A dialogue on individualised marketing : addressing misperceptions.

Author(s)
Roth, M. Ker, I. James, B. Broeg, W. Ashton-Graham, C. Ryle, J. Goulias, K. & Richardson, E.
Year
Abstract

This paper provides a summary of published results to date from implementation of Individualised Marketing (IndiMark(r)) interventions around the world. A discussion is provided to explain the methodology and the evaluation process. This paper then presents evidence and logic that refutes allegations raised by Professor Peter Stopher of the University of Sydney at a public forum in England in June 2003 and repeated in his ATRF 2003 paper. Similar responses were previously provided to Stopher after the June 2003 Forum, but the arguments presented in his ATRF paper are essentially unchanged. The paper concludes that the reduction in car as driver trips for all IndiMark(r) programs is within a range of 6 percent to 14 percent across target populations (broadly 5.5-13 percent allowing for non-contactable and non-responding households), demonstrating that IndiMark(r) is robust and broadly applicable for urban areas. (Author/publisher) For the covering entry of this conference, please see ITRD abstract no. E210413.

Request publication

5 + 13 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Publication

Library number
C 29047 (In: C 28997 CD-ROM) /72 /71 / ITRD E210390
Source

In: ATRF03 : [proceedings of the] 26th Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF) : leading transport research in the 21st century, Wellington, New Zealand, 1-3 October 2003, 15 p.

Our collection

This publication is one of our other publications, and part of our extensive collection of road safety literature, that also includes the SWOV publications.