and
effect relationships. While study of marketing processes
typically involves consideration of several interrelated
variables, the cost and time span associated with running
complete factorial experiments are frequently prohibi-
tive. A fractional factorial design yields much of the
same information provided by the full factorial, al-
though certain information must be sacrificed to obtain
the cost advantages inherent in the design. Moreover,
the fractional designs offer the researcher more flexi-
bility than certain of the other classical designs such as
the Latin square.
Our objective is to outline the essential aspects of the
fractional factorial design, to illustrate use of the design
in the study of a marketing problem, and to identify
* Charles W. Holland is Supervisor of Statistical Analysis,
Union Carbide Nuclear Company; and David W. Cravens is
Professor of Marketing, The University of Tennessee.
270
is potentially useful are identified.
the types of marketing research situations where the de-
sign is potentially useful.
FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL DESIGNS
Advantages of Factorial and Fractional Factorial
Designs
Factorial experimental designs have proven to be val-
uable research tools in numerous fields. These designs
are experimental programs in which a fixed number of
levels are selected for each of k controlled factors and
experiments are run for all combinations of levels of all
the factors. Thus, there may be n 1 levels of Factor 1, n2
levels of Factor 2, and so forth. The complete factorial
design would then consist of n1 x n 2 • • • x n1c (or nk if
each factor has n levels) experimental runs. 2 The main
advantages of factorial designs are as follows:
1. They are efficient in that a maximum amount of in-
formation is obtained with a minimum number of
experimental runs. (The information obtained from
nk experimental runs from a factorial experiment
can equal the information provided by k X n• ex-
perimental runs that would result if each of the
variables was studied individually using nk runs.)
2. They provide information on interactions• among
the k variables that is not available when one vari-
able at a time and other experimental designs are
used.
1
Classical experimental designs include the randomized
block, the Latin square, Greco-Latin squares, balanced incom-
plete block, and factorial designs.
2
An experimental run refers to one phase of an experiment.
(It is sometimes referred to as the application of a treatment
combination.) The complete experiment consists of obtaining
numerical observations for a series of experimental runs.
•An interaction is said to exist between two factors if the
effect of one factor varies from level to level of the other factor.
Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. X (August 1973), 270-6
FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS 271

3. They are more likely to lead to an optimum set A = Yi[(sum of y's where A is at high level)
of conditions as compared to the commonly em- - (sum of y's where A is at low level)].
ployed method of changing one variable at a
time. Estimates of all main effects and interactions for the
4. They show which factors are most important (that three factor case can be calculated using Table 1. This
is, which factors have the most effect on the re- table is obtained by first indicating "+" and " - " signs
sponse). under the Factor A, B, and C columns corresponding to
The primary disadvantage of factorial experiments is the level that the factor is to be held for each experimen-
that, with many factors at many levels each, the num- tal run. The "+" signs indicate that the factor is to be
ber of experimental runs required and, hence, the time at its high level and the " - " signs indicate that it is to be
and expense grow rapidly. By utilizing fractional fac- at its low level. The signs in the different interaction col-
torial designs, a much smaller number of experimental umns are obtained by taking the product of the signs in
runs is needed. The price paid for reducing the number the corresponding factor columns. For example, the sign
of experimental runs is that all main effects 4 and inter- in the ith row of the ABC column is obtained by taking
action effects cannot be separately estimated. Usually the the product of the signs in the ith row of columns A, B,
fractional factorial designs are constructed so that es- and C. Each effect can be obtained from the table by
timates of the important effects (the main effects and multiplying each of the y's by the corresponding sign in
possibly the two-factor interaction effects for certain fac- the effect column, taking the sum and dividing by four
tor combinations) are said to be confounded5 with higher (the number of changes in level). For example, the main
order interaction effects that are assumed to be negligi- effect of Factor A is:
ble.
A = Yi( - Yi + Y2 - Ya + Y1 - Ya + Yu - Y; + Ys).
Fractional Factorial Development Table 1 illustrates how fractional factorial designs are
Whenever a fraction of a full factorial experiment is obtained. Suppose that we are interested in investigating
used, the design is termed a fractional factorial. (See the effects of four factors each at two levels. Further sup-
[10, Chapter 15] for an introduction to fractional fac- pose that our resources limit us to eight experimental
torials.) Thus, Latin square or incomplete block designs, runs, thus precluding the use of a full factorial experi-
for example, are really special cases of fractional fac- ment which would involve 2 4 = 16 experimental runs.
torial designs. Various fractions of the full factorial can If certain interactions can be assumed to be negligible,
be used depending upon the resources available and then we can estimate the main effects of all four factors
the degree of confounding acceptable to the researcher. as well as the two-factor interactions between three of
Before discussing how fractional factorials are ob- them. Thus, "clean" estimates can be made of the main
tained, it is necessary to present certain factorial experi- effects and certain two-factor interactions.
mental design terminology. In factorial experimentation To obtain the levels of a fourth factor, say D, to be
where each factor is investigated at two levels, small let- run with the levels of A, B, and C indicated in the table,
ters are used to denote treatment combinations and capi- we confound Factor D with one of the interactions. Any
tal letters are used to denote factors and effects. The one of the interactions could be used for this purpose;
symbol (I) is used to represent the treatment combina- however, higher order interactions are usually of less in-
tion where all factors are at their low levels. If a factor is terest than the lower order ones. Hence the highest order
at its high level, a small letter representing the factor ap- interaction is usually confounded with the added factor.
pears in the treatment combination symbol. If it is at its
low level, it does not appear. For example, if three fac- Table 1
tors A, B, and Care included in a factorial experiment, TREATMENT COMBINATIONS AND EFFECTS
the treatment combination symbol ab indicates that A
and B are at their high level and C is at its low level. Factor
Two-factor Three-
The main effect of a factor is the average change in Treat- interaction factor
ment inter- Re-
response caused by changing levels of the factor. Hence, combi- action sponse
the main effect of Factor A in the three factor case is: nation A B c AB AC BC ABC
=D
A = Yi[(a - (J)) +(ab - b) + (ac - c) + (abc - be)]
(1) + + + y,
or in terms of the responses (see Table I) the main effect a + + + Y2
of: b + + + Ya
ab + + + Y•
'A main effect of a factor is the average change in response c + + + y,
caused by a change in level of the factor. ac + + + Ys
" Two effects are confounded when the linear combination of be + + + Y1
observations used to estimate the first effect is identical to that abc + + + + + + + Ys
used to estimate the second effect.
272 JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, AUGUST 1973

In this case, we confound Factor D with the ABC inter- The Latin square designs have probably been used
action. We write D =ABC which indicates that the lev- more often than any other type of experimental design
els of Factor D will be determined by the signs in the in marketing. It appears that these designs are used in
ABC interaction column of Table 1. Hence, the experi- many instances where some other form of fractional fac-
mental conditions under which the experiment is to be torial would be more appropriate. The Latin square de-
conducted are given in Table 2 where the Factor D col- signs require that there be exactly three factors included
umn is exactly the same as the ABC interaction column in the experiment and the number of levels must be the
of Table 1. same for each of these three factors. It seems that there
We can then construct what is called a defining rela- are very few experimental situations in marketing (or
tion that enables us to determine which effects are con- any other area) where both of these conditions exist. In
founded (usually referred to as the confounding scheme). the application of statistical methods, the appropriate
Rules for determining which effects are confounded are design should be chosen to fit the problem rather than
given in the Appendix. The use of the defining relation adapting the problem to fit the design.
for this situation shows that in addition to ABC = D the The assumption made when using the Latin square is
following pairs of effects are confounded: ABD = C, that no interactions exist. It appears that this assump-
ACD = B, BCD = A, AB = CD, AC = BD, and tion is rarely met in marketing situations. In any event,
AD = BC. Note that all main effects are confounded care should be taken when interpreting the analysis of
only with three-factor interactions. This means that if the the data from the Latin square or any other fractional
three-factor interactions are assumed to be negligible, factorial design. The defining relation should be con-
this design will enable us to estimate the main effects of structed and the confounding relationships determined
all four factors with only eight observations. In addition, and studied before naively assuming that no interactions
if certain of the two-factor interactions are assumed to exist.
be negligible, we can also estimate some two-factor inter-
action effects. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
Latin Square Designs As an illustration of the use of fractional factorial de-
By definition, a Latin square experimental design has signs, we have selected a screening experiment. Suppose
three factors arranged so that each level of each factor a candy company is interested in test marketing a new
is combined only once with each level of the other two candy bar. The objective is to determine which of the
factors. For example, a 3 x 3 Latin square is given be- following factors are important to the sales of the candy
low: bar: (1) television advertising; (2) billboard advertising;
Factor 2 (3) newspaper advertising; (4) candy wrapper design;
(5) display design; (6) free sample introduction pro-
I II III
1 A B c gram; or (7) size of candy bar. A full factorial experi-
Factor 1 2 B c A ment using only two levels of each factor would involve
3 c A B 128 experimental runs. Typically the cost associated with
The levels of Factor 3 are represented by the A, B, and running an experiment this large would be prohibitive.
C symbols in the table. Consequently, it is decided that a screening experiment
Latin square experimental designs are a very restricted will be run in an effort to identify the more important
subset of the fractional factorial designs. A Latin square factors. After these more important factors are identi-
design with n 2 observations is a 1/ n fraction of a n3 fac- fied, smaller experiments can be conducted to obtain
torial design. more precise estimates of the factor effects and the asso-
ciated interaction effect. The factor levels for the screen-
Table 2 ing experiment are chosen as shown in Table 3.
Suppose that it is decided to test the sales of the new
EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS candy bar in cities ranging in size from 100,000 to
150,000 inhabitants. Further, suppose that 20 such cities
Factor
Observation are available where the firm's established candies are al-
A B c D ready being marketed and where the sales are reasonably
consistent from city to city. Eight of these 20 cities are
Yi chosen at random and then randomly assigned the treat-
Y2 + + ment combinations indicated in Table 4. The Factors D,
Ya + + E, F, and G are confounded with the four interactions.
Y•
y,
+ + The y column of this table shows the observed sales in
+ +
Y• + + thousands of dollars for a six-week period after the ex-
Y1 + + periment was started.
Ys + + + + To obtain the main effect of A (that is confounded
FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL EXPERIMENT AL DESIGNS 273

Table 3 it is expected that the effects of all but a few of

FACTOR LEVELS FOR THE FRACTIONAL the potentially important variables will be neg-
ligible. The objective of this type of experimenta-
FACTORIAL EXPERIMENT
tion is to identify the relative importance of the
different variables. In these situations often as
Factor Low level ( - ) High level ( +)
many as k - I variables will be investigated using
A-television ad- no advertising advertising (X $) only k experimental runs (as in the example of the
vertising previous section). It appears that screening ex-
B-billboard ad- no advertising advertising (X $) periments should be particularly useful in market-
vertising ing research because most marketing situations in-
C-newspaper ad- no advertising advertising (X $) volve a large number of potentially influential
vertising variables. For example, in the development of new
D-candy wrapper conservative de- flashy design products or in the alteration of existing products
design sign there are often a large number of features, charac-
£-display design normal shelf dis- special aisle display
play teristics, or ingredients that can be added to or
F-free sample no free samples free samples booth deleted from the product. Usually the decision to
introduction set up in stores include or delete a particular feature, character-
program istic, or ingredient is made by subjective judg-
G-size of candy 1 oz. bar (sells 2~2 oz. bar (sells for ment. It appears that fractional factorials would be
bar for 5¢) 10¢) ideal screening methods in these situations. The
factors would be the different features, character-
istics, or ingredients and the level of each factor
with certain interaction effects), we subtract the sum of would be with and without that particular fea-
the y values where A is at its low level from the sum of ture, characteristic, or ingredient. In most cases,
they values where A is at its high level and divide the re- the response would be consumer preference or
sult by four. From Table 4 we see that A is at its high ranking data. The costs associated with running
level in cities 2, 4, 6, and 8. Similarly, it is at its low level the experiments would be relatively low, and the
in cities 1, 3, 5, and 7. Hence, decision-making process would be greatly im-
proved. The results from the experiments could
(15.l + 11.3 + 22.3 + 22.l) be used to obtain "approximate optimum"' defini-

Effect of A = - (8.7 + 9.74 + 14.7 + 16.1) = 5..4 tions of the new products. In addition, by compar-
ing the results from a particular new product with
results from other new products, likely failures
The sum of squares due to Factor A is calculated by the could be detected and eliminated from further
following: consideration.
2. In sequential experimentation where, having per-
Sum of squares due to A
= [(number of changes in level) x (effect of A)]2 / Table 4
total number of observations = [4(5.4)]2/8.
TREATMENT COMBINATIONS AND
Results of similar calculations for all factors are shown EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS•
in Table 5. Assuming the interactions are negligible, the
obvious interpretation of the data is that Factors C and Factor
A have the most important effects on the response. That City
D= E= F= G=
is, newspaper advertising has the largest effect on sales, A B c AB AC BC ABC
and television advertising has the next largest effect. Fur-
ther experimentation could be conducted to determine 1 + + + 8.7
which of these two variables is most important and to 2 + + + 15 .1
study the possible interaction between them. Alterna-
3 + + + 9.7
tively, narrowing down the factors to these two may be
4 + + + 11.3
5 + + + 14.7
sufficient. The decision maker would need to assess the 6 + + + 22.3
costs of additional benefits to be gained from further 7 + + + 16.1
experimentation. 8 + + + + + + + 22.1

• This table indicates the levels for each of the seven factors
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS to be used in each city. For example, in City 1 there is to be no
television, billboard, or newspaper advertising. (Factors A, B,
Types of Applications and Care at their low levels.) The flashy candy wrapper design,
special aisle display, and free sample booths are to be used
Fractional factorial designs are useful in a number of (Factors D, E, and Fare at their high levels). Finally, only the
different situations [4, 12]: 1 oz. candy bar is to be sold (Factor G is at its low level).
b Observed sales in lOOO's of dollars for a 6-week period
I. They are applicable in screening situations where after the experiment was started.
274
Table 5
EFFECTS, SUMS OF SQUARES, AND SIGNIFICANCE TESTS
FOR THE SEVEN FACTORS
Factor Main Sums of F-ratio"
effect squares
A-television advertising 5.4 58.32 23.05
B-billboard advertising -0.4 0.32
C-newspaper advertising 7.6 115. 52 45.54
D-candy wrapper design -1.6 5.12
£-display design 1.4 3.92
F-free sample introduction pro- 1.0 2.00
gram
G-size of candy bar 0.8 1.28
• In this screening experiment, we have, of course, per-
formed no replication and, therefore, have no estimate of
experimental error. Consequently, the normal significance
tests cannot be performed. However, the important thing is
that the relative magnitude of the effects can be used to pick
out the more important factors. In addition, approximate
significance tests can be performed under the null hypothesis
that there is no effect due to any of the factors. To accomplish
this, the sums of squares associated with the smaller effects
are pooled to test the larger effects. In this case, the sums of
squares for Factors B, D, E, F, and G can be averaged to ob-
tain:
estimated error mean square
= Yo (0.32 + 5.12 + 3.92 + 2.00 + 1.28) = 2.53.
There is one degree of freedom associated with each factor.
Hence, the sums of squares are also the mean squares. There-
fore, under the null hypothesis, the sums of squares for Fac-
tors A and C divided by the estimated error mean square has
an F distribution with one and five degrees of freedom. The
results are given in the F-ratio column of the table. The critical
F value at the 0.05 level is 6.61. Hence the null hypotheses is
rejected and we conclude that newspaper advertising and
television advertising significantly increase sales.
formed one fraction, the results can be reviewed,
and if there is uncertainty or ambiguity due to
confounding, experimental error, or unexpected re-
sults, further experimentation can be performed to
resolve the uncertainty or ambiguity. For example,
in the new product development discussed earlier,
the screening experiment would probably identify
some features, characteristics, or ingredients that
should definitely be left out and others that should
definitely be included. However, there might be
some for which no clear-cut decision could be made.
Further experimentation involving only a small sub-
set of the original variables would be necessary to
further investigate these "in-doubt" variables.
3. The designs can be used in situations where certain
interactions can be assumed to be nonexistent. In
some instances past experience or theory will in-
dicate that certain variables will not interact. Also,
in almost all experimental situations involving sev-
eral variables, the higher order interactions can be
assumed to be nonexistent.
4. In the simultaneous study of major and minor vari-
ables, fractional factorial designs are available
which permit the estimation of the main effects and
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, AUGUST 1973
interactions of the more important variables along
with the main effects of the less important ones.
The candy bar example discussed earlier might
fall into this category. Suppose that interaction is
expected to exist between factors A, B, and C, but
none is expected involving the other factors. A
fractional factorial design could be obtained that
would enable the evaluation of the interactions
involving factors A, B, and C, while confounding
all of the remaining interactions.
The data resulting from fractional factorial experi-
mentation can be statistically analyzed using routine
analysis of variance techniques for factorial designs
(keeping in mind the confounding relationships). Yates's
method is a popular technique that is described in Hicks
[10]. Several examples of the analysis of fractional fac-
torial data are given in Davies [8, Chapter 10].
The requirements for a good experimental design are
discussed in [6]. These apply to both fractional factorial
and classical designs. Proper randomization procedures
should be used to eliminate systematic error and to as-
sure the validity of appropriate statistical tests and infer-
ences. Also, the normal analysis of variance assumptions
should be met; i.e., we should have additivity of effects,
normally distributed experimental errors, and homoge-
neity of variances within groups. However, slight de-
partures from these assumptions usually create no
serious problems.
Selecting the Confounding Scheme
The most important aspect of designing a fractional
factorial experiment involves the choice of the confound-
ing scheme. The general rule is that higher order inter-
actions should be confounded with main effects and those
lower order interactions of interest. (Of course, in screen-
ing situations, it is often necessary to confound all inter-
actions with main effects and other interactions.) The
marketing researcher will usually be able to identify a
priori the lower order interactions that are likely to be
significant. For example, in the experimental situation of
Table 3, the Factors A (television advertising) and B
(billboard advertising) would probably interact. The sales
response would probably be of the type illustrated in
Figure 1. This figure indicates that the effect of billboard
advertising is much larger when there is no television
advertising than when television advertising is used.
This reasoning can be extended to the higher order
interactions. For example, a second order interaction
would be expected between Factors A, B, and C (news-
paper advertising). Newspaper advertising is likely to
increase sales more when there is no television and bill-
board advertising then when television and billboard ad-
vertising is being used.
On the other hand, Factor C (newspaper advertising)
and D (candy wrapper design) probably would not inter-
act. The sales response might be as shown in Figure 2.
This figure indicates that the flashy wrapper design in-
FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
Figure 1
INTERACTION BETWEEN TELEVISION ADVERTISING AND
BILLBOARD ADVERTISING
SALES
bil I board
advertising
no billboard
advertising
no advertising advertising
TELEVISION ADVERTISING
creases sales by approximately the same amount when
there is no newspaper advertising as when there is news-
paper advertising.
Another rule for choosing the confounding scheme is
that interactions involving factors expected to have large
effects should not be confounded with effects of interest.
Similarly, interactions involving factors expected to have
small effects should be confounded with effects of inter-
est.
The penalty for confounding interactions that are not
negligible is not too serious. If the analysis of the data
indicates that some of the interactions might be present,
the ambiguity can be resolved with further experiments
involving fewer factors.
CONCLUSIONS
The inherent advantages of the fractional factorial de-
sign should contribute to increased use of experimental
designs by marketing researchers. When compared to the
various classical designs, the fractional factorial designs
will typically yield relatively favorable cost-benefit rela-
tionships. While the potential usefulness of experimental
designs in marketing research has been increasingly
stressed in recent years [2, 7, 9], there has been a notice-
able lack of applications. Emphasis in the contemporary
marketing research literature upon classical experimen-
tal designs and the absence of discussion of fractional
factorial designs suggest that, in general, marketing re-
searchers are not familiar with this important group of
designs.
Fractional factorial designs should become essential
marketing research tools. They allow the experimenter
275
to investigate a large number of factors with a small
number of experimental runs. The designs are manda-
tory for situations where several variables are thought to
influence the response and the costs associated with con-
ducting full factorial experiments are prohibitive. Their
only disadvantage is that certain higher order interac-
tions are assumed to be negligible. However, this disad-
vantage appears minor since higher order interactions
are rarely present. In situations where the fractional fac-
torial analysis indicates they might be present, the possi-
bility can be checked with smaller experiments involving
far fewer factors. There are, of course, situations in mar-
keting where the costs associated with running even the
fractional factorial experiments may be prohibitive. In
these instances, the appropriate solution is for the mar-
keting researcher to use subjective judgment to choose
the proper levels of the different factors, thus reducing
the number of experimental runs needed.
APPENDIX
The complete confounding scheme for fractional fac-
torials where each factor is at two levels can be deter-
mined from a simple set of rules:
1. Write down the primary confounding relation-
ship(s). For each new factor, it will be of the
form:
New factor = (original factor 1) x (original
factor 2) x · · · x (original factor m).
2. Multiply both sides of each equation by the
letter designating the new factor and use the
convention that any letter squared equals one.
This yields a defining relation for each new fac-
tor introduced. It will be of the form:
= (new factor) x (original factor 1) x
(original factor 2) x · · · x (original
factor m).
3. Obtain the complete set of confounding relation-
ships by multiplying each defining relationship
by each effect. Then apply the convention that
any letter squared equals one.
The application of this set of rules to the situation de-
scribed in Table 2 is given below:
1. The primary confounding relationship is:
D =ABC.
2. Multiplying both sides of the equation by D
yields:
D (D) = D 2 = A B CD
or
1 =ABC D.
This is the defining relation.
276 JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, AUGUST 1973

3. Multiplying both sides of the defining relation fining relation and each effect may be confounded with
by each effect yields: several other effects. Also, rules for obtaining the de-
A (1) = A= A (ABCD) = A 2 BCD =BCD fining relations when the factors have more than two
B (1) = B = B (ABCD) = A B 2 CD = ACD
levels are considerably more complicated than for the
C (1) = C = C (ABCD) = AB C 2 D = ABD two level case. Fortunately, defining relations and con-
D (I) = D = D (ABCD) = A BC D 2 = ABC
founding schemes have been derived for designs cover-
AB(l) = AB= AB(ABCD) = A 2 B 2 CD =AB ing most research situations. The National Bureau of
AC (1) = AC= AC (ABCD) = A2 B C 2 D = AC Standards [13] has made available a complete collection
AD(l) = AD= AD(ABCD) = A 2 BCD2 =AD of such designs for situations where each factor is at two
BC (1) = BC= BC (ABCD) = A B 2 C 2 D =BC levels. Cochran and Cox [5, pp. 276-92] discuss situa-
BD(l) = BD = BD (ABCD) = A B 2 C D 2 = BD tions involving factors at two, three, and four levels each.
CD (1) = CD = CD (ABCD) = A B C2 D2 = CD In a recent article, Addelman [1] discusses some of the
ABC (1) =ABC= ABC (ABCD) = A2 B2 C 2 D = D more specific situations not covered by the other two
ABD (1) = ABD = ABD (ABCD) = A2 B2 C D 2 = C references.
BCD (1) = BCD = BCD (ABCD) = A B 2 C 2 D2 = A. REFERENC ES
Hence we have the following pairs of effects confounded: 1. Addelman, Sidney. "Recent Developments in the Design of
Factorial Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical
A =BCD, B = ACD, C = ABD, D =ABC, Association, 67 (March 1972), 103-11.
AB= CD,AC = BD,AD =BC. 2. Banks, Seymour. Experimentation in Marketing. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1965.
The confounding scheme will usually be much more 3. Barclay, William D. "Factorial Design in a Pricing Experi-
complex than for this example. If there is more than one ment," Journal of Marketing Research, 6 (November 1969),
427-9.
primary confounding relationship (that is, if more than 4. Box, G. E. P. and J. S. Hunter. "The 2•-P Fractional Fac-
one new factor is added), there will be more than one de- torial Designs," Technometrics, 3 (August 1961), Part I,
311-51 and (November 1961), Part II, 449-58.
Figure 2 5. Cochran, William G. and Gertrude M. Cox. Experimental
Designs, second edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
NO INTERACTION BETWEEN NEWSPAPER ADVERTISING 1966.
AND CANDY WRAPPER DESIGN 6. Cox, David R. Planning of Experiments. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1965.
SALES 7. Cox, Keith K. and Ben M. Enis. Experimentation for
Marketing Decisions. Scranton, Penn.: International Text-
book Company, 1969.
8. Davies, Owen L., ed. The Design and Analysis of Industrial
Experiments. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1960.
flashy 9. Green, Paul E. and Donald S. Tull. Research for Market-
wrapper design ing Decisions, second edition. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, 1970, Chapter 14.
10. Hicks, Charles R. Fundamental Concepts in the Design of
conservative
Experiments. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964.
wrapper design
11. Hoofnagle, William S. "Experimental Designs in Measuring
the Effectiveness of Promotion," Journal of Marketing Re-
search, 2 (May 1965), 154.
12. Hunter, J. Stuart. Fractional Factorial Designs. Pittsburgh:
Westinghouse Learning Press, 1968.
13. United States Department of Commerce, National Bureau
of Standards. Fractional Factorial Experiment Designs for
Factors at Two Levels. Applied Mathematics Series 48
no advertising advertising April 15, 1957. '
14. Venkatesan, M. and Robert J. Holloway. An Introduction
to Marketing Experimentation. New York: The Free Press
NEWSPAPER ADVERTISIN G 1971. '