Compare › focus groups

SaliencyLab and focus groups.

Choose the evidence your creative decision needs.

Oussama Nakhil · SaliencyLab

Reviewed 7 October 2026 · Official sources and public sample outputs

Creative diagnostics and real-person discussion

Focus groups use moderated discussion with recruited participants to explore interpretations, language and reactions. The research design determines who takes part and what can be inferred.

Compare the scope.

Dimension	SaliencyLab	focus groups
Work	Creative diagnostics, AI-simulated resistance themes, and an agreed human review and delivery.	Focus groups use moderated discussion with recruited participants to explore interpretations, language and reactions. The research design determines who takes part and what can be inferred.
Timing	Automated analysis runs in minutes; review and delivery timing are agreed separately. Queue, file and service conditions affect completion.	Agree recruitment, fieldwork and reporting dates with the researcher. There is no universal turnaround for every audience.
Pricing	Agree a scope with our team; see current pricing.	Request a current quote for the exact scope. No unsupported per-ad price comparison.
Evidence	Five KPI diagnostics; separate platform-native attribute-model validation; cohort coverage and run stability reported separately. Meta and unsupported cohorts remain directional.	Observed discussion from the recruited participants, interpreted in its group and research context. It is not a representative population estimate by default.
Decision fit	Teams reviewing scored creatives, choosing revisions and recording human decisions between edit rounds.	You need real buyer language, cultural interpretation or reactions the creative team has not anticipated.
Output to inspect	Annotated frames, prioritized edits, a reviewed shortlist and a decision call within the agreed service scope.	Agree a discussion guide, participant criteria, consented recordings or notes, theme analysis and a debrief. Kantar’s linked page describes moderated qualitative creative research as one provider example.
Question for the proposal	Which brand, brief, audience and platform are covered, and who owns the revision and next test?	Who is recruited, how are leading questions and group effects handled, and which conclusions will the sample support?

Vendor source: focus groups product description (new tab). These are vendor descriptions, not an independent head-to-head evaluation. Scope can change.

Before the next edit round

What should your creative team receive?

A useful review connects a specific creative moment to a decision your editor can act on. Bring the original assets, audience, offer, platform, brand constraints and the question you need to resolve.

Keep: The passage, image or brand cue worth preserving, with the reason.
Change: The exact frame, timestamp or wording to revise; the proposed edit and its priority.
Explain: What is visible in the creative, what the model infers, and what remains uncertain. BuyerLens objections are simulated hypotheses.
Decide and test: Who accepts, adapts or rejects the recommendation, which version gets made, and what real evidence would support the next decision.

Download the blank decision brief Build your campaign brief

Why use SaliencyLab if we already use ChatGPT or Claude?

A general assistant can help review an ad when you provide the assets and context. SaliencyLab brings brand context, eligible market references, creative versions, diagnostics and recorded decisions together in a project. The review service adds a human-owned recommendation and revision review; a software subscription is a separate offer.

That workflow is a reason to evaluate the product, not proof of better advice. Compare the same assets and brief, check whether recommendations are supported and usable, and record the time your team needs to reach a decision. We have not completed an independent head-to-head quality study against ChatGPT or Claude.

Read the comparison protocol v2

Choose real participant research when you need actual buyer responses. Use a controlled campaign test for performance effects. Meta diagnostics remain directional, and BuyerLens cannot independently validate RoastIQ.

Start with the DTC testing guide or the agency buying checklist to match the evidence to your brief.

Two briefs. Different evidence needs.

A small DTC brand choosing the next edit

Bring the actual Meta or TikTok assets, target buyer, offer and campaign objective. Ask which opening, product explanation or brand cue deserves a revision, and what should stay intact.

SaliencyLab fits a team that can make the edits and wants annotated priorities with a human review. Meta diagnostics remain directional. If the decision requires actual buyer comprehension, recruit real participants; if it requires conversion performance, use a controlled campaign test.

See a skincare creative and a proposed edit →

An agency preparing a client recommendation

Agree the decision, audience, market and format before choosing a supplier. A client deliverable should distinguish what is visible in the creative, what a model suggests, what real participants said and what happened in market.

SaliencyLab fits revision planning and documenting the reasoning between edit rounds. Commission respondent research when the client needs measured audience responses or an established research framework. AI screening, including a competitor’s AI product, is a separate purchase from a new consumer study.

Choose between simulated and real research →

What SaliencyLab delivers.

The paid service combines diagnostics and expert review. These service packages are separate from software subscriptions. Prices below exclude VAT where applicable.

Launch with Confidence

€500 / sprint

One brand · one campaign · up to 6 creatives

A prioritized creative shortlist, with the reasoning
Annotated frames and visual editing recommendations
One 30-minute decision call
One review of up to 6 revised creatives

Initial recommendations within 10 business days. The window starts on the agreed date after payment and complete materials.

Creative Decision Partner

€1,000 / month

One brand · 2 cycles · up to 6 creatives per cycle

The complete sprint deliverables in each cycle
Two reserved review slots on an agreed calendar
Two campaign briefs, with relevant category references
A shared decision log that carries learning forward

Initial recommendations within 10 business days per cycle. The window starts on the agreed date after payment and complete materials.

Asset limits, editing and workspace access

One image or one video up to 60 seconds. Each edit, language version or placement adaptation counts separately. Each cycle covers one campaign brief, one audience and one platform for one brand. Longer videos, additional markets or multiple brands receive a separate quote before work starts.

Your designer, editor or agency makes the changes. We provide annotated frames and priorities for the opening, sequencing, product visibility and benefit demonstration. Production, video editing and media buying are outside this review service.

The workspace access and analysis usage needed for the agreed review are included, with no additional software subscription required for that work. You receive downloadable deliverables to keep. Ongoing software use after the engagement requires a separate workspace plan; access and data-retention arrangements are confirmed in your proposal.

Read the full scope, revision and cancellation terms

Inspect the output before commissioning.

The CeraVe worked case shows the original creative, archived model scores, the evidence behind a proposed revision and an unexecuted test plan. It is an editorial analysis of a public ad, not a customer endorsement or an outcome study.

For the current report layout, inspect the seeded RoastIQ demo. Its demonstration numbers are not fresh measurements of a client campaign. A useful handoff connects an exact frame or passage to the proposed edit, the reason, the evidence limit and the next test.

Use real interviews for unexpected buyer language and cultural interpretation; a suitable quantitative study for population estimates; and controlled delivery for in-market effects. BuyerLens generates hypotheses downstream of RoastIQ and cannot independently confirm its score. No provider’s headline score is directly comparable without a common study.

SaliencyLab’s evidence boundary.

The platform-native attribute model is separate from RoastIQ’s five KPI scores. Its held-out estimates do not validate the composite or establish superiority over another provider.

ρ +0.33

TikTok click-through rate · held-out Spearman · n=691

+0.33 on TikTok click-through rate (n=691), held out. On the cohort its weights were tuned on the same model scores +0.43, brand-clustered 95% CI [+0.32, +0.53]

ρ +0.40

YouTube view counts · held-out Spearman · n=397

+0.40 on YouTube view counts (n=397), held out. On the cohort its weights were tuned on the same model scores +0.49, brand-clustered 95% CI [+0.37, +0.58]

No sales, ROAS, attributed-conversion or brand-recall prediction is claimed. Heatmaps predict visual attention; they do not measure eye tracking. BuyerLens generates synthetic resistance themes, not measured emotional strength or real participant responses.

Read the methodology and limitations

Questions before commissioning.

When should I choose a focus group?

When you need to hear how real people interpret the idea, discuss it with one another or express unexpected concerns. Agree recruitment and moderation around the research question.

Does a focus group predict campaign performance?

Group discussion provides qualitative evidence. It does not by itself establish population prevalence, causal sales lift or the best media allocation. Use an appropriate quantitative or in-market design for those questions.

Can BuyerLens replace the participants?

No. BuyerLens generates synthetic hypotheses downstream of RoastIQ. It can suggest questions to explore, but its answers are not participant testimony or independent confirmation.

How do costs and delivery compare?

SaliencyLab’s defined review-service scope is shown below. For real-participant research, request a quote that separates recruitment, incentives, moderation, analysis and delivery. Timing and cost depend on the study.

Oussama Nakhil founded SaliencyLab after working in market research at NielsenIQ (January 2022–June 2024) and as Global Consumer and Market Insights Manager at L’Oréal (September 2024–November 2025). His work included media-testing methodology across 500+ campaigns for six global brands. He began building SaliencyLab part-time in August 2025 and full-time in March 2026.

Start with the decision in front of you.

Bring your brief and creative. Agree the evidence, review and delivery needed.

Discuss your campaign All comparisons