当差异并不意味着不同了解全球客户体验计划中的文化反应偏差（英）

WHEN DIFFERENCEDOESN’T MEAN Understanding cultural response biasin global CX programmes Fiona Moss How cultural response bias influences responses Cultural response bias is not a newtheory. It has been scrutinised withinresearch communities for many years.Consequently, large numbers of studies specific tendency to consistently usea rating in the scale, or set of ratings, Cultural response bias cansubstantially underminethe validity of conclusions The impact of cultural response bias whenlooking at survey findings can be obviousand significant. In 2018, when this paperfirst appeared, we collected normativedata specifically with the purpose ofexploring cultural response bias. The Cultural response bias typically appliesto attitudinal questions where responsescales (for example, the five-point Likertscale, 10-point end-anchored scales) are Global organisations require global marketresearch programmes. The benefits areclear: not only do global programmesreturn better value for money than amultitude of individual studies, but theyalso provide a degree of standardisation being evaluated. Cultural response biascan substantially undermine the validity ofconclusions drawn from global researchprogrammes. This paper initially sets outto detail the impact of cultural responsebias on Customer Experience (CX) survey This paper was first published in 2018 andfocused on the findings of a dedicatedR&D study. In this third edition, we includeCX KPI data – customers rating theirexperience of brands – in aggregate formfrom Ipsos projects around the world from2020 to 2025. This allows us to validatewhether the response patterns identified Multi-market research programmes arenot, however, without their challenges. Theresearch needs to find a delicate balancebetween consistency across markets Moreover, cultural response bias is not justvisible in descriptive results. Inferentialstatistics can also be distorted. Forexample, relationships between differentattitudinal statements can appear to have However, isolating cultural effects isparticularly challenging. This is becauseproduct or service expectations may alsodiffer across countries due to a number Results interpretation is also a thornyissue. Organisations want to track KPIsglobally, but a straightforward comparisonof results across markets can bemisleading, as scores given by individuals Cultural response biasin action: its impact on In a nutshell, cultural response biasmakes it very difficult to compare resultsbetween countries and reliably gaugewhether disparities are the result of true Cultural response Again, the normative data available for our2018 paper illustrated this. For example,in Figure 2, considering satisfaction withthe banking sector, Asian markets typically Three types of response style are 1. Acquiescence Response The tendency to agree, regardless ofwhat is asked – seen frequently in LatinAmerica, the Middle East and somemarkets in Africa and Asia. Known as 2. Extreme Response Styles (ERS) The tendency to use the extremes ofa rating scale. Again, this is typicallyseen in Latin America (particularlyat the positive end of the scale – a In a nutshell, culturalresponse bias makes itvery difficult to gaugewhether disparitiesare the result of true 3. Middle Response Styles (MRS) The tendency to use the mid-responses of a rating scale. Europeanand some Asian markets tend toprovide more mid-responses, while Cultural response biasis still entrenchedin the way different Starting with the CX KPI data (see Figure 3),we found that cultural response bias is stillentrenched in the way different marketsrespond to scale questions. The results are However, now, in 2026, we want to exploretwo things: 01Do these patterns still play out inreal-world CX metrics?To do this westudied data from Ipsos CX studiesfrom H2 2020 to H1 2025 from aroundthe world using our CX Benchmark Moreover, by including more countries weare also able to tease out more nuance. Forexample, while many Asian markets givelower scores, some appear among the high 02What does cultural response biaslook like outside of CX?To explorethis, we looked at similarly aggregatedresults for Brand Health (usingIpsos’ BVC Database3) and Employeemetrics (using Ipsos Karian and Box’s The pattern of high and low scoring marketsremains the same across a variety of sectorsand metrics, as illustrated in Figure 4 lookingat the percentage of customers scoring9 or 10 out of 10 at overall satisfaction. When we expand our scope to considermetrics outside of the world of CX, wefind that cultural response bias stillmanifests itself in a consistent way. For benchmarks, illustrated here by the keymetric of Brand Closeness (Figure 5); andalso in Employee benchmarks (Figure 6), or the political/socio-economic status ofthe market in question (see Figures 7 and 8 However, when we turn to societal datafrom Ipsos Global Trends, we start tosee that cultural response bias can be Cultural response biascan be