Synthetic Decision Panel Report

SAMPLE method: a 10-persona qualitative depth panel derived from the target audience and frozen as a quota matrix before the run. Options are shown blind, symmetrically and in randomized order. Personas answer independently, rejection reasons come first, comprehension is a hard gate (>2/10 material misreads disqualifies an option), aggregation uses median/range plus best-worst and segment/polarization cuts, and a diversity audit checks for mode collapse. Directional only, not statistical.

Synthetic panel. Directional read of objections, not a forecast of demand.

• Synthetic personas can share model biases.
• No real buyer behavior was observed.

Lowest friction: A. Highest disagreement: C. Most confusing: A’s deliverable wording.

Directional median objection strength by variant (SAMPLE, 0–3).

Score scale: 0 none · 1 weak · 2 moderate · 3 strong

[
 [
  "Price feels high",
  1,
  3,
  1
 ],
 [
  "Unclear deliverable",
  2,
  1,
  2
 ],
 [
  "Trust in reviewer",
  2,
  2,
  1
 ],
 [
  "Subscription fatigue",
  0,
  0,
  3
 ]
]

Share of personas disagreeing with the panel majority (SAMPLE %).

[
 [
  "Variant A",
  21
 ],
 [
  "Variant B",
  29
 ],
 [
  "Variant C",
  54
 ]
]

• “What exactly do I receive after 48 hours?”
• “Why a subscription for something I need twice a year?”

Clarify A as “a written report with 10 prioritized fixes”, then run SKPTST on A vs C.